The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Off Topic Discussions > Most Annoying Person of 2009
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:24 AM
TheTrekkie's Avatar
TheTrekkie TheTrekkie is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
Well, if you trust someone, he or she has unprotected intercourse outside of the relationship, gets infected and then also infects you, condoms would most likely seem like the first-best method (besides abstinence).
Not a nice thought, but that's why technically condoms are the safer way of protection against AIDS and STDs.
However if you want to have children in your relationship you at least have to go for the trust method at least once (or make tests all the time and hope that she gets pregnant with the first try ^^)
__________________
And if tyrants take me, And throw me in prison, My thoughts will burst free, Like blossoms in season.
Foundations will crumble, The structure will tumble, And free men will cry:
Thoughts are free!
Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:25 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
But we the people vote for our leaders the members of the Catholic Church do not vote for the Pope.
Yep, that's the problem of this institution, it's undemocratic. But people are also free to leave the club whenever they like to. I did and I'd rather give the extra money to Greenpeace or Amnesty International or another useful NGO.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTrekkie View Post
However if you want to have children in your relationship you at least have to go for the trust method at least once (or make tests all the time and hope that she gets pregnant with the first try ^^)
Nah, if you are a Christian you can order an angel and let him screw your wife.
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:25 AM
Captain Tom Coughlin's Avatar
Captain Tom Coughlin Captain Tom Coughlin is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USS Meadowlands
Posts: 10,989
Default

The other differnce is that you are not legally obligated to support the Pope. You don't get a choice in taxes.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:29 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Right, but you decide indirectly via the political process about the tax level and in addition, one can assist or promote the improvement of budget supervising public and non-government institutions to limit wasteful spending and increase public efficiency. Which is by the way also an issue in corporate governance, increasing the supervision power of proprietors and limiting the power of managers.
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:30 AM
TheTrekkie's Avatar
TheTrekkie TheTrekkie is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
Nah, if you are a Christian you can order an angel and let him screw your wife.
And then you get at the wrong Angel and she gives birth to the Anti-Christ

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain
But we the people vote for our leaders the members of the Catholic Church do not vote for the Pope.
And that's where Luther comes into play.
__________________
And if tyrants take me, And throw me in prison, My thoughts will burst free, Like blossoms in season.
Foundations will crumble, The structure will tumble, And free men will cry:
Thoughts are free!

Last edited by TheTrekkie : 01-08-2010 at 10:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:39 AM
janeway72's Avatar
janeway72 janeway72 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Federation Starship Voyager
Posts: 4,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
By that reasoning then a person of faith that believes in God has flawed reasoning because they believe in God. How does that make any sense? It's ok for religious people to pick and choose what they believe from their respective dogmas but it's not ok to believe that Dawkins makes some good points in his argument? I don't believe everything the man says but I think some of his points are valid.
I didn't explain that properly. Dawkins believes that people who have faith in God are idiots. He has faith in the non-existence of God. Since God's existence can be neither proved not disproved, then the only purely scientific view is to be agnostic. Dawkins by his own reasoning therefore is an idiot. As am I by his reasoning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
don't have a problem with them practicing their faith, what I have a problem with is them wanting to play a game of soccer for 90 minutes and not hydrating themselves because they are practicing their faith. If they want to practice there faith that's fine but they shouldn't be offended if they are told they can't play the game while they are practicing their faith because anyone with any reason can tell you playing a 90 minute game of soccer with out hydrating is a heath risk. Is heath not the reason that pregnant women, the sick, travelers, children under 12 and the elderly are excused from fasting?
I would agree with that. They shouldn't expect to play

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
agree with you completely on this but the Creationists would not agree with us.
That is their outlook.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
wouldn't call myself an atheist and I don't have any issue with the statements you have brought up above but I can see why a person atheist or not may get offended if someone told them they are going to hell because of what they believe.
I don't understand why someone would be offended by something they don;t believe in. Hindus believe if I do not live a good life then I will be reborn as a "lesser" creature. I don't believe that so it doesn't offend me

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
It's not a matter of "if" I know reasonable and normal religious people but morals can be taught with out religion. Most people understand that it is wrong to kill, steal etc. religious or not.
I would agree that morality is not the purview of just religious people and that people of all faiths or none can be moral people. Just the same as people of all faiths or none can be highly immoral

