Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - IS GOD RUINING PROG?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedIS GOD RUINING PROG?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 89101112>
Author
Message
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2005 at 21:19
Originally posted by The Ryan The Ryan wrote:

Originally posted by Flip_Stone Flip_Stone wrote:

This is a really weird post.  It is an invitation to some to slam God and spiritual matters.  And then you get responses from those who are mental midgets and too small-minded to see the significance and wonder that comes from thinking about God, and thinking beyond the realm of daily, worldy human existence.

The order and beauty of the universe proves that an intelligent creator is behind it all.  It makes no sense to assume everything just kind of fell into place by chance. 

God does not ruin prog!  It's completely the opposite.  He inspires people to think at a higher level, to dream, to think on a cosmic level about grander things.  Some great prog. music (like Supper's Ready from Genesis) and songs by Kansas, have a direct influence from God and spiritual thinking. 

 

I agree with you on everything except you seem to be assuming on the theory of creationism and/or intelligent design. It's only a possibility. Religion influences all art forms in ways god-bashers probably won't realize, while The Flower Kings aren't necessarily religious and are probably agnostic/atheist, their music reflects various religions as well as everyday good morals. Your examples are true as well.

I admire your faith, but nothing in Religion is more than a posibility, and that's the great merit of religious people, we have faith without proves.

To believe in something that's a scientific fact is no merit, we all know that two parts of hidrogen plus one part of oxygene gives water, so what, it's a fact.

I believe in God beyond any scientific evidence, I believe there's more merit in that.

I won't argue with Sean (Who is an intelligent and open minded Atheist) about spirituality, because he doesn't believe in such thing, but I will argue always about the moral values of Religion, and I wish more atheists were as respectful as him.

Fanaticism has already given religious people a bad name, if we can argue with intelligent arguments, is enough for me, I will never loose my faith but I will aleways respect intelligent arguments come from who they come and respect moral values even if come from a non religious person.

Iván

            
Back to Top
tardis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 14378
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2005 at 21:36
Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Originally posted by tardis tardis wrote:

tardis: God, why must this thread continue so?

God: tardis, I am allowing the continued existence of this thread as a punishment for the sins of mankind.


Tardis, I rarely seen such a respectfull and civilized thread between two persons with opposite perspectives.

Probably is getting long, but I believe Sean and I have been presenting different arguments for an important issue.

I've seen similar threads ending with insults long before this point, Sean and myself have keeped a respectful and hope intelligent discussion..

Now, you don't have to be punished, just avoid clicking the link to this thread, nothing as easy, it's just free will?

Iván

BTW: I never seen a threar in which most of the participants have accepted the other peoplé's position, Sean and I have done it repeteadly and the last post by Hemispheres also.

Isn't this small achievement valid enough to justify all this thread, isn't tollerance and mutual respect something we rarely find?

If we can agree about Religion (Soccer or Politics), we can agree about anything!!!!!!!!

Sorry, I was only kidding. It's healthy to have a discussion. But I like what the Hitchiker's Guide To The Galaxy has to say...

Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2005 at 22:05

Great, fresh meat  just joking.

Originally posted by John Gargo John Gargo wrote:

Ooooh, a thread on religion!!! 

My family is very religious and I've found that in some cases (not all, mind you, but in a lot of them), religion is very limiting because it discourages discourse.  You attempt to ask questions about religion and religious people will be VERY dismissive and criticize you for "daring to ask such a thing."  It's very frustrating, at least in my case.  You are supposed to follow because it's SUPPOSED to be true.

There are cases and cases John, my family is religious and so am I, but my parents have always encouraged me tho think and ask questions.

Personally, I think religion should be a very PERSONAL thing.  It should be a belief system that should not be advertised or forced upon others.  Those that attempt to "preach to the unconverted" are reprehensible.

I agree, as it has been discussed before, I can only talk about Catholics, and that's not an actual practice of our Church.

I have an anecdote: Some years ago I rented a house at the beach with 4 friends, each one had his room and no one could take guests without consent of the rest, but this doesn't works.

One night I came after a party at 5 am and found a couple sleeping in my bed, I was too tired and drunk to throw them away and change the sheets, so took a blanket and slept in the sofa.

At 6 am the door bell rang, half asleep and with a liquor smell that could be noticed from a block opened the door and two guys in suit (one peruvian and the other oprobably from USA) shouted: Sinner, God loves you.

I wont reproduce here what I told them, butr I'm sure they thought I was some kind of pervert.

I hate this door to door work even when I'm, not drunk, Religion is personal and nobody should try to preach where they are not asked to do so.

These days I subscribe to science and natural law.  A lot of religious people will claim that science is not infallible, but that's the point... it is a self-correcting and always progressive to new realms with every new discovery of man.  We always know more about the world around us because of the achievements of men who are not afraid to ask questions and learn more about our environment.  The problem with (some) religions is that they are less eager to accept radical change, but without radical change we would still think the Earth is flat and that it is the center of the solar system. 

Religion and science are not incompatible in these days except for fanatics.

Gallileo was punished because he dared to commit "blasphemy" by studying the heavens.  What's blasphemous is to live your life without constantly asking questions about your surroundings and, yes, about your religion too.

Galileo again, John Paul II already disclaimed Galileo and I believe Pontius Pilates too if you want a higher sign of change.

At least in my school (Catholic) we were not only allowed but encouraged to ask questions, of course in theCatholic University we were even more encouraged to do so.

Iván

            
Back to Top
tardis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 14378
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2005 at 22:11
Actually, I don't have much to add to the discussion. Personally, I don't think God is ruining prog simply because I think faith has a lot to offer to progressive music. And don't forget the artists have their own personal journeys to follow, and if they choose to share their journey, so be it! There is plenty of non "religious" prog out there if it offends ones sensibiliities...
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2005 at 00:52

Honestly I don't like preaching in Prog', Rock or Pop even when I'm a religious person as you have already noticed.

 I believe the altars and Religious schools are the right places for preaching, but it's great to make religious references, for example:

  • Tales from Topographic Oceans is based on the four part Hindu Shastric scriptures.
  • Suppers's Ready: Has clear references to the Book of Revelations.
  • 666 by Aphrodites Child: Goes even further, narrates all te book of Revelations.
  • No Earthly Connection by Rick Wakeman: Narrates Rick religious perspective of music.
  • Kansas: Except on the Elephante years when they were a confessional band (and failed as musicians), they made Christian references but never preached.
  • Glass Hammer: Makes a lot of Christian references but again don't preach.
  • Vangelis: Heaven and Hell: Apart from the Orthodox references, the music is highly influenced by Greek sacred music.
  • Carlos Santana: Never denied his Catholic faith and respect for The Virgin of Guadalupe, he even used a T-Shirt with her image, he's proud of his faith and Mexican inheritance, but the lyrics of his music have nothing to do with preaching.

I find this references excellent, nobody has to hide his honest beliefs, but preaching on stage is another thing.

As Frank Hill (King of the Hill) said to his son when he joined preaching Christian band:

"You're not making Christianity any better, you're just making rock music worse."

Iván



Edited by ivan_2068
            
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2005 at 11:37

 Here a few smashes of the ball in your camp!!

Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Great!!!! I was missing this debate

Hugues wrote:

Quote

I will also edit a few text !!

ivan_2068 wrote:

Each time we have less disagreements and less colors  So lets focus in the few we still have: and start using italics:

Quote:

ivan_2068 wrote:

I knew sooner or later you would, but I believe you'll also understand that being attacked by each and every Christian group, Catholivc Church needed a stronger arm, and I mean stronger in the doctrinarial aspect, because until today Opus Dei has caused no violent act. I do believe that they assassinated a lot of persons and even poisoned a few popes (JP I for example)

Still too influenced by The Godfather or even worst by Og Mandino, John Paul I died probably of natural causes, he had a severe heart condition.

It's a use in the Vatican that after a long Papacy (Like John Paul II or Paulus VI) they elect an older and often sick Pope to create a transition between two long terms. That seems like some sick theory!! Bring an old git to replace another old git. This would mean that after such a long rein of JPII , Benedetto 16 is about to have his life terminated - sickness or aggravated OpusDei cholera!! jesss kiddin!!!!

Paulus VI made a lot of changes with the Vatican II (started by a transitional Pope like Saint John XXIII), he allowed to celebrate mass in local languages and allowed to print Bibles Massively.

So they elected an old man as Pope to calm the waters, but they never thought his health condition was so bad.

The rest are only gossips from people who love to invent plots, because it's mysterious and sells more to say that there are murders in the Vatican. There are many novels depicting Vatican as a mega-secured HQ for catholics to take over the world with extreme technology!! I always find such novels rather pleasant stories , but I leave it at that.  But clearly there are some major power struggles in hallways and no doubt that a lot of below the belt hits are dealt - figuratively speaking of course. But that the odd poison gets lost when one cardinal is a little encumbrant however, I do not doubt it!! The run for power in the vatican is similar than in a multi-national firm in many regards!!

Please, now you're going too far!!!!!! I knew I was going all little far with this statement but in terms of blind faith they are just equals , but are certainly not open terrorists, even if they have got an armed branch for actions..

Honestly, I have my doubts towards the Opus Dei, as a matter of facts, our Cardinal is the first Opus Dei Member in the world with such a high position in the Church, and he was involved with Fujimori in the develation of the hostage crisis in the Japanese Embassy.

I'm not against the solution, it was a success (Despite the factthat Fujimori is a criminal for other reasons), the Government must protect us froim terrorists,  hostages were released with only two casualties (One hostage who recieved a bullet when hidding in a closet and a brave liutenant who placed his body in front of a hostage to recieve the bullet) from 200 (according to Israel standarts 25% of lives lost is an acceptable margin), but the place of a priest is not in violent solutions. actually I had forgotten this thing , thanks for giving a missile for further battles!!

It's also wrong that a Cardinal supports a corrupt Government as Fujimori - Montesinos. 

There's no violence in Opus Dei doctrine, yes they can be elitist but that's not a crime against human law (Even when it's a crime against divine law). I believe you underestimate Opus Dei's desires to defend the faith at all costs! they have resorted to murders!! Them and their predecessors have actually killed some currents of thinking in sake of the unity of the church. (Templiers, Cathars  and other discovering other texts that could cast some doubts on the sacred texts).

Templars were fanatics excomunicated for their crimes in Holy Land. Mostly because their faith were opposing the Vaticans - and they were exterminated on bonfires , too! Too quickly they forgot that it was because of them Templars that Christiannity actually regained control of Jerusalem and during that time a lot of "studying" happened and this was maybe the most troubled times for the truth!!

Remember that the christians sacred texts have all been dramatically rewritten , interpreted, incorrectly recopied as well as written only four centuries after the prophet's death (I can only consider him a prophet since he is certainly not my messiah), so those texts are anything but pure!

The Dead Sea Rolls have proved that the Gospels are very accurate, the differences between the ones accepted by the Church and recent discovered roles are minimal, except in the Mary Magdalene and Saint Thomas Gospels that admit that Mary Magdalene wasn't a Prostitute (Neither Jesus Christ wife as  the Da Vinci Code implies ), but she was Jesus favorite and most intelligent apostle. Of course the woman taking care of the prophet's genitals could not have been a whore to the vatican. This is just too far I wish to discuss simply because I lack the interest to delve further. For alll I care Marie-Magdalena could've been another immaculate conception , if the vatican wishes!

The Church didn't accepted this because of the discrimination against women some centuries ago and I agree this is wrong and should be changed, and I'm sure some day will be.

This is why Vatican is always on shaky grounds!!! And they get very defensive about their evanlical texts (remember the catholics authorities took most christians for imbecils with the little angels , devils trills, St Peter at the gates of heaven , apparitions of the Virgins - the most laughable one is the revelation of Fatima in Portugal 40 or 50 yearts ago - they could not come up with any revelatians after the 50 years moratorium) etc....now they must the consequences of disbeliefs

Let me inform you something, because I have studied Canonic Law, the process of admitting a miracle like Fatima is very complex, the church names a Bishop who is called "The Devil's Advocate", normaly is a member of the Sacred Congregation of  Faith", this man tries by all means (As a DA) to prove the Miracle is false.

