I believe no one can define truth, rather, we can come up with rules for deciding how to behave, such as the use of the scientific method. The scientific method produces perceived results we find useful, but it does not mean the results are truthful, but rather that the results have predictablity and repeatability.
Regards.
It appears that the Christian god is against genital piercing and wants Georgia to ban it:
Georgia House Outlaws Genital Piercing For Women
ATLANTA – Genital piercings for women were banned by the Georgia House as lawmakers considered a bill outlining punishments for female genital mutilation.
Complete text at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2004/03/25/genitalpierce.DTL
Regards
Now you’re just plain old trolling, which isn’t even fun. The last bastion of the defeated.
You have to be dumb to believe that at face value. You really DON’T read your cites, do you?
Are you speculating that Georga passed this law for secular reasons and not religious ones?
Regards.
I’m speculating that they passed a bill to prevent female genital mutilation, including clitoral circumcision, which is practed in some cultures and destroys the sexual capacity of the girl.
If you would do some research (I know, it may seem amazing to you), you’d know that this is an ammendment of a previous bill that did not include piercings, and the ammendment was added to remove the loophole. When giving the press announcement, the state senator whose bill it was expressed that he did not know that women did such a thing, which isn’t far fetched, considering that he is a conservative.
I dunno what Christian religious reason you think they would ban genital piercing for, but whatever.
I also don’t know what this has to do with the 12 indisputable arguments. You should make a new thread when you have a new topic.
I think they would want to ban it for the same reason they want to ban porn, prostitution, and strip clubs: they believe Jesus Christ wants them to ban it. But, Jesus never converted by the sword, yet today’s Christians do. An inconsistancy.
This topic adds to the irrationality of religion. Plus, I am not allowed to start any more threads.
Regards.
Really? Is that the truth?
It is my perception.
Cite?
Really? Most Christians I know either think it is icky but whatever, or think it is sexy.
Not really. First you have to prove that it has a religious motivation, rather than a social conservative motivation. There is nothing about Christianity that says, “thou shalt not get a clit piercing,” though many Christians may decline if offered. If you went and asked a priest, he would probably ask you why you wanted such a thing, and try to talk you into celibacy if you weren’t married, and if you were, he’d probably wouldn’t say, “Jesus hates you, get out.”
Sure you are. You just aren’t allowed to start 5 threads in one night that all involve copy and pasting someone’s essay.
OK. So do you conclude that anyone who claims the ability to define truth, for instance who claims that religion is indisputably false, must be mistaken?
“Results we find useful” does not mean that they are predictable or repeatable. I would find winning the state lottery very useful, but it is not predictable or repeatable.
On the other hand, if you’ve ever been to a Catholic mass, you would find it extremely predictable and repeatable.
That’s truth. Unless you’re lying. 
I think everyone knows what truth is: everyone knows when they are telling the truth, or not. Truth is personal, the same with God, God is Truth. If you would only speak of what you know as truth, and sometimes that will be: “I don’t know”, you will soon understand God.
Religion is not God, Science has not shown God doesn’t exist. God is Love. When you feel it you will never be alone again.
Say and do the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and you will know God.
The same works with love, compassion, and honesty.
These arguments will never be resolved, those who experience God will believe and those who don’t won’t. Life is simple, why complicate it?
Love
Theist or atheist, there is only one logical conclusion one can arrive at regarding this dubious topic.
There is no way to objectively prove or disprove the existence of god, period.
All of man’s dogmas and scriptures were created and written down by man - be they Moslem, Jewish, Christian, Shinto, Animist, et cetera.
That covers EVERY religion on this planet, regardless of any protests by the faithful.
Man is an idiot to believe he can perceive the eternal; man is an arrogant, mortal creature who dies and rots away, who knows little or nothing about the true nature of the universe.
Indeed, the wise man knows he is ignorant, myself included.
Ergo, I’d say the scale tips in favor of the atheists.
Enough said on this, bye.
