No matter how open-minded...

[Marcus Kehoe]

The second part is how any church that says love your brother like yourself can in any way support war.

There is no way in Hell I'm going to love my brother like I love myself. Not even if he washes it first.

Then how about love your Neighbor, might have a hot neighbor.

 

[cgaWolf]

In a way that bidding your dog to fetch your slippers is not? Or is fetch violating the dog's rights as well? My point is that if it's a mutually enjoyed experience - or really just as long as the animal in question isn't much begrudged by it - then it's not harmful. It's not in violation of any right that I can see being reasonably attributed to an animal either.

My dog never fetched my shoes when i asked him to, and there was no bad consequence for that - thus i wasn't abusing my power. In fact, i'd say he was, because the only time he did anything with my shoes, he chewed them up ^_^

That said, sexual abuse of an animal who cannot reason against it, or has no way to defend itself, is an abuse of power. Do not forget that desire (on part of the animal) is not equal to informed consent, and informed consent is a requirement for a sexual act to not be abuse.

[note i'm not talking about medical or aesthetic considerations, both of which are obviously considerations, but shouldn't necessarily determine legality or morality]

 

[Codeman90]

Only took 3 replies to start the great religious crusade of Atheism vs. Religion. Might want to put something against that in the original post. Then it might take at least a page before the forum wars begin.

In any event what I can't wrap my head around is those who lack sympathy. Those who just don't care at all about other people. I think there is a term for that, but I don't quite remember off the top of my head. Maybe it's just because I had an organ transplant at a young age, so perhaps I have way too much sympathy. I'M HOGGING IT ALL, YOU CAN'T HAVE ANY MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Also that Hazama quote is awesome, gotta love Blazblue.

 

[conflictofinterests]

Not to sound mean it's just I find those so desperate for comfort as weak spirited.

As for the "more comfort" point, one must remember the old saying: "everything in moderation." Obsessing about anything, from religion to business to even science, will usually bring about a negative effect. It is up to the person, not the religion, to decide whether they should be wholly obsessed. Religions might teach you to devote your whole life to its word, but that is your decision. That is the blessing of free will!

I just want to squeeze into this conversation here...

I've been studying some pretty desperate places in my Anthropology class, and they're a lot more desperate than you or I have any familiarity with. Dirt floor and banana shingle roofs, they flooded my farm and killed my livestock and expected me to survive kind of desperate. People in places like that believe in religion for 2 reasons. 1) Because there has to be some place, even if it's after this life, where their children won't die of starvation or any number of entirely treatable (diseases we have all but eradicated in the Western World) illnesses, and 2) There has to be some place, even if it's after this life, where the people who did good will be rewarded and the people who did evil (who did all the things that ruined their lives) will be punished.

A wonderful addition! Thank you so much!

Now, could we really tell these people that they are being weak-willed? Silly? Idiotic? For giving themselves this comfort. I would never do so, for it gives them the hope to live, to keep going in a situation that seems utterly hopeless.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a firm agnostic-leaning-atheist, and for all intents and purposes in the first world there isn't a whole lot of use for religion. I just think that there are instances in which it does much more good than harm, and that for the most part, since for the most part people are religious, if not possessed of faith, religion isn't a bad thing.

I kind of view it as a tool to cope with different situations: Initially to assure ourselves that the world is a rational, ordered place, and then to assure ourselves that life is worth living. The first situation has largely been dealt with by science in the Western World, but there are still areas where the second require a little religion to shore up.

 

[Trivea]

People who know what they want to do in life and don't go for it, no matter how out-of-reach the final goal might sound, knowing that not going for it will fill them with regret for the rest of their lives. I've heard so many people who want to, say, be professional actors, but don't try for it because "that doesn't happen to normal people". I'm sorry, but I don't think all celebrities were born to it.

 

[Unesh52]

Erm, pardon me if I'm misunderstanding this, but why is the fact that you can't prove religion even an argument? Many religions by definition are based on faith alone and to prove it would be to go against the point. The origin of major religions may be unknown and therefore, there's no logical reason to have an opinion of it regarding its validity. Religion serves as a reference point for morals and ethics, and it often gives people optimism that they otherwise wouldn't have. Some people need a religion to help deal with the facts of reality, and some people can use religion to help out a community. The misuse and the misunderstanding of religion is the problem itself, not the fact that it exists and people follow it. Ultraconservative ideals pushed out by a few particular louder members are sometimes frustrating, maybe, but they actually DO have a higher moral ground than atheists. The reasoning is that we can't actually know any facts about the universe, only our perceptions of them and the definitions we've created. The one exception is cogito ergo sum and that barely qualifies. Without this sort of objective reasoning, morality and ethics don't actually exist. Religion, whether you like it or not, has its place in society and is a logical decision to make despite the lack of reasoning behind it. For the record, I'm not religious.