The actual Pope was the Chief of this Congregation and he is one of the most intelligent and well prepared men in the world, not as charismatic as his predecessor, but highly intelligent.

You got me lost, here (out of lack of interest I assure you)!! I believe even less in miracles than I do in god!

Who can adore Rasputin except an absolutev wacko. The problem is that Rasputin was a religious character and  he was never excommunicated even after his death.

Please Sean, almost inmediately after Rasputin's death by Yussupuv, came the October Revolution, the Czar and his family were assasinated and Russian Orthodox Church was silenced for 61 years.

I'm not sure, but I believe Rasputin was not really an Orthodox monk or maybe  he was excomunicated, not sure though; he was some kind of hermit who claimed to talk in the name of God, but had a lot of women in the nights and drunk as a camel. Yup, Rasputin was an opportunist that intrigued heavily and used the church as a cover for his crazy doings. But he was of religious origins and loathed by a good part of the orthodox church!! But he had access to the Czar and the highest religious circles!

The fact that he was orthodox does not change things one bit because Orthodox and catholic faith are really kinked and should be the closest allies. This did not stop the Serbians orthodox to slain and invade Catholic Croatia!

Things are changing, some Orthodox Cardinals are being allowed to participate in the Conclave (Not sure about the translationof this word), both churchs and probably Lutheran will rejoin very soon. Something that frightens some Christian groups, because without the Lutherans, who started the separation, they will loose a lot of support. I personally would rather see christiannity speak as a whole rather than have them fight against each other. As a matter of fact, I would fear a lot less religions if all three monotheistic religions were not at each other's throats and collaborated intelligently together at mankind's future! The planet would probably be a safer place!!

By the way the Croatian invasion is politic and carries a lot of hate among two different ethnias that comes from hundreed of years ago, don't blame religoion for this. Ethnias????? these guys are more than brothers. Serb and Croats speak the same language but are culturally different. The Croats are catholics and write with latin characters and the Sebs are orthodox and are using cyrillic characters. But to call them different ethnias would be like making them as different as the Finns would be from the Swedes or the Russians>>> there is an an ethnic difference!!!

We agree again, but thanks heaven we are free to believe or disbelieve today, sadly some Governments are taking an Atheist orientation lately instead of remaining neutral !  I beg you pardon, there are religious political parties in power always favoring religion matters even sometimes undoing things the previous government just did!!

That is wrong, The Vatican II concilium clearly stated that our Church priests should avoid to participate in politics, since 1978, the military Catholic Chaplains (Another word I'm not sure about, the translation in Spanish is Capellán) don't hold a military rank, so they should never carry a weapon or accept orders of the military. Theories!!!!!!! But abandonning politics would be suicidal and I do not think that the Vatican or any other religion is suicidal (well Jonestown being the exception that confirms the sectarian rule!)

Well decades of forced Atheism have to create a reaction, that I can't justify, but surely may understand. You calk gay bashing , outlawing abortion justified. If you do not like abortion fine , don't do it!! but do not force your private feelings onto needing women!!

We don't bash gays, we don't admit the mariage of two persons of the same sex, which is different. Actually I do not appreciate gays getting married either!! I think they should have the legal rights to be together and have the advantages that spouses do, but getting married is useless provocation especially wanting to force open the church gates! I favor even less the right for gays to adopt since the kids should shouild have parents of both genres> This is especially for lesbians since I refuse to believe both partner would be infertile!

Well, I'm against most cases of abortion (Rape, therapeutic abortion when the mother's life is in risk and probably is the baby is going to be born with a painful and beyond cure illness) and the law of my country adopts the same position, so it's not a conflict for me. I suppose you meant that those exceptions were correct to carry out the abortion

Not in all South America, for example in Lima lives 50% of Peruvian population, and women are not sexual slaves, probably in the forgotten towns, but this must change, the problem is what change option we must follow. According to the macho and catholic way, women belong barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen and this is expected by many catholic males and is awaited from from Catholics females! I do not think this stereotype is quite history yet , even if it is in regression!

The macho thing is ethnic and cultural, not Catholic, there are a lot of machist rednecks in USA who barely believe in anything, Fair enough , you do not have to be catholic to be macho!! But it helps.....

Sorry my friend, but abortions are 100 time more dangerous and expensive than birth control techniques, a condom costs 50 cents and if you don't have money, they are given for free in some places. I agree but it is the men who do not want to use the condoms and the woman have only one choice then then, abort once thet are pregnant, Believe me most of them could do without being pregnant and wished their partner wore a condom!!

It's in them to stay firm, not all men are savages and animals. Yeah right !!! if the woman  stay firm about condoms, then he loses interest!!!

Recently I took the case of  a young woman who was forced by her husband too have sex without condom using force.

I achieved that the guy was convicted  for rape inside marriage and spent a year in prison befire released on parole, you must know that there's a code between prissoners. the rapists have a real hard time in jail, as the joke says, they can't afford to drop the soap in the showers. Does this mean in this particular case, that the wife would've agreed to sexual relation if he did use a condom???

That God is not guilty of fanatism But those moderate do nothing to stop fanaticism

Sadly human laws protect this fanatics and their right to act in such a way, candidates protect this fanatics because they also vote, police can't do anything against them unless they make a violent act, and then is too late.

How can you blame us? Our hands are tied by human right watchers who created all this protection for fanatics as a side effect of their fight against formal religions.

Actually if someone is a danger to society (terrorist activist integrist etc... ) you will call the authorities to have him arrested , so why not dennounce the intolerant religious person planning against the others who do not share his faith??!!??

You still believe in consiglieris and capos di tuti capi.   Mafia today is more violent and absolutely anti religious, it's even worst that the Italian mob. Ever since man existed and shamans also (using superstition to arrange powers to themselves) , these last ones always managed to form an strange couple with brute force (this meant the bigger brute being the chief or the king)  to create a power tandem.

Don't change the subject, but again as I told you the people that hold the power use anything to save their jobs. Of course , but this is true for religions, too!

I was not changing the subject. I do not really make a big difference between Shamanism and religions since they both address the fear and anguish od superstitious people about the after life> Nobody ever talks od the pre-life. if an after life exists , then there should be a before life! Religions completely avoid the subject where shamanism does address it as reincarnation>

We had a war with Chile and they took part of our territory 120 something years ago, normally there are not problems, but now we have a candidate who is being agressive against Chile just to gain votes from our patriotic feeling. I knew Chile did take away land from Bolivia (this is why Bolivia has no sea access), but I did not know they also fought Peru. And there are major troubles in both Bolivia and Peryu with a Belgian firm Tractebel about carrying minereals through different routes and Bolivians wishing to have go through Peru rather than Chile. Also the electicity in Arequipa is under control of this firm. I am not their lawyers , but theoretically Tractebel is a firm that does care on how they make money. But I know not the odds and ends of this dispute!

explain without being wrongly attributed racism or xenophobia !! Fourty years ago all the moslims coming to Europe did it because of a hope of better life and mainly money!! This is called economic refugees even if they were allowed in because there was a lack of man-power. for the first thirty years , there was no problem and you never saw veiled women (or very rarely) in the streets or at school or even in public feasts!!

Only in the last 10 years have this gotten a problem!! (And just by a stroke of luck when moslim integrism statred really its upswing!!) And this because around 80% of women are forced to wear it (in order to stop male abuse) and the rest of them are forced-fed religious morals!! This is mainly true for the third generation from immigration. What it comes down to really is forced marriages with outsiders (from Morrocco , Turkey, Pakistan etc) so they can come to emigrate to Europe - Slavery if you ask me!! - so religion is  the tool used to control these girls!!

Things change, the anti Muslim atmosphere existing in the world now, the Neo Nazi movements  (Not religious BTW) in all Europe (including skinheads) create a consiousness of  racial  individuality in this people.

Agressive and coward attacks of stupids who blame a whole race for crimoinal  acts of a few, create reactions, Muslims are prouder than ever of their inheritance and make stronger their beliefs as a mechanism of self defence. but if Moslims would actually denounce and turn in the terrorists recruiting in the mosque (and the Immams DO know what goes on), they would give a real strong message that they do care about their new country. By shutting up otr turning a blind eye, they make the wrong decisions and fuel up the fire instead of showing they DO care!!

But sometimes those girls are pushing it to provocation a bit too much by hanging on to the veil because it provokes reactions/irritations to christians!!! So the nastyness is really coming from different religious currents and the only way to have peace for governments or authorities is to simply bans ALL religious signs and have a basic laic morale taught in schools . This is valid for schools but will also be someday for workplaces!!

That would be inconstitutional in any civilized country, nobody can ask me to take the cross I have on my neck (Of course is very small and ususally insoie my shirt or T-Shirt), it's part of my faith and even of my identity and inheritance.

Now being 100% honest, I believe the treatment recieved by Muslim women is medieval, but it's their way, it's their culture and inheritance, let them evolve at their own speed, as long as they do it inside their countries, But carrying out their traditions (often tribal and backwards traditions) in another country where such things are forbidden (I am thinking of Excision here in practice if Moslim Africa) is clearly a lack of respect for the welcoming country

 

HUGUES

Iván

 

HUGUES

Iván

 

HUGUES

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2005 at 23:11

Back for you:

Originally posted by Sean Trane Sean Trane wrote:

 Here a few smashes of the ball in your camp!!

Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Great!!!! I was missing this debate

Hugues wrote:

Quote

I will also edit a few text !!

ivan_2068 wrote:

Each time we have less disagreements and less colors  So lets focus in the few we still have: and start using italics:

Quote:

ivan_2068 wrote:

 

Still too influenced by The Godfather or even worst by Og Mandino, John Paul I died probably of natural causes, he had a severe heart condition.

It's a use in the Vatican that after a long Papacy (Like John Paul II or Paulus VI) they elect an older and often sick Pope to create a transition between two long terms. That seems like some sick theory!! Bring an old git to replace another old git. This would mean that after such a long rein of JPII , Benedetto 16 is about to have his life terminated - sickness or aggravated OpusDei cholera!! jesss kiddin!!!!

Just check the age of the Popes and how many years they lasted, Pius XII had a long papacy, John XXIII a very short one, John Paul I was almost 80 and very sick, John Paul II was 56 years old when elected, Benedictus XVI has 78 if I'm not wrong.

Paulus VI made a lot of changes with the Vatican II (started by a transitional Pope like Saint John XXIII), he allowed to celebrate mass in local languages and allowed to print Bibles Massively.

So they elected an old man as Pope to calm the waters, but they never thought his health condition was so bad.

The rest are only gossips from people who love to invent plots, because it's mysterious and sells more to say that there are murders in the Vatican. There are many novels depicting Vatican as a mega-secured HQ for catholics to take over the world with extreme technology!! I always find such novels rather pleasant stories , but I leave it at that.  But clearly there are some major power struggles in hallways and no doubt that a lot of below the belt hits are dealt - figuratively speaking of course. But that the odd poison gets lost when one cardinal is a little encumbrant however, I do not doubt it!! The run for power in the vatican is similar than in a multi-national firm in many regards!!

There are interests of course, just remember that the Church is a human organization, but from there too shout murder without asingle evuidence is too much.

Please, now you're going too far!!!!!! I knew I was going all little far with this statement but in terms of blind faith they are just equals , but are certainly not open terrorists, even if they have got an armed branch for actions..

Honestly, I have my doubts towards the Opus Dei, as a matter of facts, our Cardinal is the first Opus Dei Member in the world with such a high position in the Church, and he was involved with Fujimori in the develation of the hostage crisis in the Japanese Embassy.

I'm not against the solution, it was a success (Despite the factthat Fujimori is a criminal for other reasons), the Government must protect us froim terrorists,  hostages were released with only two casualties (One hostage who recieved a bullet when hidding in a closet and a brave liutenant who placed his body in front of a hostage to recieve the bullet) from 200 (according to Israel standarts 25% of lives lost is an acceptable margin), but the place of a priest is not in violent solutions. actually I had forgotten this thing , thanks for giving a missile for further battles!!

Just trying to be absolutely honest in the facts.

It's also wrong that a Cardinal supports a corrupt Government as Fujimori - Montesinos. 