What does immortality have to do with religion? Most religious people acknowledge fully that they can’t comprehend the enormity of god, god’s reasoning, or the nature of god, and dedicate their lives to studying more.
I don’t see what the mortality of man has to do with tipping in favor of the atheists, but you’re welcome to believe that.
If anything, the atheists that claim to understand all of existence seem more “arrogant” to my own perception.
Though sometimes, the man who is ignorant is just ignorant.
I mentioned nothing at all about immortality sir, you did.
Immortality is yet more dogmatic, non-factual conjecture, dreamed up in man’s collectively deranged mind.
As with all other postulations regarding religion and ‘faith’, such belief is rooted in nothing, with man consulting his past musings on ‘god’ in attempt to find ‘answers’.
Clarifying on my use of the term ‘mortal’ - I mean that we all die, period; no harps, pitchforks, reincarnation, or other wishful thinking.
Indeed, I have yet to see incontrovertable evidence to the contrary, anywhere.
Those who believe we have souls can believe what they want, but again, there is no PROOF.
That is my point, friend.
How arrogant of any man thinking he can define such as thing a ‘god’ - that is the height of true ignorance.
No, but you brought up mortality, with the implied notion that immortality is foolish. In fact, you stated as much here, so I do not understand your objection.
shrugs My religion doesn’t believe in immortality. Does that make me more right?
While some obviously superior emotionless automaton such as yourself may not feel any need to believe in anything unsubstantial, other people’s observation leads them to believe otherwise. The fact that these senses are emotional rather than visual does not make them less valid.
How about a question. Why is racism or genocide or unlawful arrest or anything else wrong?
You kinda stepped around my other question to you, so I’ll put it more bluntly - is it not also arrogance to presume to know everything about the universe?
You only asked one question in your earlier post.
I submit your religion is an artificial construct, as is all religion - I take it you are a little annoyed by me pointing this out.
I never said I was superior to anyone sir, in fact, I admit I am ignorant, you do not.
I also admit I have no apparent need to believe in the etherial; the universe will continue as it should and I can accept that without resorting to ‘magical thinking’, superstition, or other meaningless conjecture.
As an aside, I note also that you are touching on ‘morality’ - regarding ‘racism’, or ‘unlawful arrest’.
While that has nothing to do with the subject, I will address it.
Morality is relative friend, ergo, there is no right or wrong, nor good or bad, only perceptions by fallible individuals, who then create a value judgement regarding any given situation.
One thing I think folks against religion (or any ideology) need to make sure to do is separate the practitioners from the actual institution. Just because some Christian does something hypocritical, doesn’t make the religion automatically hyporcritical.
Any arguments against a religion which involve saying things along the line of “religious people do this or that” need to be checked against said religions actual tenants.
For the record - I am not against religion, I simply maintain that it is totally conjectural, without foundation in fact.
What people do on their own time to assuage a particular perceived need, i.e., god, I have no problem with at all.
However, when dogmatism threatens my worldview or even life, I will definitely take issue - just look at history - it is replete with folks of every faith who stated, “Believe or die”.
That is the threat posed by irrational creatures such as we are. Blind ‘belief’ has led to so much misery in mankind’s history, and will probably continue until we eventually destroy ourselves - in the name of ‘god’.
I submit that science is an artificial construct. We can go in this circle all day, if you like, or you can admit that you don’t have the slightest clue as to whether or not religion exists, other than your own fallible perception.
Would you please quote me where I said I know all the secrets of the universe? In fact, I believe I said something along the lines of a truly religious man knowing that he can not comprehend god.
You may not come out and say you are superior to anyone, though it is implied through your use of language, namely in pronouncing all religious folk ignorant. Describing a piece of shit rather than saying it is a piece of shit doesn’t get you around the fact that you’re talking about fecal matter.
And so your claim is that genocide is only wrong if it is convenient to the individual’s perception for it to be viewed as wrong, but can also be viewed as wholly the right thing to do in certain social and personal constructs with equal validity?