Results 41 to 50 of 156
Thread: just an observation
-
06-21-2009 #41actually adam was a female to male ts and eve was a male to female ts so nothing is "forbidden" about this site
-
06-21-2009 #42
too funny
MY NEW VIDEOS!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6x0NgzQ6vU www.myspace.com/janiahstephens
-
06-21-2009 #43
-
06-21-2009 #44
i'll lick your ass in a fight
don't forget that!!
-
06-21-2009 #45
-
06-21-2009 #46
Trish, religion is not the same as spirituality. Too many people get this concept twisted.
Believing in an 'otherness' to human existence, an existence/reality that exists beyond the known, natural world - the supernatural - is not the same as believing in the existence of Blessed dildos, booglie wooglie men, etc.
And why is it that atheists are the same as fundamentalists in their take on holy scripture as a literal translation of the Word of God?
To learn anything meaningful from the Bible, Koran, or Torah, these books must be read metaphorically, like a Buddhist koan, and from meditation on the underlying meaning of these scriptures, 'spiritual' enlightenment can be attained.
MacShreach, to me it appears you're being loose with your defintions to avoid being pigeon-holed.
You're right, HA is not the place for this discussion, and I'm not trying to convert anyone.
But your counterpoints in many cases are dependent on how you define your terms.
Most agnostics come from a religious tradition, and by the very nature of their deciding they are agnostic, they have come to doubt the concept of 'a prior' knowledge; knowledge that is knowable independent of experience - i.e., belief in God.
You keep implying that one can be both a 'good' atheist and a skeptic. I don't see how this is possible, since atheists generally have no skepticism about the existence God, or their belief that there is no God.
Maybe the mistake I made was injecting the term science into this discussion,
That way, 'scientific thought and rigour' and 'atheism' would not overlap.
One can still be an honest scientist, and be either an atheist or someone who believes in a Higher Power.
Lastly, theoretical physics, (worm holes, stacked alternate universes, time travel, string theory), on its furthest fringes, is pure Star Trek.
-
06-21-2009 #47
-
06-21-2009 #48
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Location
- The United Fuckin' States of America
- Posts
- 13,898
Please do not misunderstand the profundity of the Blessed Dildo. The Blessed Dildo has an "otherness" that even the most spiritual cannot fully comprehend. It stands as metaphor for our most physical yearnings and at the same time of the tragic sacrifice of the generations of ones loins for the eternal life of the loins themselves. It points toward the religion of sex and death, yet it points beyond religion. All this. And beyond all this. Yet its very history as a story tells us the Blessed Dildo does not exist.
"...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.
"...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.
-
06-22-2009 #49
Oh ye unholy blasphemer!!!
Beware all false prophets, and dildo cultists!!
-
06-22-2009 #50Originally Posted by giovanni_hotel
.
Most agnostics come from a religious tradition, and by the very nature of their deciding they are agnostic, they have come to doubt the concept of 'a prior' knowledge; knowledge that is knowable independent of experience - i.e., belief in God.
You keep implying that one can be both a 'good' atheist and a skeptic.
[ I don't see how this is possible, since atheists generally have no skepticism about of the existence God, or their belief that there is no God.
The problem that the proponents of a faith-based viewpoint have is that while it is extremely difficult to prove a negative, the overwhelming weight of evidence from all around us, on every hand, means that we can effectively discount the existence of a higher power, or booglie-wooglie men.
We are constrained at the same time to allow that, if a suitably robust scientific proof of the existence of such things were to be found we would, after suitably testing the proposition and the proof, have to accept it, whether we liked it or not. This has nothing to do with agnosticism, however, which accepts the premise without proof or rigour whatsoever; it is simply the application of the science-based view.
Maybe the mistake I made was injecting the term science into this discussion,
That way, 'scientific thought and rigour' and 'atheism' would not overlap.
One can still be an honest scientist, and be either an atheist or someone who believes in a Higher Power.
Lastly, theoretical physics, (worm holes, stacked alternate universes, time travel, string theory), on its furthest fringes, is pure Star Trek.
If god exists at all, he only exists in the minds of those who believe in him. Or her.