There's no violence in Opus Dei doctrine, yes they can be elitist but that's not a crime against human law (Even when it's a crime against divine law). I believe you underestimate Opus Dei's desires to defend the faith at all costs! they have resorted to murders!! Them and their predecessors have actually killed some currents of thinking in sake of the unity of the church. (Templiers, Cathars  and other discovering other texts that could cast some doubts on the sacred texts).

Templars were fanatics excomunicated for their crimes in Holy Land. Mostly because their faith were opposing the Vaticans - and they were exterminated on bonfires , too! Too quickly they forgot that it was because of them Templars that Christiannity actually regained control of Jerusalem and during that time a lot of "studying" happened and this was maybe the most troubled times for the truth!!

The Templars and Hospitalarians role in Crusades   is a very complex issue.

They were under the direct orders of heir kings rather than under the orders of the Pope, not only the case but especially France (check about Raynald de Chatillon and Guy de Lugsinan)

They tried to keep control of Jerusalem not for the Catholic Church  but for their countries and their own glory, we could talk about this for months

The Dead Sea Rolls have proved that the Gospels are very accurate, the differences between the ones accepted by the Church and recent discovered roles are minimal, except in the Mary Magdalene and Saint Thomas Gospels that admit that Mary Magdalene wasn't a Prostitute (Neither Jesus Christ wife as  the Da Vinci Code implies ), but she was Jesus favorite and most intelligent apostle. Of course the woman taking care of the prophet's genitals could not have been a whore to the vatican. This is just too far I wish to discuss simply because I lack the interest to delve further. For alll I care Marie-Magdalena could've been another immaculate conception , if the vatican wishes!

First, you have avoided the issue of the real hoistoric value of the Gospels with the new evidence of the Death Sea Papers.

You're also changing your tone, keep it respectful please, I can't expect less from you, and this are not inventions, this are historical facts supported by written evidence.

Let me inform you something, because I have studied Canonic Law, the process of admitting a miracle like Fatima is very complex, the church names a Bishop who is called "The Devil's Advocate", normaly is a member of the Sacred Congregation of  Faith", this man tries by all means (As a DA) to prove the Miracle is false.

The actual Pope was the Chief of this Congregation and he is one of the most intelligent and well prepared men in the world, not as charismatic as his predecessor, but highly intelligent.

You got me lost, here (out of lack of interest I assure you)!! I believe even less in miracles than I do in god!

Well, I'm a lawyer and Canonical Law is a passion for me, but as a Catholic I believe in Miracles.

Please Sean, almost inmediately after Rasputin's death by Yussupuv, came the October Revolution, the Czar and his family were assasinated and Russian Orthodox Church was silenced for 61 years.

I'm not sure, but I believe Rasputin was not really an Orthodox monk or maybe  he was excomunicated, not sure though; he was some kind of hermit who claimed to talk in the name of God, but had a lot of women in the nights and drunk as a camel. Yup, Rasputin was an opportunist that intrigued heavily and used the church as a cover for his crazy doings.  THANKS, you're makinng my point But he was of religious origins He was a renegade!! Never was really an Orthodox Monk, so formal religion had no power over him, and loathed by a good part of the orthodox church!! excomunicated to be precise!!! But he had access to the Czar and the highest religious circles!

That's the problem when a Governor is also the head of a Church as in Russia or even England (When the kings has real power), Rasputin was excomunicated by Russian Orthodox Church, but the Czar and especially the Czarina (Because Nicolas II had a very weak character) gave Rasputin huge power, even over the Church. 

Things are changing, some Orthodox Cardinals are being allowed to participate in the Conclave (Not sure about the translationof this word), both churchs and probably Lutheran will rejoin very soon. Something that frightens some Christian groups, because without the Lutherans, who started the separation, they will loose a lot of support.

I personally would rather see christiannity speak as a whole rather than have them fight against each other. As a matter of fact, I would fear a lot less religions if all three monotheistic religions were not at each other's throats and collaborated intelligently together at mankind's future! The planet would probably be a safer place!!

The day will come for at least Catholics, Orthodox and Lutherans, but I won't count too much on some churches in USA which are a huge eneterprize more than a Religion.

Don't count with most new born Christians, because a lot of the are absolute fundamentalists.

By the way the Croatian invasion is politic and carries a lot of hate among two different ethnias that comes from hundreed of years ago, don't blame religoion for this. Ethnias????? these guys are more than brothers. Serb and Croats speak the same language but are culturally different. The Croats are catholics and write with latin characters and the Sebs are orthodox and are using cyrillic characters. But to call them different ethnias would be like making them as different as the Finns would be from the Swedes or the Russians>>> there is an an ethnic difference!!!

I believe the situationis not as simple, there are different cultures and even races involved in their problem.

That is wrong, The Vatican II concilium clearly stated that our Church priests should avoid to participate in politics, since 1978, the military Catholic Chaplains (Another word I'm not sure about, the translation in Spanish is Capellán) don't hold a military rank, so they should never carry a weapon or accept orders of the military. Theories!!!!!!! But abandonning politics would be suicidal and I do not think that the Vatican or any other religion is suicidal (well Jonestown being the exception that confirms the sectarian rule!)

The terms of the Vatican II Concilium are very clear and the sanctions very drastic, again I can only talk about my own religion.

When John Paul II came to Perú for the first time, our President (Fernando Belaunde Terry, a real gentleman even when he had an absolute lack of character) kneel in the floor of the airport to kiss the Papal ring, but the Pope took his hand as begged him to rise, because in that moment it wasn't a Religious ceremony, but two chiefs of State with the same rank and no one should kneel before the other.

This a prove that Catholic Church has learned how to separate political from Religious power.

Well decades of forced Atheism have to create a reaction, that I can't justify, but surely may understand. You calk gay bashing , outlawing abortion justified. If you do not like abortion fine , don't do it!! but do not force your private feelings onto needing women!!

We don't bash gays, we don't admit the mariage of two persons of the same sex, which is different. Actually I do not appreciate gays getting married either!! I think they should have the legal rights to be together and have the advantages that spouses do, but getting married is useless provocation especially wanting to force open the church gates! I favor even less the right for gays to adopt since the kids should shouild have parents of both genres> This is especially for lesbians since I refuse to believe both partner would be infertile!

Again we agree and probably we will be bashed by many members here

Well, I'm against most cases of abortion except (Rape, therapeutic abortion when the mother's life is in risk and probably is the baby is going to be born with a painful and beyond cure illness) and the law of my country adopts the same position, so it's not a conflict for me. I suppose you meant that those exceptions were correct to carry out the abortion

Yep that's what I ment, when doing corrections I usually delete some extra parts.

It's in them to stay firm, not all men are savages and animals. Yeah right !!! if the woman  stay firm about condoms, then he loses interest!!!

It's still women choice, if they want to sacrifice their rights for an a$$hole that doesn't respect their rights, it's their problem.

Recently I took the case of  a young woman who was forced by her husband too have sex without condom using force.

I achieved that the guy was convicted  for rape inside marriage and spent a year in prison befire released on parole, you must know that there's a code between prissoners. the rapists have a real hard time in jail, as the joke says, they can't afford to drop the soap in the showers. Does this mean in this particular case, that the wife would've agreed to sexual relation if he did use a condom???

Yes, because she didn't wanted to get pregnant and she her doctor said that due to the history of cancer in her family, she should never use hormones (Birth control pills are full of hormones).

She had asked the guy to make a vasectomy but he didn't wanted and she wasn't going to take the risk of a surgery.

But this proves you that when a woman wants to do something, she's able to do it.

How can you blame us? Our hands are tied by human right watchers who created all this protection for fanatics as a side effect of their fight against formal religions.

Actually if someone is a danger to society (terrorist activist integrist etc... ) you will call the authorities to have him arrested , so why not dennounce the intolerant religious person planning against the others who do not share his faith??!!??

Because human rights activists will jump to defend the fanatic's right to practice their faith.

Don't change the subject, but again as I told you the people that hold the power use anything to save their jobs. Of course , but this is true for religions, too!

There are honest and dishonest members of clergy as in any human activity.

I was not changing the subject. I do not really make a big difference between Shamanism and religions since they both address the fear and anguish od superstitious people about the after life> Nobody ever talks od the pre-life. if an after life exists , then there should be a before life! Religions completely avoid the subject where shamanism does address it as reincarnation>

  1. Shamans are closer to the sects which you said you're afraid of, so I can't understand why now you compare them with formal religions.
  2. Many Religions believe in pre and after life, Have you ever read the word reincarnation? If not, ask Shirley McLaine (Despite the fact that she seems a bit insane).

We had a war with Chile and they took part of our territory 120 something years ago, normally there are not problems, but now we have a candidate who is being agressive against Chile just to gain votes from our patriotic feeling. I knew Chile did take away land from Bolivia (this is why Bolivia has no sea access), but I did not know they also fought Peru. And there are major troubles in both Bolivia and Peryu with a Belgian firm Tractebel about carrying minereals through different routes and Bolivians wishing to have go through Peru rather than Chile. Also the electicity in Arequipa is under control of this firm. I am not their lawyers , but theoretically Tractebel is a firm that does care on how they make money. But I know not the odds and ends of this dispute!

Before the war, we didn't have limits with Chile but Perú had a treaty with Bolivia of mutual defence, when Chile attacked Bolivia we were forced to enter to the war, Bolivia, lost their sea and left us alone with the war, we lost much more, Iquique, Arica and Tacna, later the citizens of Tacna voted and decided to rejoin Perú.

The actual problem with the gaseoduct is that it would be cheaper for any firm to reach the sea by Chilean territory because of the shorter distance, but I can't blame Bolivians for wanting to sell their gas through Perú.

Bolivians as you should imagine don't have much love for Chile.

Now we're talking about history

Things change, the anti Muslim atmosphere existing in the world now, the Neo Nazi movements  (Not religious BTW) in all Europe (including skinheads) create a consiousness of  racial  individuality in this people.

Agressive and coward attacks of stupids who blame a whole race for crimoinal  acts of a few, create reactions, Muslims are prouder than ever of their inheritance and make stronger their beliefs as a mechanism of self defence. but if Moslims would actually denounce and turn in the terrorists recruiting in the mosque (and the Immams DO know what goes on), they would give a real strong message that they do care about their new country. By shutting up otr turning a blind eye, they make the wrong decisions and fuel up the fire instead of showing they DO care!!

I agree about that. Moslims hardly change their way of life and embrace a new culture, that's true.

But you can't deny there's a lot of abuse against innocents also.

That would be inconstitutional in any civilized country, nobody can ask me to take the cross I have on my neck (Of course is very small and ususally insoie my shirt or T-Shirt), it's part of my faith and even of my identity and inheritance.

Now being 100% honest, I believe the treatment recieved by Muslim women is medieval, but it's their way, it's their culture and inheritance, let them evolve at their own speed, as long as they do it inside their countries, But carrying out their traditions (often tribal and backwards traditions) in another country where such things are forbidden (I am thinking of Excision here in practice if Moslim Africa) is clearly a lack of respect for the welcoming country

Blame the Civil Right watchers who fight for their right to keep their cultural inheritance.

HUGUES

Iván

 

HUGUES

Iván

 

HUGUES

Iván

            
Back to Top
greenback View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: August 14 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3300
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 07 2005 at 23:35

hey!

just scroll the  previous long post, and you will see jon&vangelis' private collection album:

 

THIS IS GOD'S INSPIRATION!

[HEADPINS - LINE OF FIRE: THE RECORD HAVING THE MOST POWERFUL GUITAR SOUND IN THE WHOLE HISTORY OF MUSIC!>
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2005 at 08:45

Here Goes!!

Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Back for you:

Originally posted by Sean Trane Sean Trane wrote:

 Here a few smashes of the ball in your camp!!

Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Great!!!! I was missing this debate

Hugues wrote:

Quote

I will also edit a few text !!

ivan_2068 wrote:

Each time we have less disagreements and less colors  So lets focus in the few we still have: and start using italics:

Quote:

ivan_2068 wrote:

 

Just check the age of the Popes and how many years they lasted, Pius XII had a long papacy, John XXIII a very short one, John Paul I was almost 80 and very sick, John Paul II was 56 years old when elected, Benedictus XVI has 78 if I'm not wrong. He sure as hell does not look that old, but I did not pay attention!