You epistemology is worrisomely scant. From the Tim Minchin beat poem Storm, upon hearing the titular character remark that all knowledge is mere opinion, in much the same way you have expressed here:

I resist the urge to ask Storm,
Whether knowledge is so loose weave,
Of a morning, when deciding whether to leave,
Her apartment by the front door,
Or the window on the second floor.

Epistemological uncertainty is a problem, yes, and it is certainly possible that tomorrow all the things we have ever known about anything will be turned inside out and upside down, but certainly you must concede that it is impractical to accept any and all propositions put to us without discrimination. And doubly certainly you must believe that some methods for discriminating amongst the beliefs that are put to us are better than others at providing a sturdy framework on which to make decisions that have the outcomes we desire - this is to say that you're more likely to be able to eat your morning cereal if you learn how your spoon works by direct experimentation rather than consulting your cat. In keeping with that, it seems unreasonable to say that all ideas are valid because they cannot be 100% disproved, but that it's not true that you can eat co-co pebbles by licking your crotch and scratching up the arm of your couch.

But let's say you could, and thus even these ultraconservatives have valid ideas - how does that give them the "moral high ground" over atheists? Do they not enjoy the same vindication for their beliefs that the ultraconservatives do? Why is it ok to positively assert the existence of God, but not the non-existence of God, if neither is verifiable?

 

[conflictofinterests]

Only took 3 replies to start the great religious crusade of Atheism vs. Religion. Might want to put something against that in the original post. Then it might take at least a page before the forum wars begin.

In any event what I can't wrap my head around is those who lack sympathy. Those who just don't care at all about other people. I think there is a term for that, but I don't quite remember off the top of my head. Maybe it's just because I had an organ transplant at a young age, so perhaps I have way too much sympathy. I'M HOGGING IT ALL, YOU CAN'T HAVE ANY MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Also that Hazama quote is awesome, gotta love Blazblue.

Sympathy and empathy are big definers of humans in general. Aside from having the highest intellectual capacity, we also have the highest capacity for empathy. It comes with living in such large groups and relying as heavily as we do on one another. I would go so far as to say a feeling of alienation towards someone who is not empathetic is entirely to be expected.

That being said, empathy doesn't have to be all-encompassing, and by that I mean encompassing everyone, not one's whole being. It is entirely reasonable for someone to be more empathetic towards their family than towards strangers, for instance.

 

[Monty McDougal]

People who have absolutely no idea about science and say that it completely disproves religion. BTW, a majority of scientific theories are always disproved in a generation or two. And every generation thinks that they are 100% right.

 

[conflictofinterests]

People who have absolutely no idea about science and say that it completely disproves religion. BTW, a majority of scientific theories are always disproved in a generation or two. And every generation thinks that they are 100% right.

No Idea why I'm posting this here, it has no relevance what soever, it just seemed oddly appropriate.

 

[Kolby Jack]

Drinking, smoking, and doing drugs. They're proven to be quite bad for you, all are addictive, and drugs are illegal. Whatever little buzz or high you get from it in my eyes does NOT outweigh the costs, or even come remotely close to doing so. I even made a topic a while back asking people who do these things why they do it and despite the overwhelming number of well-put responses, I still find myself wondering why they think it's worth it.

 

[azurine]

Dubsteps.

I don't care how popular they are at my school, it feels like I'm being hit with a frying pan made out of mindless noise.

And call of duty. I don't get why that's popular either.
or why anyone likes twilight.

 

[Quantum Star]

Narcissism. It just astounds me how people can be so self absorbed with so little regard for others.

 

[Cat of Doom]

Tottenhan hotspurs fans.

 

[Semudara]

The people who feel the need to deride religion at every opportunity and be self-righteous about it. They're being just as nasty and close-minded as the people who give religion a bad name.