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
Regardless of what caused these pedophile Catholic priests to do what they did the stories I've heard of how the Catholic Church went about dealing with these men is sickening.
I agree. The Catholic Church's attitude was ridiculous. Power surely does corrupt. But there are paedophiles in all walks of life and from all social strata. There are however many more priests who work away in their parishes bringing comfort and support to their parishioners

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post

You're absolutely right and I never said that.
No but Richard Dawkins did. He seems to think that because some religious people are responsible for all sorts of crimes, that it somehow negates the existence of God. That's a very poor argument against God's existence. If he wants to stop being a scientist and become a philosopher he is more than welcome but he had better improve his critical thinking skills if he is going to do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post

And many of those members despite there personally give money every time they go to church which funds these me because that's just what you do at church. "God loves those who are generous with their money." Really when did God give a **** about money?
I pay council tax in Scotland and it pays for the wages of teachers and bin men and librarians and government officials. Some of them must be paedophiles and I am funding their lifestyles. Most people in the Catholic church did not know about these men. When I joined the Church I agreed to give a fitting proportion of my time, talents and money to the Church. Again, some take that idea to the extreme, but it says nowhere in the Bible that God loves those who are generous with their money. Jews give 10% of their income as the Torah tells them to, Muslims give 2.5% of their savings as is expected of all Muslims.

The God I believe in cares about justice and charity and giving everyone a chance. I'm not sure if he believes in Atheists like Dawkins though
__________________

"Unless you have something a little bigger in your torpedo tubes, I'm not turning around!"
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 01-08-2010, 11:26 AM
Enterprise Captain's Avatar
Enterprise Captain Enterprise Captain is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toronto, ON Canada
Posts: 1,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janeway72 View Post
I didn't explain that properly. Dawkins believes that people who have faith in God are idiots. He has faith in the non-existence of God. Since God's existence can be neither proved not disproved, then the only purely scientific view is to be agnostic. Dawkins by his own reasoning therefore is an idiot. As am I by his reasoning.
But you believe in God so you don't believe Dawkins's point of view so why are you offended? Didn't you ask the same question of the atheist being offended when told by the believer that they are going to hell? Regardless of his final conclusion though because God can not be proven to exist or not exist does that make all of Dawkins points invalid? I don't believe it does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janeway72 View Post
I would agree with that. They shouldn't expect to play
But they did expect to play and the coach allowed them to play his condition was not the full game but had he not let them play they would have probably argued it was religious discrimination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janeway72 View Post
I agree. The Catholic Church's attitude was ridiculous. Power surely does corrupt.
I believe many of the Catholic Church’s official attitudes towards things are still ridiculous for example condoms etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janeway72 View Post
I pay council tax in Scotland and it pays for the wages of teachers and bin men and librarians and government officials. Some of them must be paedophiles and I am funding their lifestyles. Most people in the Catholic church did not know about these men. When I joined the Church I agreed to give a fitting proportion of my time, talents and money to the Church. Again, some take that idea to the extreme, but it says nowhere in the Bible that God loves those who are generous with their money. Jews give 10% of their income as the Torah tells them to, Muslims give 2.5% of their savings as is expected of all Muslims.
The difference is by funding the Catholic Church you are essentially supporting the official views of the Catholic Church and sure you can walk away and you don't have to give money to them but this is why I say more people need to question their religion and their personal beliefs. Many people give money because it's tradition and like you said no where in the Bible does it say "God loves those who are generous with their money" but every time the Priest hands out those donation trays to the people at his church he uses those exact words. When you give your taxes over to the government and someone on their payroll turns out to be a pedophile that doesn't mean you support pedophiles. Plus if the government finds out someone on their payroll is a pedophile they don't tend to try and hide it they turn them over to the police unlike other institutions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by janeway72 View Post
The God I believe in cares about justice and charity and giving everyone a chance. I'm not sure if he believes in Atheists like Dawkins though
I thought God loves everyone?
Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 01-08-2010, 11:44 AM
janeway72's Avatar
janeway72 janeway72 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Federation Starship Voyager
Posts: 4,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
[color=black]But you believe in God so you don't believe Dawkins's point of view so why are you offended? Didn't you ask the same question of the atheist being offended when told by the believer that they are going to hell? Regardless of his final conclusion though because God can not be proven to exist or not exist does that make all of Dawkins points invalid? I don't believe it
I am offended at being called an idiot. Would you not be offended at being called an idiot? He uses strong language and bad critical thinking skills. As I said elsewhere if he wants to become a philosopher then fine. But don't wrap it up in bad science.