There are interests of course, just remember that the Church is a human organization, but from there too shout murder without a single evidence is too much. Denial of strong allegations, and there are no solid proff! I can see you are a lawyer!!

Templars were fanatics excomunicated for their crimes in Holy Land. Mostly because their faith were opposing the Vaticans - and they were exterminated on bonfires , too! Too quickly they forgot that it was because of them Templars that Christiannity actually regained control of Jerusalem and during that time a lot of "studying" happened and this was maybe the most troubled times for the truth!!

The Templars and Hospitalarians role in Crusades   is a very complex issue.  I cannot forgive the Vatican to kill a movement stated by someone named Hugues (De Payens first Templar)

They were under the direct orders of their kings rather than under the orders of the Pope, not only the case but especially France (check about Raynald de Chatillon and Guy de Lugsinan)

They tried to keep control of Jerusalem not for the Catholic Church  but for their countries and their own glory, we could talk about this for months I'd rather not!!

The Dead Sea Rolls have proved that the Gospels are very accurate, the differences between the ones accepted by the Church and recent discovered roles are minimal, except in the Mary Magdalene and Saint Thomas Gospels that admit that Mary Magdalene wasn't a Prostitute (Neither Jesus Christ wife as  the Da Vinci Code implies ), but she was Jesus favorite and most intelligent apostle. Of course the woman taking care of the prophet's genitals could not have been a whore to the vatican. This is just too far I wish to discuss simply because I lack the interest to delve further. For alll I care Marie-Magdalena could've been another immaculate conception , if the vatican wishes!

First, you have avoided the issue of the real historic value of the Gospels with the new evidence of the Death Sea Papers. Too long a debate and I am not passionate enough since I do not have the faith, all arguments can be considered as useless to me! Sorry about this!!

You're also changing your tone, keep it respectful please, I can't expect less from you, and this are not inventions, this are historical facts supported by written evidence. OK Sorry for the tone, I was humorous in a pagan way , but I meant no disrespect, but Jesus was human and he was having a carnal relationship with that woman. The fact that religious people avoid his sex , love and affective life is simply shameful!

Let me inform you something, because I have studied Canonic Law, the process of admitting a miracle like Fatima is very complex, the church names a Bishop who is called "The Devil's Advocate", normaly is a member of the Sacred Congregation of  Faith", this man tries by all means (As a DA) to prove the Miracle is false.

The actual Pope was the Chief of this Congregation and he is one of the most intelligent and well prepared men in the world, not as charismatic as his predecessor, but highly intelligent.

You got me lost, here (out of lack of interest I assure you)!! I believe even less in miracles than I do in god!

Well, I'm a lawyer and Canonical Law is a passion for me, but as a Catholic I believe in Miracles. Can you pray for a Genesis reformation with Gabriel , Hackett and Phillips as well as John Mayhew??? NOW THAT WOULD BE A MIRACLE AND I WOULD ACTUALLY START DOUBTING ABOYT MY ATHEIST BELIEFS!! Jess Kiddin..........

. Yup, Rasputin was an opportunist that intrigued heavily and used the church as a cover for his crazy doings.  THANKS, you're makinng my point But he was of religious origins He was a renegade!! Never was really an Orthodox Monk, so formal religion had no power over him, and loathed by a good part of the orthodox church!! excomunicated to be precise!!! But he had access to the Czar and the highest religious circles!

That's the problem when a Governor is also the head of a Church as in Russia or even England (When the kings has real power), Rasputin was excomunicated by Russian Orthodox Church, but the Czar and especially the Czarina (Because Nicolas II had a very weak character) gave Rasputin huge power, even over the Church. OK Case closed even if he was acting on the name of good!

The day will come for at least Catholics, Orthodox and Lutherans, but I won't count too much on some churches in USA which are a huge eneterprize more than a Religion. Yeah those US sects are downright worrysome

Don't count with most new born Christians, because a lot of the are absolute fundamentalists. You can say that again. Just like the saying that they are more catholic than the pope!!

That is wrong, The Vatican II concilium clearly stated that our Church priests should avoid to participate in politics, since 1978, the military Catholic Chaplains (Another word I'm not sure about, the translation in Spanish is Capellán) don't hold a military rank, so they should never carry a weapon or accept orders of the military. Theories!!!!!!! But abandonning politics would be suicidal and I do not think that the Vatican or any other religion is suicidal (well Jonestown being the exception that confirms the sectarian rule!)

The terms of the Vatican II Concilium are very clear and the sanctions very drastic, again I can only talk about my own religion.

When John Paul II came to Perú for the first time, our President (Fernando Belaunde Terry, a real gentleman even when he had an absolute lack of character) kneel in the floor of the airport to kiss the Papal ring, but the Pope took his hand as begged him to rise, because in that moment it wasn't a Religious ceremony, but two chiefs of State with the same rank and no one should kneel before the other.

This a prove that Catholic Church has learned how to separate political from Religious power. I think you make a valid point here and this is why they are losing out a lot of followers, too. So it is only a matter of time before the Vatican gets to a more aggressive stance!

Well decades of forced Atheism have to create a reaction, that I can't justify, but surely may understand. You calk gay bashing , outlawing abortion justified. If you do not like abortion fine , don't do it!! but do not force your private feelings onto needing women!!

We don't bash gays, we don't admit the mariage of two persons of the same sex, which is different. Actually I do not appreciate gays getting married either!! I think they should have the legal rights to be together and have the advantages that spouses do, but getting married is useless provocation especially wanting to force open the church gates! I favor even less the right for gays to adopt since the kids should shouild have parents of both genres> This is especially for lesbians since I refuse to believe both partner would be infertile!

Again we agree and probably we will be bashed by many members here

It's in them to stay firm, not all men are savages and animals. Yeah right !!! if the woman  stay firm about condoms, then he loses interest!!!

It's still women choice, if they want to sacrifice their rights for an a$$hole that doesn't respect their rights, it's their problem. But they always have a price to pay for it!

Recently I took the case of  a young woman who was forced by her husband too have sex without condom using force.

I achieved that the guy was convicted  for rape inside marriage and spent a year in prison befire released on parole, you must know that there's a code between prissoners. the rapists have a real hard time in jail, as the joke says, they can't afford to drop the soap in the showers. Does this mean in this particular case, that the wife would've agreed to sexual relation if he did use a condom???

Yes, because she didn't wanted to get pregnant and she her doctor said that due to the history of cancer in her family, she should never use hormones (Birth control pills are full of hormones).

She had asked the guy to make a vasectomy but he didn't wanted and she wasn't going to take the risk of a surgery.

But this proves you that when a woman wants to do something, she's able to do it. But I am not sure sending her husband to jail and having to deal with him once he will be out, is exactly the way she wished things turned out!! Even if she will divorce , he will be back for vengeance , you can be sure. And this is where women do not really have a choice!!

How can you blame us? Our hands are tied by human right watchers who created all this protection for fanatics as a side effect of their fight against formal religions.

Actually if someone is a danger to society (terrorist activist integrist etc... ) you will call the authorities to have him arrested , so why not dennounce the intolerant religious person planning against the others who do not share his faith??!!??

Because human rights activists will jump to defend the fanatic's right to practice their faith. Hang on a minute there, you are again taking a huge shortcut here with linking Human Rights Watchers with Atheists. Atheists are not really for freedom of religion , theywould rather do without them. regarding the HRW's fight for freedom of religion, this is the religious part of that movement doing ALL of the work to protect those fanatcs - not the Atheists>> Big Difference!!

I was not changing the subject. I do not really make a big difference between Shamanism and religions since they both address the fear and anguish od superstitious people about the after life> Nobody ever talks od the pre-life. if an after life exists , then there should be a before life! Religions completely avoid the subject where shamanism does address it as reincarnation>

  1. Shamans are closer to the sects which you said you're afraid of, so I can't understand why now you compare them with formal religions. Hang on a second here, atheist consider that all forms of cults as religions, even shamanism> The very fact that you accept super-natural beings or forces makes you a non-atheist! sorry , this may shock you , but I do not really see a difference withmy neighbor goping to church and praying and the annimist worshipping trees and sacrificing a lamb on the altar for his Volcanic divinity. I would like to stress you that I mean absolutely no disrespect about you or religion
  2. Many Religions believe in pre and after life, Have you ever read the word reincarnation? If not, ask Shirley McLaine (Despite the fact that she seems a bit insane). I have never heard of any debate of a pre-life discussed in monotheistic religions and re-incarnations are nt allowed in those. Except for Prophets , Virgin Mary etc...

Before the war, we didn't have limits with Chile but Perú had a treaty with Bolivia of mutual defence, when Chile attacked Bolivia we were forced to enter to the war, Bolivia, lost their sea and left us alone with the war, we lost much more, Iquique, Arica and Tacna, later the citizens of Tacna voted and decided to rejoin Perú.

The actual problem with the gaseoduct is that it would be cheaper for any firm to reach the sea by Chilean territory because of the shorter distance, but I can't blame Bolivians for wanting to sell their gas through Perú.

Bolivians as you should imagine don't have much love for Chile.

Now we're talking about history  Yup, another debate!! I did not know Iquique Arica was once Peruvian, I thought it was Bolivian once. I think the Atacama desert is the most awesome place in the world!!

Agressive and coward attacks of stupids who blame a whole race for crimoinal  acts of a few, create reactions, Muslims are prouder than ever of their inheritance and make stronger their beliefs as a mechanism of self defence. but if Moslims would actually denounce and turn in the terrorists recruiting in the mosque (and the Immams DO know what goes on), they would give a real strong message that they do care about their new country. By shutting up otr turning a blind eye, they make the wrong decisions and fuel up the fire instead of showing they DO care!!

I agree about that. Moslims hardly change their way of life and embrace a new culture, that's true.But you can't deny there's a lot of abuse against innocents also. Of course, there are plenty of Arabs who adapt perfectly and are a major asset to their new country. But unfortunately , they are overshadowed by the hoodlums taking pride in being a rebell and burning cars and the integrist!! I feel sorry for those model immigrants!!

That would be inconstitutional in any civilized country, nobody can ask me to take the cross I have on my neck (Of course is very small and ususally insoie my shirt or T-Shirt), it's part of my faith and even of my identity and inheritance.

Now being 100% honest, I believe the treatment recieved by Muslim women is medieval, but it's their way, it's their culture and inheritance, let them evolve at their own speed, as long as they do it inside their countries, But carrying out their traditions (often tribal and backwards traditions) in another country where such things are forbidden (I am thinking of Excision here in practice if Moslim Africa) is clearly a lack of respect for the welcoming country

Blame the Civil Right watchers who fight for their right to keep their cultural inheritance. Again, the CRW are not atheists!! You must get that in your head! They are a minority in them except for a few countries

HUGUES

Iván

 

HUGUES

Iván

 

HUGUES

Iván

Soon Time for another editing!!
HUGUES

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2005 at 16:10
Sean wrote:
Quote Quote:

ivan_2068 wrote:

 

Had to delete some previous replies again, we're dribving the system mad, and probably some members also, but it's fun  

Of course, just remember that the Church is a human organization, but from there too shout murder without a single evidence is too much. Denial of strong allegations, and there are no solid proff! I can see you are a lawyer!!

True, but honestly, a very sck man, quite old with such a responsability, is a strong candidate for a heart attack or a stroke, the rest is only guessing and giving material for novelists.

Templars were fanatics excomunicated for their crimes in Holy Land. Mostly because their faith were opposing the Vaticans - and they were exterminated on bonfires , too! Too quickly they forgot that it was because of them Templars that Christiannity actually regained control of Jerusalem and during that time a lot of "studying" happened and this was maybe the most troubled times for the truth!!

The Templars and Hospitalarians role in Crusades   is a very complex issue.  I cannot forgive the Vatican to kill a movement stated by someone named Hugues (De Payens first Templar)

Solid argument. enough for me

They were under the direct orders of their kings rather than under the orders of the Pope, not only the case but especially France (check about Raynald de Chatillon and Guy de Lugsinan)

They tried to keep control of Jerusalem not for the Catholic Church  but for their countries and their own glory, we could talk about this for months I'd rather not!!