 

[Unesh52]

My dog never fetched my shoes when i asked him to, and there was no bad consequence for that - thus i wasn't abusing my power. In fact, i'd say he was, because the only time he did anything with my shoes, he chewed them up ^_^

That said, sexual abuse of an animal who cannot reason against it, or has no way to defend itself, is an abuse of power. Do not forget that desire (on part of the animal) is not equal to informed consent, and informed consent is a requirement for a sexual act to not be abuse.

[note i'm not talking about medical or aesthetic considerations, both of which are obviously considerations, but shouldn't necessarily determine legality or morality]

I've never bought this consent argument. The reason consent laws are important is because it's generally up to the individual to make their own decisions, and when they can't, society has a responsibility to keep them from harm. Children and the mentally disabled cannot give informed consent because they lack capacity - the capacity to make reasonable decisions based on sufficient information. This is not the part about child abuse or raping a handicapped person that makes it bad, however. There are plenty of things we do to with children and the handicapped that they do not and cannot consent to, like immunization shots and baths. Sexual abuse is bad because it can hurt them, and it often does, for psychological as well as biological (pregnancy, STDs) reasons. The fact that it can hurt them doesn't make it bad in itself either. There is risk for sexual activity between two adults too. You need both together - lack of consent (either due to will or lack of capacity) and probable harm - to make it something wrong.

The whole point of my "fetch" analogy was that dogs don't usually require consent for you to be able to do things with them, or even to use them for things (think work horses). It seems to me that you are making an arbitrary distinction by saying that sexual activity always requires consent to be morally permissible, where other types of activity do not. If you think it's not arbitrary, then what is the relevant distinction? What about sex requires that the animal be able to give consent?

 

[German Borbon]

i just cant get my mind around people who doesn´t give a toss about knowledge, books, hell, even pop culture. people that stay ignoran forever because they want to, and i just can´t understand why

 

[Unesh52]

Dubsteps.

Tee-hee. I understand why you don't like it and that's cool, but you said it wrong. That's like calling it "metals," or "countries."

 

[Zoraste]

People who dye their hair.

I can handle nose rings, nipple piercings, earrings, belly-button rings, and tattoos, but dying your hair, or altering any aspect of your body that you were born with just doesn't feel right.

Same with any cosmetic surgery.

Seriously? If anything, all the piercings should be the ones you don't understand. Dying your hair is a small cosmetic change that has ultimately no functional change to your performance in any task. I dare you to tell me that sticking several large, pointless hunks of metal in your flesh is less intrusive. That's one thing I can't wrap my head around, btw.

Deliberate acts of unbridled rage, fury, or anger with the intent to harm others.

As someone who has an OCEAN of rage swimming around inside my head, I can tell you conclusively that there is no such thing as "A deliberate act of rage", and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying their a** off. Deliberate acts with intent to harm are MALICE, and I can totally believe you not understanding that. Rage is something that you keep under control for as long as you can, and just try to aim at your enemies when it comes out. You don't do ANYTHING deliberate when enraged. People who think they understand anger when they have never truly experience it are something else I can't wrap my head around.

 

[dagens24]

The religious, I dont get how people can overlook the barbarity and outmoded moral concepts thats rife throughout religion. I dont get how these people can then say they hold the moral high ground, that as an atheist Im spiritually dead and morally suspect.
If Im totally honest it makes me very angry.

Yeeeep. Religion and drugs for me.

Since religion was covered...drugs. I definitely want to risk permanent damage so that I can black out and wake up feeling like shit in some strange place. Sounds like a good time to me.

Don't pain all drugs with one brush friend. There are plenty of wonderful drugs that don't lead to this.

 

[Rule Britannia]

In fear of being suspended I'll word this lightly.

What's with the bronies thing? I really don't get it. If somebody could quote me and explain in a paragraph or something that would be greatly appreciated.
_________________________

People who cut themselves. Just no. How could that possible solve or help anything (working on the basis the person is depressed)? Cutting one's self could only lead to further depression, what could possibly be going through a person's mind, when they decide? "The only way to solve my problems is it cut myself"

Some people I feel cut themselves because it's part of the gothic/metal culture kind of like peer presure but on a scale of fitting into a huge group of people that happen to like similar music to you. Some of them just happen to cut themselves 'cause...well I'm not sure why really...

Probably sounds dumb to rant about something I don't fully understand...