The money that the church receives goes to many things, not just the pocket money and board and lodgings of priests. Many people are helped by the work of the Catholic Church. As I stated before, the Catholic Church were completely wrong in how they dealt with the Paedophile Priest scandals. Yes they should have acted sooner and had these people prosecuted. I have many issues with the Roman Catholic Church, hence the reason that I am Presbyterian.

To me it is immaterial what people who believe in God have done wrong. It matters that I believe there has to be some intelligent life form bigger and better than me and there has to be some force behind the creation of the universe. And that is the point Dawkins doesn't get. Faith doesn't make you a good person. It should! But it doesn't there fore every religion has its fair share of felons and hypocrites, just like every non-religious organisation
__________________

"Unless you have something a little bigger in your torpedo tubes, I'm not turning around!"
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 01-08-2010, 12:16 PM
Enterprise Captain's Avatar
Enterprise Captain Enterprise Captain is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toronto, ON Canada
Posts: 1,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janeway72 View Post
I am offended at being called an idiot. Would you not be offended at being called an idiot? He uses strong language and bad critical thinking skills. As I said elsewhere if he wants to become a philosopher then fine. But don't wrap it up in bad science.

The money that the church receives goes to many things, not just the pocket money and board and lodgings of priests. Many people are helped by the work of the Catholic Church. As I stated before, the Catholic Church were completely wrong in how they dealt with the Paedophile Priest scandals. Yes they should have acted sooner and had these people prosecuted. I have many issues with the Roman Catholic Church, hence the reason that I am Presbyterian.

To me it is immaterial what people who believe in God have done wrong. It matters that I believe there has to be some intelligent life form bigger and better than me and there has to be some force behind the creation of the universe. And that is the point Dawkins doesn't get. Faith doesn't make you a good person. It should! But it doesn't there fore every religion has its fair share of felons and hypocrites, just like every non-religious organisation
No one wants to be called an idiot. What is the difference between Dawkins calling religious people idiots and religious people telling Dawkins he is going to hell? Why do religious people believe certain people go to hell? Is it not because they are bad, immoral people? You can't see how someone may take offence to being called immoral? Do you really believe Dawkins thinks all religious people are idiots? Many of the points Dawkins makes are not warped up in bad science and like I stated over and over again I think some of them are valid points. I don't agree with everything he says but I do some of it. Just like I don't believe religion is all evil. I've taken a stance here in order to have a debate and I personally have enjoyed our back and forth conversation because threw debate you better understand other peoples point of views but in debate you need to take a stance. In this case I have been arguing against religion and like I said I don't think everything about religion is bad.
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 01-08-2010, 12:40 PM
janeway72's Avatar
janeway72 janeway72 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Federation Starship Voyager
Posts: 4,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain View Post
No one wants to be called an idiot. What is the difference between Dawkins calling religious people idiots and religious people telling Dawkins he is going to hell? Why do religious people believe certain people go to hell? Is it not because they are bad, immoral people? You can't see how someone may take offence to being called immoral? Do you really believe Dawkins thinks all religious people are idiots? Many of the points Dawkins makes are not warped up in bad science and like I stated over and over again I think some of them are valid points. I don't agree with everything he says but I do some of it. Just like I don't believe religion is all evil. I've taken a stance here in order to have a debate and I personally have enjoyed our back and forth conversation because threw debate you better understand other peoples point of views but in debate you need to take a stance. In this case I have been arguing against religion and like I said I don't think everything about religion is bad.
I actually believe in idiots, Dawkins presumably doesn't believe in hell. You misunderstand the Christian understanding of Heaven and Hell. Heaven means to be with God, and Hell means to be not in the presence of God. The Bible says that "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life." It has nothing to do with being moral or immoral. It has to do with faith. However, faith should bring about a change in lifestyle and therefore you should live a moral life if you have faith. (That's not to say those without faith don;t live moral lives). Christians believe you need faith to go to heaven. But hell is not a place of fire and brimstone. It may very well just mean that you cease to exist.

I would probably also agree with Dawkins on some points if he hadn't got my back up by calling me an idiot because I have faith in something I can't prove.

I have enjoyed our discussion too. I like to debate my faith with people of all faiths and none and to some extent I do it for a living. It's more fulfilling with adults though
__________________

"Unless you have something a little bigger in your torpedo tubes, I'm not turning around!"
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:38 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.