Neither me or most of the members of this forum

First, you have avoided the issue of the real historic value of the Gospels with the new evidence of the Death Sea Papers. Too long a debate and I am not passionate enough since I do not have the faith, all arguments can be considered as useless to me! Sorry about this!!

Somebody is escaping from evidence

You're also changing your tone, keep it respectful please, I can't expect less from you, and this are not inventions, this are historical facts supported by written evidence. OK Sorry for the tone, I was humorous in a pagan way , but I meant no disrespect, but Jesus was human and he was having a carnal relationship with that woman. The fact that religious people avoid his sex , love and affective life is simply shameful!

No problem, I even have that doubt, and honestly if he was man and God at the same time I wouldn't see anything wrong woith natural human functions.

Well, I'm a lawyer and Canonical Law is a passion for me, but as a Catholic I believe in Miracles. Can you pray for a Genesis reformation with Gabriel , Hackett and Phillips as well as John Mayhew??? NOW THAT WOULD BE A MIRACLE AND I WOULD ACTUALLY START DOUBTING ABOYT MY ATHEIST BELIEFS!! Jess Kiddin..........

If I achieve that, I assure that even the Devil's Adocate will accept my inclussion inthe altars, but this will have to wait for at least 50 years (I don't plan to die before).

The day will come for at least Catholics, Orthodox and Lutherans, but I won't count too much on some churches in USA which are a huge enterprize more than a Religion. Yeah those US sects are downright worrysome

At least most of them.

The terms of the Vatican II Concilium are very clear and the sanctions very drastic, again I can only talk about my own religion.

When John Paul II came to Perú for the first time, our President (Fernando Belaunde Terry, a real gentleman even when he had an absolute lack of character) kneel in the floor of the airport to kiss the Papal ring, but the Pope took his hand as begged him to rise, because in that moment it wasn't a Religious ceremony, but two chiefs of State with the same rank and no one should kneel before the other.

This a prove that Catholic Church has learned how to separate political from Religious power. I think you make a valid point here and this is why they are losing out a lot of followers, too. So it is only a matter of time before the Vatican gets to a more aggressive stance!

Really don't believe that's an option, Vatican is taking more liberal positions lately.

It's still women choice, if they want to sacrifice their rights for an a$$hole that doesn't respect their rights, it's their problem. But they always have a price to pay for it!

Nothing is for free.

Yes, because she didn't wanted to get pregnant and she her doctor said that due to the history of cancer in her family, she should never use hormones (Birth control pills are full of hormones).

She had asked the guy to make a vasectomy but he didn't wanted and she wasn't going to take the risk of a surgery.

But this proves you that when a woman wants to do something, she's able to do it. But I am not sure sending her husband to jail and having to deal with him once he will be out, is exactly the way she wished things turned out!! Even if she will divorce , he will be back for vengeance , you can be sure. And this is where women do not really have a choice!!

We have a restriction order and  this guy is just a violent a**hole not a criminal, I'm sure that the months he passed in a minimum seccurity prisson are enough for him.

But the a$$hole had left all her body purple, so the least he deserved was some months in jail being a candidate for sexual attacks himself.

Because human rights activists will jump to defend the fanatic's right to practice their faith. Hang on a minute there, you are again taking a huge shortcut here with linking Human Rights Watchers with Atheists. Atheists are not really for freedom of religion , theywould rather do without them. regarding the HRW's fight for freedom of religion, this is the religious part of that movement doing ALL of the work to protect those fanatcs - not the Atheists>> Big Difference!!

Then Atheist Civil Watchers should clearly separete positions from fundamentalist Atheists, something they don't do.

  1. Shamans are closer to the sects which you said you're afraid of, so I can't understand why now you compare them with formal religions. Hang on a second here, atheist consider that all forms of cults as religions, even shamanism> The very fact that you accept super-natural beings or forces makes you a non-atheist! sorry , this may shock you , but I do not really see a difference withmy neighbor goping to church and praying and the annimist worshipping trees and sacrificing a lamb on the altar for his Volcanic divinity. I would like to stress you that I mean absolutely no disrespect about you or religion I hope they never get your pet or even worst any relative, because certain cults and sects still make human sacrifices.
  2. Many Religions believe in pre and after life, Have you ever read the word reincarnation? If not, ask Shirley McLaine (Despite the fact that she seems a bit insane). I have never heard of any debate of a pre-life discussed in monotheistic religions and re-incarnations are nt allowed in those. Except for Prophets , Virgin Mary etc... If you believe in reincarnation as Budhists, Hinduists, etc, then pre life is clearly logical, because they claim they existed on other body before they were born. I even read that early Christians believed in reincarnation but the Church changed that, something I can't prove.

Now we're talking about history  Yup, another debate!! I did not know Iquique Arica was once Peruvian, I thought it was Bolivian once. I think the Atacama desert is the most awesome place in the world!!

Nope, not a debate, we lost those territories more than 100 years ago, and even if we don't likle it, what can we do?

I agree about that. Moslims hardly change their way of life and embrace a new culture, that's true.But you can't deny there's a lot of abuse against innocents also. Of course, there are plenty of Arabs who adapt perfectly and are a major asset to their new country. But unfortunately , they are overshadowed by the hoodlums taking pride in being a rebell and burning cars and the integrist!! I feel sorry for those model immigrants!!

Then why should you want to change the external signs of faith of those innocent Arabs, or are you going to ask Orthodox Jewish, Menonites  and Amishs to shave their beards and cut their sideburns before they enter to a public school or office?

By the way Amish and Menonites, being pacific at extreme, are one of the favorite victims of people, what in hell does the ACLU for them? SIMPLY NOTHING, I can't understand their way of life, but I defend their right to keep it.

Blame the Civil Right watchers who fight for their right to keep their cultural inheritance. Again, the CRW are not atheists!! You must get that in your head! They are a minority in them except for a few countries

Most big Civil Rights Watchers even International as Amnesty International or local as the ACLU are full of Atheists.

HUGUES

Iván



Edited by ivan_2068
            
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2005 at 04:57
Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Sean wrote:
Quote Quote:

ivan_2068 wrote:

 

Had to delete some previous replies again, we're dribving the system mad, and probably some members also, but it's fun  

Of course, just remember that the Church is a human organization, but from there too shout murder without a single evidence is too much. Denial of strong allegations, and there are no solid proff! I can see you are a lawyer!!

True, but honestly, a very sck man, quite old with such a responsability, is a strong candidate for a heart attack or a stroke, the rest is only guessing and giving material for novelists. I grant you that imagining vatican cardinals as money loving , power-tripping and blood thirsty satan worshippers is fun!!!

First, you have avoided the issue of the real historic value of the Gospels with the new evidence of the Death Sea Papers. Too long a debate and I am not passionate enough since I do not have the faith, all arguments can be considered as useless to me! Sorry about this!!

Somebody is escaping from evidence  thoSee it your way, but to me this is old history and the page must be turned. I also believe only the vatican has the right to examine se Dead Sea Rolls!

This a prove that Catholic Church has learned how to separate political from Religious power. I think you make a valid point here and this is why they are losing out a lot of followers, too. So it is only a matter of time before the Vatican gets to a more aggressive stance!

Really don't believe that's an option, Vatican is taking more liberal positions lately. Actually I believe that one of the point you made about the age of Benedetto 16 is that they allow themselves time for reflection about choose a much more integrist pope> There is certainly some 40% of cardinals pushing for that option! And a very conservateur pope will reinforce the Catholic church role in politics!

But this proves you that when a woman wants to do something, she's able to do it. But I am not sure sending her husband to jail and having to deal with him once he will be out, is exactly the way she wished things turned out!! Even if she will divorce , he will be back for vengeance , you can be sure. And this is where women do not really have a choice!!

We have a restriction order and  this guy is just a violent a**hole not a criminal, I'm sure that the months he passed in a minimum seccurity prisson are enough for him.But the a$$hole had left all her body purple, so the least he deserved was some months in jail being a candidate for sexual attacks himself. I am not even discussing the fact that he should've been sent to jail for what he did! But this would not have happened  if men were willing towear condom or allowing their wives to take the pill.

Because human rights activists will jump to defend the fanatic's right to practice their faith. Hang on a minute there, you are again taking a huge shortcut here with linking Human Rights Watchers with Atheists. Atheists are not really for freedom of religion , theywould rather do without them. regarding the HRW's fight for freedom of religion, this is the religious part of that movement doing ALL of the work to protect those fanatcs - not the Atheists>> Big Difference!!

Then Atheist Civil Watchers should clearly separete positions from fundamentalist Atheists, something they don't do. Fair enough you return my point back at me!!

  1. Shamans are closer to the sects which you said you're afraid of, so I can't understand why now you compare them with formal religions. Hang on a second here, Atheists consider that all forms of cults as religions, even shamanism> The very fact that you accept super-natural beings or forces makes you a non-atheist! sorry , this may shock you , but I do not really see a difference withmy neighbor goping to church and praying and the annimist worshipping trees and sacrificing a lamb on the altar for his Volcanic divinity. I would like to stress you that I mean absolutely no disrespect about you or religion I hope they never get your pet or even worst any relative, because certain cults and sects still make human sacrifices. Neither do I , but let's face it!! Believing in and worshipping a super-natural being is a dangerous sign of unhealthyness (or a weakness) philosophically speaking!!
  2. Many Religions believe in pre and after life, Have you ever read the word reincarnation? If not, ask Shirley McLaine (Despite the fact that she seems a bit insane). I have never heard of any debate of a pre-life discussed in monotheistic religions and re-incarnations are nt allowed in those. Except for Prophets , Virgin Mary etc... If you believe in reincarnation as Budhists, Hinduists, etc, then pre life is clearly logical, because they claim they existed on other body before they were born. I even read that early Christians believed in reincarnation but the Church changed that, something I can't prove. I do not believe in a pre life and an afterlife! But I can actually feel more sympathy for re-incarnation (including a pre-life) than I do for  montheistic idea of an afterlife without a pre-life. Simply makes more sense. But a "soul " is born at birth (not in a foetus) and dies when its only life support (the body)  dies !!

IThen why should you want to change the external signs of faith of those innocent Arabs, or are you going to ask Orthodox Jewish, Menonites  and Amishs to shave their beards and cut their sideburns before they enter to a public school or office? Simply because those external signs of faith are the ones creating the tensions between the religious communities. The fact is that a christian does not like a jew to wear its kippa and a moslim to wear its veil etc... This (and counter examples too of course) is the main gripe and the cause of rancour. So the only sensible solution is to remove those external signs which are just troublind peace and order!!

By the way Amish and Menonites, being pacific at extreme, are one of the favorite victims of people, what in hell does the ACLU for them? SIMPLY NOTHING, I can't understand their way of life, but I defend their right to keep it. So you are agreeing with the CRW for this issue even though the Amish are a sect.

Blame the Civil Right watchers who fight for their right to keep their cultural inheritance. Again, the CRW are not atheists!! You must get that in your head! They are a minority in them except for a few countries

Most big Civil Rights Watchers even International as Amnesty International or local as the ACLU are full of Atheists. Amnesty International are fighting for political prisoners but also religious prisoners like they are fighting for Atheists being jailed for their beliefs (IF they have not been killed before they got to jail by the integrists) , so they fight for freedom not for atheism. I take it you are not for AI?? Because you constantly attack their goals!! This is strange for a freedom loving lawyer!!

HUGUES

Iván

HUGUES

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
RoyalJelly View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 29 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 582
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2005 at 06:20

     Hello, that Amnesty International is full of atheists is 1) pure speculation on your part 2) None of your goddam business, since last I heard, atheism is not illegal, and religious persuasion is a purely personal matter.

     But I do feel that religious fanaticism of this nature is not merely a detriment to music, it is exactly what's destroying the world today, not to mention the civil rights and quality of life in the USA. These so-called Christians imposing their prudery and intolerance on the whole society, it's holding the culture back the same as it's always done since the Dark Ages.

     Religion, as someone wisely said, is a personal matter between you and God, or the intelligent universe, be it as it may. But stop trying to force your beliefs on other people, that puts you in the same camp as the Taliban. Morality doesn't only stem from organized religion, true humanismand respect for life  is a product of the Enightenment, of philosophy and ethics. If there's a God, he created us with brains to think for ourselves, not to slavishy follow narrow religious dogmas.

Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2005 at 07:53
Originally posted by RoyalJelly RoyalJelly wrote:

     Hello, that Amnesty International is full of atheists is 1) pure speculation on your part 2) None of your goddam business, since last I heard, atheism is not illegal, and religious persuasion is a purely personal matter. Well Iván is a lawyer and although I am not his lawyer, I am sure he thinks AI is a valid organization

     But I do feel that religious fanaticism of this nature is not merely a detriment to music, it is exactly what's destroying the world today, not to mention the civil rights and quality of life in the USA. These so-called Christians imposing their prudery and intolerance on the whole society, it's holding the culture back the same as it's always done since the Dark Ages.

     Religion, as someone wisely said, is a personal matter between you and God, or the intelligent universe, be it as it may. But stop trying to force your beliefs on other people, that puts you in the same camp as the Taliban. Morality doesn't only stem from organized religion, true humanism and respect for life  is a product of the Enightenment, of philosophy and ethics. If there's a God, he created us with brains to think for ourselves, not to slavishy follow narrow religious dogmas.

Hi RJ,

I took the linerty of underlinig keywords in yourtext so that Iv'n or someone else does not take offence in the text or to avoid the debate re-starting from scratch. From what I read,  you and I agree om most issues, though!

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
chromaticism View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: May 19 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 65
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2005 at 08:25

I don't think a belief in God or writing progressive music about God is ruining prog; it even inspires it to go further.  A lot of progressive rock artists we hear happen to inspired by their moral conviction and beliefs whether they are Christian, Atheist, Satanist, or whatever belief they may have.  To a person who believes in a supreme being, that supreme being is too vast that simple words or even complex compositions cannot adequately describe that supreme being, yet he (or she or it, depending on what your beliefs are) provided opportunities for that person to understand him (or she or it) that's why progressive musicians are able to and will be able to further come up with new music.  Take Bach for example; he dedicated his work to God and he came up with wonderful music.  I could consider Bach as progressive during his time.  Liszt, another "progressive" composer, was also inspired by God in some way or another as he also wrote some sacred music as well.   I hope my examples, though not necessarily progressive rock musicians yet wrote music that's progressive for their time, explains my opinion.

Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 10 2005 at 00:42

Devilish red is ok? 

Originally posted by Sean Trane Sean Trane wrote:

Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Sean wrote:
Quote Quote:

ivan_2068 wrote:

 

Had to delete some previous replies again, we're dribving the system mad, and probably some members also, but it's fun  

Of course, just remember that the Church is a human organization, but from there too shout murder without a single evidence is too much. Denial of strong allegations, and there are no solid proff! I can see you are a lawyer!!

True, but honestly, a very sck man, quite old with such a responsability, is a strong candidate for a heart attack or a stroke, the rest is only guessing and giving material for novelists. I grant you that imagining vatican cardinals as money loving , power-tripping and blood thirsty satan worshippers is fun!!!

I don't doubt you enjoy that, as I enjoy Sci Fi

First, you have avoided the issue of the real historic value of the Gospels with the new evidence of the Death Sea Papers. Too long a debate and I am not passionate enough since I do not have the faith, all arguments can be considered as useless to me! Sorry about this!!

Somebody is escaping from evidence  thoSee it your way, but to me this is old history and the page must be turned. I also believe only the vatican has the right to examine se Dead Sea Rolls!

 "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat their mistakes". (George Santayana)

BTW: The Dead Sea Scrolls were studied by a almost every  major University in the World, including Oxford, Princeton, a University in Israel (Not sure which one), etc, and the site of discovery was managed by an international and multi religious team.

This  team paid a big amount of money for any fragment of the scrolls, so the vbeduins who found them usually divided the ones found in 20 or 30 pieces, it was a good business for them, but a huge work for the team, so they gathered the most capable experts in all the fields involved, (History, Theology, Antropology, Geography, Linguistics, etc.).

As a conclusion you can't accuse the Vatican for the investigation of the scrolls.

The most notable expert on the Dead Sea Scrolls is Robert Eisenman from The Institute for Jewish-Christian Origins California State University, who if I'm not wrong is Jewish and has no official connection with the Vatican, as a matter of facts since he published James The Brother of Jesus he's not an idol in the Vatican.

This a prove that Catholic Church has learned how to separate political from Religious power. I think you make a valid point here and this is why they are losing out a lot of followers, too. So it is only a matter of time before the Vatican gets to a more aggressive stance!

Really don't believe that's an option, Vatican is taking more liberal positions lately. Actually I believe that one of the point you made about the age of Benedetto 16 is that they allow themselves time for reflection about choose a much more integrist pope> There is certainly some 40% of cardinals pushing for that option! And a very conservateur pope will reinforce the Catholic church role in politics!

Well, Benedictus XVI is from one of the most radical wings of Church, and he's making no dramatic changes, so don't expect too much in either way for at least 20 years, even when it's very possible that the celibate votes will be removed for lower grade priests and only asked for Archbiships or higher

We have a restriction order and  this guy is just a violent a**hole not a criminal, I'm sure that the months he passed in a minimum seccurity prisson are enough for him.But the a$$hole had left all her body purple, so the least he deserved was some months in jail being a candidate for sexual attacks himself. I am not even discussing the fact that he should've been sent to jail for what he did! But this would not have happened  if men were willing towear condom or allowing their wives to take the pill.

You don't get me, she couldn't take the pill because she had a strong cancer history in her family and the pills contain hormones which are cancerigenous. 

The guy had two chances:

  1. Vasectomy: Histerectomy is too risky because it's an invasive surgery and produces early menopaiusia, due to the cancer precedents, she couldn't take estrogen to avoid collateral damages from menopausia.
  2. Condom: Easy, clean and simple.

The guy invented a third one, wipe the floor with her.

This only proves the guy is an a$$hole and that an intelligent woman has alternatives (Like hiring an expert and friendly lawyer )

Because human rights activists will jump to defend the fanatic's right to practice their faith. Hang on a minute there, you are again taking a huge shortcut here with linking Human Rights Watchers with Atheists. Atheists are not really for freedom of religion , theywould rather do without them. regarding the HRW's fight for freedom of religion, this is the religious part of that movement doing ALL of the work to protect those fanatcs - not the Atheists>> Big Difference!!

Then Atheist Civil Watchers should clearly separete positions from fundamentalist Atheists, something they don't do. Fair enough you return my point back at me!!

That's what I intended

  1. Shamans are closer to the sects which you said you're afraid of, so I can't understand why now you compare them with formal religions. Hang on a second here, Atheists consider that all forms of cults as religions, even shamanism> The very fact that you accept super-natural beings or forces makes you a non-atheist! sorry , this may shock you , but I do not really see a difference withmy neighbor goping to church and praying and the annimist worshipping trees and sacrificing a lamb on the altar for his Volcanic divinity. I would like to stress you that I mean absolutely no disrespect about you or religion I hope they never get your pet or even worst any relative, because certain cults and sects still make human sacrifices. Neither do I , but let's face it!! Believing in and worshipping a super-natural being is a dangerous sign of unhealthyness (or a weakness) philosophically speaking!!  I believe it's a sign of strong faith and will, also phillosophical virtues according to Kierkegaard.
  2. Many Religions believe in pre and after life, Have you ever read the word reincarnation? If not, ask Shirley McLaine (Despite the fact that she seems a bit insane). I have never heard of any debate of a pre-life discussed in monotheistic religions and re-incarnations are nt allowed in those. Except for Prophets , Virgin Mary etc... If you believe in reincarnation as Budhists, Hinduists, etc, then pre life is clearly logical, because they claim they existed on other body before they were born. I even read that early Christians believed in reincarnation but the Church changed that, something I can't prove. I do not believe in a pre life and an afterlife! But I can actually feel more sympathy for re-incarnation (including a pre-life) than I do for  montheistic idea of an afterlife without a pre-life. Simply makes more sense. But a "soul " is born at birth (not in a foetus) and dies when its only life support (the body)  dies !!

And I respect your right to disbelief, would be the first one to defend it in front of a court even when I absolutely disagree with your atheist perspective.

BTW: Are you accepting the idea of a soul???????

IThen why should you want to change the external signs of faith of those innocent Arabs, or are you going to ask Orthodox Jewish, Menonites  and Amishs to shave their beards and cut their sideburns before they enter to a public school or office? Simply because those external signs of faith are the ones creating the tensions between the religious communities. The fact is that a christian does not like a jew to wear its kippa and a moslim to wear its veil etc... This (and counter examples too of course) is the main gripe and the cause of rancour. So the only sensible solution is to remove those external signs which are just troublind peace and order!!

Then ask the kids to have their hair cut because they are increasing the generational or even wthnic and cultural gap or force everybody to listen the same music, force the kids to use a uniform in school  because the different quality of clothes and external signs of richness creates violence,  or force the inmigrants to forget all their cultural and linguistic inheritance because they could create tension between foreign communities.

Dress them as in Mao's China with grey overalls, the same hair cut, taylor and even worst ideology.

I'm 100% sure that if you did it the Civil Right Watchers will be the first ones to attack you and the Supreme Court would ban you.

By the way Amish and Menonites, being pacific at extreme, are one of the favorite victims of people, what in hell does the ACLU for them? SIMPLY NOTHING, I can't understand their way of life, but I defend their right to keep it. So you are agreeing with the CRW for this issue even though the Amish are a sect.

Honestly, I don't have enough information about Amishs or Menonites at least not more  than the average USA citizen (Which sadly isn't too much), but I respect their right to their individuality.

I agree more with the Orthodox Jewish or even decent and honest Moslims option more, because both are formal religions or even with the annoying Hare Chrisnas (Nope, I  honestly don't like the last ones ).

Blame the Civil Right watchers who fight for their right to keep their cultural inheritance. Again, the CRW are not atheists!! You must get that in your head! They are a minority in them except for a few countries

Most big Civil Rights Watchers even International as Amnesty International or local as the ACLU are full of Atheists. Amnesty International are fighting for political prisoners but also religious prisoners like they are fighting for Atheists being jailed for their beliefs (IF they have not been killed before they got to jail by the integrists) , so they fight for freedom not for atheism. I take it you are not for AI?? Because you constantly attack their goals!! This is strange for a freedom loving lawyer!!

I don't agree, I always read the annual bulletin of AI, they are the guys who defend the same animals that killed 35,000 Peruvians in the mountains, they are ususally very bland with communist Governments and very tough with democratic ones.

HUGUES

Iván

HUGUES

Iván



Edited by ivan_2068
            
Back to Top
BePinkTheater View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 01 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1381
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 10 2005 at 00:57

Woah guys, I really dont think this thread was sopposed to be taken so seriosuly...It was a simple yes or no queston of whether or not your put off by religious lyrics

 

we dont have to question our entire existence here in this thread

I can strangle a canary in a tin can and it would be really original, but that wouldn't save it from sounding like utter sh*t.
-Stone Beard
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 10 2005 at 01:11
Originally posted by BePinkTheater BePinkTheater wrote:

Woah guys, I really dont think this thread was sopposed to be taken so seriosuly...It was a simple yes or no queston of whether or not your put off by religious lyrics

we dont have to question our entire existence here in this thread

Some of us take the things seriously, but honestly I'm enjoying this and I'm sure Sean is also, just hope won't bother ther rest of the members though.

And if it does, well, it's easy not to press the link.

BTW: We're just in the Genesis, maybe well reachc the Apocalypse.

Iván

            
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 12 2005 at 07:56

On for another week of debate!!!

Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Devilish red is ok? 

Originally posted by Sean Trane Sean Trane wrote:

Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Sean wrote:
Quote Quote:

ivan_2068 wrote:

 

 I grant you that imagining vatican cardinals as money loving , power-tripping and blood thirsty satan worshippers is fun!!!

I don't doubt you enjoy that, as I enjoy Sci Fi. let's call this thing Vatcan-fiction or Vat-fi

Well, Benedictus XVI is from one of the most radical wings of Church, and he's making no dramatic changes, so don't expect too much in either way for at least 20 years, even when it's very possible that the celibate votes will be removed for lower grade priests and only asked for Archbiships or higher Well he will not be able to, since he is programmed to die soon!

  1. Vasectomy: Histerectomy is too risky because it's an invasive surgery and produces early menopaiusia, due to the cancer precedents, she couldn't take estrogen to avoid collateral damages from menopausia. Hysterictomy is no solution for a male in this siotuation!! I certainly would have not accepted it myself!!
  2. Condom: Easy, clean and simple. As we said, the solution!!!

The guy invented a third one, wipe the floor with her.

This only proves the guy is an a$$hole and that an intelligent woman has alternatives (Like hiring an expert and friendly lawyer ) Does this mean the friendly lawyer work at friendly rates??

Then Atheist Civil Watchers should clearly separete positions from fundamentalist Atheists, something they don't do. Fair enough you return my point back at me!!

That's what I intended  But the ones defending religious freedom are not the atheists!!! I just wish you would understand that!!

  1. Many Religions believe in pre and after life, Have you ever read the word reincarnation? If not, ask Shirley McLaine (Despite the fact that she seems a bit insane). I have never heard of any debate of a pre-life discussed in monotheistic religions and re-incarnations are nt allowed in those. Except for Prophets , Virgin Mary etc... If you believe in reincarnation as Budhists, Hinduists, etc, then pre life is clearly logical, because they claim they existed on other body before they were born. I even read that early Christians believed in reincarnation but the Church changed that, something I can't prove. I do not believe in a pre life and an afterlife! But I can actually feel more sympathy for re-incarnation (including a pre-life) than I do for  montheistic idea of an afterlife without a pre-life. Simply makes more sense. But a "soul " is born at birth (not in a foetus) and dies when its only life support (the body)  dies !! And I respect your right to disbelief, would be the first one to defend it in front of a court even when I absolutely disagree with your atheist perspective.

BTW: Are you accepting the idea of a soul???????Whatever made you think that atheist do/would not believe in the soul?? It is clear that a soul is born at birth , but the fact that the soul exists does not mean there is a religious design or intent, far from it. I can even accept different state of consciousness from all living systems/organism (even plants) and our human level of consciousness , we could call it a soul!! But it is born completely helpless with the body and dies with its only life support. Anything else is pipe dreams , illusions and promises for paradise if you behave!!

Then why should you want to change the external signs of faith of those innocent Arabs, or are you going to ask Orthodox Jewish, Menonites  and Amishs to shave their beards and cut their sideburns before they enter to a public school or office?  Hang on all of those sects refuse the normal system and have their own school system. The do not want their kids to know what progress are all about since they fear that their kids will wander away from their dogma. Mennonites can just agree to some steam engine tractors , but refuse any other types of machine, electricity etc... The Amish are even worse at that: they refuse paved roads and  steam engines.. And they are ready to force their kids intoa private schooling system so they do not learn or come in contact with people outside their world...

Then ask the kids to have their hair cut because they are increasing the generational or even ethnic and cultural gap or force everybody to listen the same music, force the kids to use a uniform in school  because the different quality of clothes and external signs of richness creates violence,  or force the inmigrants to forget all their cultural and linguistic inheritance because they could create tension between foreign communities. Would this not be part of the solution: if origins/inheritance are at the center of of your problems to fit in a new country of your choice , than you should consider either going back or re-settling somewhere else!!! Please I am not talking of native Americans or other people whose lands have been invaded - but immigrants who have chosen to live elsewhere than their country of origin.  In the case of Nothern Africans immigrating to Europe but intending to keep all of their religious beliefs , tribal ritual (some fairly cruel) etc because of the religious beliefs  and refusing to meddle in (even forcing girls in marriages they do not want) , they could try their luck in Saudi Arabia or U Arab Emirates.

Dress them as in Mao's China with grey overalls, the same hair cut, taylor and even worst ideology.I'm 100% sure that if you did it the Civil Right Watchers will be the first ones to attack you and the Supreme Court would ban you. I never even suggested anything of the sort

By the way Amish and Menonites, being pacific at extreme, are one of the favorite victims of people, what in hell does the ACLU for them? SIMPLY NOTHING, I can't understand their way of life, but I defend their right to keep it. So you are agreeing with the CRW for this issue even though the Amish are a sect.

Honestly, I don't have enough information about Amishs or Menonites at least not more  than the average USA citizen (Which sadly isn't too much), but I respect their right to their individuality. I just told you what above what those Amish and Menonites sect are about, but generally they live in very backwords place like Paraguay's Matto Grosso or confines of Canada, do not mix with modern life and generally from what I know are not aggressed by anyone. There are still Menonites villages in Holland and Germany - places of origins of this extreme protestant sects. The roads of the villages are still of dirt and modern men are not welcome although they will not be chasen away, they will make wish to leave soon. There is a superb film with Harrison Ford as a cop and dealing with the Amish. I forget the title.

I agree more with the Orthodox Jewish or even decent and honest Moslims option more, because both are formal religions or even with the annoying Hare Chrisnas (Nope, I  honestly don't like the last ones ). I have a certain sympathy for Hare Krishnas because they are linked to the hippy era , but they are still a sect.

Most big Civil Rights Watchers even International as Amnesty International or local as the ACLU are full of Atheists. Amnesty International are fighting for political prisoners but also religious prisoners like they are fighting for Atheists being jailed for their beliefs (IF they have not been killed before they got to jail by the integrists) , so they fight for freedom not for atheism. I take it you are not for AI?? Because you constantly attack their goals!! This is strange for a freedom loving lawyer!!

I don't agree, I always read the annual bulletin of AI, they are the guys who defend the same animals that killed 35,000 Peruvians in the mountains, they are ususally very bland with communist Governments and very tough with democratic ones. AI is fighting against power abuses of all systems but can only act in democracies - so they are more likely to act only where they make a difference./If they had the power to do something in North Korea , believe me , they would!!!! However both AI and Greenpeace are ONG that I only support morally (I could financially since I could ) but I have doubts about the way the money is used and how their internal organization work. I would rather give money to the Flying Doctors (medecins Sans Frontičres) or the Red Cross (which if you heard will lose all religious symbols because of Jewish objections to the red cross or red crescent - and will spend millions by using a red square on flags and vehicles to avoid any religion meanings - thanks to religions!!!!!

I was saving this one after the Templars and the Free masons are still to come....... Because the atheists you accuse in the Civil rights Watcher are really Free Masons  - who are not atheists.............

HUGUES

Iván

HUGUES

Iván

HUGUES

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2005 at 14:25
Sean wrote:
Quote
ivan_2068 wrote:

 I don't doubt you enjoy that, as I enjoy Sci Fi. let's call this thing Vatcan-fiction or Vat-fi

Ok, as long as we know it's only fiction.

Well, Benedictus XVI is from one of the most radical wings of Church, and he's making no dramatic changes, so don't expect too much in either way for at least 20 years, even when it's very possible that the celibate votes will be removed for lower grade priests and only asked for Archbiships or higher Well he will not be able to, since he is programmed to die soon!

You're a master twisting what I said  He's 78 or 79 already, nobody programmed him toi die soon, but it's the general rule, he's already slightly over the average age reached in populated centers.

  1. Vasectomy: Histerectomy is too risky because it's an invasive surgery and produces early menopaiusia, due to the cancer precedents, she couldn't take estrogen to avoid collateral damages from menopausia. Hysterictomy is no solution for a male in this siotuation!! I certainly would have not accepted it myself!!  Well, you can't do hysterectomy because it's the removal of woumb, but don't be a machist, my brother in law is going to make a reversible vasectomy, it's only a small tie.
  2. Condom: Easy, clean and simple. As we said, the solution!!! Again we agree, more human, simpler and safer than any abortive procedure.

This only proves the guy is an a$$hole and that an intelligent woman has alternatives (Like hiring an expert and friendly lawyer ) Does this mean the friendly lawyer work at friendly rates??

Honestly not so friendly, she is a friend of a friend and has enough money, so I wasn't really cheap in that case

BTW: Are you accepting the idea of a soul???????Whatever made you think that atheist do/would not believe in the soul?? It is clear that a soul is born at birth , but the fact that the soul exists does not mean there is a religious design or intent, far from it. I can even accept different state of consciousness from all living systems/organism (even plants) and our human level of consciousness , we could call it a soul!! But it is born completely helpless with the body and dies with its only life support. Anything else is pipe dreams , illusions and promises for paradise if you behave!!

Well that's an advance, even when you're not talking about a soul but about a brain function.

Then why should you want to change the external signs of faith of those innocent Arabs, or are you going to ask Orthodox Jewish, Menonites  and Amishs to shave their beards and cut their sideburns before they enter to a public school or office?  Hang on all of those sects refuse the normal system and have their own school system. The do not want their kids to know what progress are all about since they fear that their kids will wander away from their dogma. Mennonites can just agree to some steam engine tractors , but refuse any other types of machine, electricity etc... The Amish are even worse at that: they refuse paved roads and  steam engines.. And they are ready to force their kids intoa private schooling system so they do not learn or come in contact with people outside their world...

You said that this signs should be prohibited in  public places and  both Amishs and Menonites have to use Public Registers and some publuic offices as any human.

Then ask the kids to have their hair cut because they are increasing the generational or even ethnic and cultural gap or force everybody to listen the same music, force the kids to use a uniform in school  because the different quality of clothes and external signs of richness creates violence,  or force the inmigrants to forget all their cultural and linguistic inheritance because they could create tension between foreign communities. Would this not be part of the solution: if origins/inheritance are at the center of of your problems to fit in a new country of your choice , than you should consider either going back or re-settling somewhere else!!! Please I am not talking of native Americans or other people whose lands have been invaded - but immigrants who have chosen to live elsewhere than their country of origin.  In the case of Nothern Africans immigrating to Europe but intending to keep all of their religious beliefs , tribal ritual (some fairly cruel) etc because of the religious beliefs  and refusing to meddle in (even forcing girls in marriages they do not want) , they could try their luck in Saudi Arabia or U Arab Emirates.

But you can't make a difference between strong and weak cultural forms, Italians for example are Catholics in a Protestant country as USA, if you don't ban Catholicism, why should you ban sects (Even when I admit most sects are very dangerous).

Fairly cruel  rituals???? For God's sake, that's what I was talking about when mentioned animism and you refuted my point of view, sho can understand you?

Laws should be general for everybody.

Dress them as in Mao's China with grey overalls, the same hair cut, taylor and even worst ideology.I'm 100% sure that if you did it the Civil Right Watchers will be the first ones to attack you and the Supreme Court would ban you. I never even suggested anything of the sort

If you want to avoid any risk of violence and cultural colitions, that's your only alternative, why should you ban religion if you don't make a dressing code?

Why can kids use long hair and Orthodox Jewish can't use black clothes hat, never save and cut their sideburns?

If you don't uniform the people, you can't ban religion using that lame excuse of avoiding potential religious problems.

BTW:

Quote

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Oops, I believe USA and all the countries of Euroepe signed this declaration.

Honestly, I don't have enough information about Amishs or Menonites at least not more  than the average USA citizen (Which sadly isn't too much), but I respect their right to their individuality. I just told you what above what those Amish and Menonites sect are about, but generally they live in very backwords place like Paraguay's Matto Grosso or confines of Canada, do not mix with modern life and generally from what I know are not aggressed by anyone. There are still Menonites villages in Holland and Germany - places of origins of this extreme protestant sects. The roads of the villages are still of dirt and modern men are not welcome although they will not be chasen away, they will make wish to leave soon. There is a superb film with Harrison Ford as a cop and dealing with the Amish. I forget the title.

All that I know, I'm talking about their philosophic foudations, I've even been in an Amish county in the North of USA and seen how this people recieve hostile treatment from the coivilized rednecks.

I agree more with the Orthodox Jewish or even decent and honest Moslims option more, because both are formal religions or even with the annoying Hare Chrisnas (Nope, I  honestly don't like the last ones ). I have a certain sympathy for Hare Krishnas because they are linked to the hippy era , but they are still a sect.

Was just joking

I don't agree, I always read the annual bulletin of AI, they are the guys who defend the same animals that killed 35,000 Peruvians in the mountains, they are ususally very bland with communist Governments and very tough with democratic ones. AI is fighting against power abuses of all systems but can only act in democracies - so they are more likely to act only where they make a difference./If they had the power to do something in North Korea , believe me , they would!!!! However both AI and Greenpeace are ONG that I only support morally (I could financially since I could )

Wow, that's very convenient, they attack all the countries that have more respect for human rights and leave alone those who clearly attack the base of freedom.

They are like the kid who is searching for his lost coin bellow a street lamp even when he lost it in the dark part of the street and answers that he does it because where he lost it he can't see.

The worst abuses are commited in non Democratic countries, that's the place where they should work, but it's more comfortable and safe to do it where they lives are not in risk.

And they even get paid for that!!!!!!

but I have doubts about the way the money is used and how their internal organization work. I would rather give money to the Flying Doctors (medecins Sans Frontičres) or the Red Cross (which if you heard will lose all religious symbols because of Jewish objections to the red cross or red crescent - and will spend millions by using a red square on flags and vehicles to avoid any religion meanings - thanks to religions!!!!!

 And for this work they recieve a very high salary (I know that, I'm lawyer of one ONG and know all about their taxes).

Well, the Jewishs are free to create the Red Star of David if they want, if I'm wounded, I'm honest to admit I wouldn't absolutely care if ther Red Cross, Red Crescent or Red Star of David come to my help as long as they save my miserable life.

BTW: The Red Cross is not a Religious symbol, they use it because it was founded by Henri Dunant from Switzerland in 1863,  and it's areference to the flag of his country:

Swiss Flag

Quote  The symbol of the Red Cross on a white background (the reverse of the Swiss flag) was chosen to represent the organization.  From this conference evolved the Red Cross Convention of 1864.  

http://www.seattleredcross.org/aboutus/history/ 

I was saving this one after the Templars and the Free masons are still to come....... Because the atheists you accuse in the Civil rights Watcher are really Free Masons  - who are not atheists.............

That's something I don't get, the Masons have a Jewish organization, use some early Christian symbols plus some Greek and they are Atheists?  isn't that contradictory?

HUGUES

Iván

            
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 14 2005 at 04:59
Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Sean wrote:
Quote
ivan_2068 wrote:

 I don't doubt you enjoy that, as I enjoy Sci Fi. let's call this thing Vatcan-fiction or Vat-fi

Ok, as long as we know it's only fiction. By assimilation only!!

Well, Benedictus XVI is from one of the most radical wings of Church, and he's making no dramatic changes, so don't expect too much in either way for at least 20 years, even when it's very possible that the celibate votes will be removed for lower grade priests and only asked for Archbiships or higher Well he will not be able to, since he is programmed to die soon!

You're a master twisting what I said  Only returning to you your stanadar lawyer practice!!!He's 78 or 79 already, nobody programmed him to die soon, but it's the general rule, he's already slightly over the average age reached in populated centers.

  1. Vasectomy: Histerectomy is too risky because it's an invasive surgery and produces early menopaiusia, due to the cancer precedents, she couldn't take estrogen to avoid collateral damages from menopausia. Hysterictomy is no solution for a male in this siotuation!! I certainly would have not accepted it myself!!  Well, you can't do hysterectomy because it's the removal of womb, but don't be a machist, my brother in law is going to make a reversible vasectomy, it's only a small tie. But attacking my mahood. Long live the condom!!!
  2. Condom: Easy, clean and simple. As we said, the solution!!! Again we agree, more human, simpler and safer than any abortive procedure.

This only proves the guy is an a$$hole and that an intelligent woman has alternatives (Like hiring an expert and friendly lawyer ) Does this mean the friendly lawyer work at friendly rates??

Honestly not so friendly, she is a friend of a friend and has enough money, so I wasn't really cheap in that case  Better a bad arrangement than a good trial, uh??

BTW: Are you accepting the idea of a soul???????Whatever made you think that atheist do/would not believe in the soul?? It is clear that a soul is born at birth , but the fact that the soul exists does not mean there is a religious design or intent, far from it. I can even accept different state of consciousness from all living systems/organism (even plants) and our human level of consciousness , we could call it a soul!! But it is born completely helpless with the body and dies with its only life support. Anything else is pipe dreams , illusions and promises for paradise if you behave!!

Well that's an advance, even when you're not talking about a soul but about a brain function. No , my friend , we acknowledge the soul as something different than just a vital organ!!

Then why should you want to change the external signs of faith of those innocent Arabs, or are you going to ask Orthodox Jewish, Menonites  and Amishs to shave their beards and cut their sideburns before they enter to a public school or office?  Hang on all of those sects refuse the normal system and have their own school system. The do not want their kids to know what progress are all about since they fear that their kids will wander away from their dogma. Mennonites can just agree to some steam engine tractors , but refuse any other types of machine, electricity etc... The Amish are even worse at that: they refuse paved roads and  steam engines.. And they are ready to force their kids intoa private schooling system so they do not learn or come in contact with people outside their world...

You said that these signs should be prohibited in  public places and  both Amishs and Menonites have to use Public Registers and some publuic offices as any human. In those backwards and out of the way villages only populated by themselves , they have their own register and town halls and they do put on the walls whatever they wish. The last thing sensible central authorities would want is no get these potentially dangerous sects angry so they leave them alone.

Then ask the kids to have their hair cut because they are increasing the generational or even ethnic and cultural gap or force everybody to listen the same music, force the kids to use a uniform in school  because the different quality of clothes and external signs of richness creates violence,  or force the inmigrants to forget all their cultural and linguistic inheritance because they could create tension between foreign communities. Would this not be part of the solution: if origins/inheritance are at the center of of your problems to fit in a new country of your choice , than you should consider either going back or re-settling somewhere else!!! Please I am not talking of native Americans or other people whose lands have been invaded - but immigrants who have chosen to live elsewhere than their country of origin.  In the case of Nothern Africans immigrating to Europe but intending to keep all of their religious beliefs , tribal ritual (some fairly cruel) etc because of the religious beliefs  and refusing to meddle in (even forcing girls in marriages they do not want) , they could try their luck in Saudi Arabia or U Arab Emirates.

But you can't make a difference between strong and weak cultural forms, Italians for example are Catholics in a Protestant country as USA, if you don't ban Catholicism, why should you ban sects (Even when I admit most sects are very dangerous). Now you are taking the sects defence!!

Fairly cruel  rituals???? For God's sake, that's what I was talking about when mentioned animism and you refuted my point of view, sho can understand you? I was speaking of Excision, castrations and circumcisions, plus I do not really remember defending primitive rituals. I said that I made no difference between worshipping a tree or a volcano and praying to some supernatural divinity. I am against sacrifices!!

Laws should be general for everybody. This is why it is best to keep religions to private matters and avoid it in the public place: less chances at rancor or disputes!!

Dress them as in Mao's China with grey overalls, the same hair cut, taylor and even worst ideology.I'm 100% sure that if you did it the Civil Right Watchers will be the first ones to attack you and the Supreme Court would ban you. I never even suggested anything of the sort

If you want to avoid any risk of violence and cultural colitions, that's your only alternative, why should you ban religion if you don't make a dressing code?Why can kids use long hair and Orthodox Jewish can't use black clothes hat, never save and cut their sideburns?If you don't uniform the people, you can't ban religion using that lame excuse of avoiding potential religious problems. The fact that the kipa and the shroud are making problems (let's take away the fact of gang or biker's colors out since they are criminal organizations and they are attacked for their  doings anyway) is the very reason why they are banned .

BTW:

Quote

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Oops, I believe USA and all the countries of Europe signed this declaration. Certainly did do so. But once the right of freedom of religion interferes with other people's rights (walking in front of a mosque or synagogue without having manisfestations or being called an asshole because you are an infidel etc...) are infriged.

All that I know, I'm talking about their philosophic foudations, I've even been in an Amish county in the North of USA and seen how this people recieve hostile treatment from the civilized rednecks. True enough but those same rednecks are being assholes with other rednecks from other counties as well. Anyway rednecks and intolerance and assholes are synonyms and pleonasms as far as I am concerned> BUT, the Amish are not friendly to strangers coming to their communities and there is no reasons that they should be treated friendly when they venture out of their villages to mid-size cities!! You get what you pay for, And does Christian wisdom not say : do not treat others as you would not like to be treated yourself?!?!

I agree more with the Orthodox Jewish or even decent and honest Moslims option more, because both are formal religions or even with the annoying Hare Chrisnas (Nope, I  honestly don't like the last ones ). I have a certain sympathy for Hare Krishnas because they are linked to the hippy era , but they are still a sect.

Was just joking  These Krishnas are really harmless as a threat to freedom , but they do convert some people who are asked to give all the money to the community/sect

Wow, that's very convenient, they attack all the countries that have more respect for human rights and leave alone those who clearly attack the base of freedom.They are like the kid who is searching for his lost coin bellow a street lamp even when he lost it in the dark part of the street and answers that he does it because where he lost it he can't see. The worst abuses are commited in non Democratic countries, that's the place where they should work Agreed, but they would get killed right away and it would be the end of that. AI lobbies powers to intervene where possible , but it's more comfortable and safe to do it where they lives are not in risk.And they even get paid for that!!!!!! Better doing what they can in places where they can make a difference, than doing absolutely nothing and allowing abuses in "civilized"countries

but I have doubts about the way the money is used and how their internal organization work. I would rather give money to the Flying Doctors (medecins Sans Frontičres) or the Red Cross (which if you heard will lose all religious symbols because of Jewish objections to the red cross or red crescent - and will spend millions by using a red square on flags and vehicles to avoid any religion meanings - thanks to religions!!!!!

 And for this work they recieve a very high salary (I know that, I'm lawyer of one ONG and know all about their taxes).Well, the Jewishs are free to create the Red Star of David if they want, if I'm wounded, I'm honest to admit I wouldn't absolutely care if ther Red Cross, Red Crescent or Red Star of David come to my help as long as they save my miserable life. You are a reasoinable religious man, but not everyone is like you

BTW: The Red Cross is not a Religious symbol, they use it because it was founded by Henri Dunant from Switzerland in 1863,  and it's a reference to the flag of his country:

Swiss Flag

[quote] The symbol of the Red Cross on a white background (the reverse of the Swiss flag) was chosen to represent the organization.  From this conference evolved the Red Cross Convention of 1864.  True but the cross on the swiss flag is a religious symbol and the organization was started by christian activist , and they did not care what was the religion of the people of the wounded onm the battlefield. A very generous ideal. Unfortunately this red cross flag was too similar to the Crusade and templars flags and during the WW1 , the Ottomans Turks  saw it as an insult even though this Red Cross was caring for their own. So what this great ONG is thinking is simply using a red square in a white backdrop all over the world to not make any reference to religion anymore, since again the problems comes from religious acrimony!! This is a vicious circle!!

I was saving this one after the Templars and the Free masons are still to come....... Because the atheists you accuse in the Civil rights Watcher are really Free Masons  - who are not atheists.............

That's something I don't get, the Masons have a Jewish organization, use some early Christian symbols plus some Greek and they are Atheists?  isn't that contradictory?

Free masonry enjoys confusing people and their Masonic Temples (funny for their non-partisan pretenses) are taken after ancient Egypt architecture and they pretend to be the descendants of the Templars etc.... Free masons are NOT  atheists!!!! They choose to make abstraction of religious dfifferences!! Difference. The roots of free-masonry is definitely christian and the helpe out restoring cathedrals in Europe by with teaching and preservation of arts. This is very vivid in France, Belgium, Spain etc.... They free masons are carving stones or restoring clergical art through Les Compagnons and their sheer love of preserving the partimonium. But please get out of your heads that free-masons are atheists>> They define themselves as free thinkers and refuse to obei to any dogma or induced current of thoughts except their own bizarre mix!!

They were a very important tool of counter-power against the clergical stances of politics during the 19th century and can be best seen as liberals in Europe. This means that they promote free enterprise and have a fairly capitalist economic stance. But they fought the clergy hard because the clergy was angry of politics line escaping its influence.

HUGUES

Iván

HUGUES



Edited by Sean Trane
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 89101112>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.258 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.