Spiritualism, theology, cultural differences and philosophy aside, what about the REAL danger of infection.
I've just recovered from a stapphlycoccal (Kiss my arse, spellcheck) infection and apparently it only needs a tiny break in the skin to enter. In 24 hrs it got in, swelled my foot to roughly double then spread up to my knee. Being navy I was seen immediately and hospitalised. 9 days later I was clean.
I've been to quite a few places in the middle East and my sweeping generalisation involves poor hygiene and a lousy medical infrastructure.
Rational thought aside, this ritual offends my sensibilities.

Would this be the culture that also practices female genital mutlation?

Oh, just as an aside, it is unwise to anger one's gods.

Found an interesting (and brief) article on the Muslim perspective of circumcision.

I was actually looking to confirm at what age the procedure is performed ... the Jewish bris occurs 8 days following the birth of the child, US hospitals do the medical circumcisions shortly after delivery. I had thought that the Muslim rite was performed in early adolescence as part of the 'manhood' rituals. Guess Alec Hailey sold us all a bill of goods ... actually the age of circumcision does vary, but this guy indicates it's "within the early few years of age". I did see some statements from men who had it done around age 12-13. The practice is apparently optional for adult converts.

1 second: I am slightly disturbed, because I am genetically programmed to like kids and care about them.
10 seconds: I read the explanation and realise that kids are apparently not suffereing too much.
15 seconds: I feel the urge to judge them, but quickly remember the idea of cross-cultural tolerance.
20 seconds: I compare this with other rituals, such as circumcision and come to a conclusion that this is not worse.
21 seconds: but it is just as bad. Being religious and irrational, this ritual is clearly very bad. Still, on the grand scale of things, USian president mentioning god in every speech is definitely much worse and much more dangerous.
25: I decide to no worry about this particular cult. There are too many things wrong on this planet (university students not knowing basic math is one of them) and I can't fix all of them immediately. People cutting the heads of their children will have to wait.

Religion is more than that. If someone believes in something which is not proved, it's ok with me. If someone believes in something which I don't believe in, I am fine with that. But when someone believes in something which contradicts pretty much everything we know and is logically inconsistant, I think they are being silly and stupid.

I am comfortable with people believing that the Big Bang was caused by God, who stopped interfering later. But pretty much all modern religions include beliefs in supernatural stuff, which usually contradicts everything we know and love about this Universe.

In addition to that, science knows enough about religion to understand how it may have emerged and evolved. We can see how Islam and Christianity modified the myths of earlier religions, which in turn, were born out of very early myths.

So, to conclude:
1) religion contradicts reality
2) we understand how religion emerges and god has nothing to do with it
3) and an obvious additional point: there are thousands of religions, all contradicting each other. Simple logic dictates that the majority of them is wrong. :)

Some people on this god forsaken planet are very different to others. DIFFERENT. JUST DIFFERENT. Some of you believe that being different to you, gives you the absolute right to blow them to pieces. God has nothing whatever to do with this. I know where my sympathy lies and it is not with mindless yes mindless killers. If the cap fits.

To reply:
1) Overly simplistic. Reality itself is subjective to the person experiencing the reality. Truth, on the other hand....

2) God has everything to do with it. Religion is man's attempt to understand God. While anthropologists might be able to come up with theories on the origin of religion, that doesn't mean that the origins themselves weren't divinely inspired. However,

3) is correct. If one of the religions is true, the rest must be false. Either that, or there is no God.

Sheesh, no wonder nobody gets along.

Myself, I think there's enough historical evidence for the prophecies in the Christian bible to lend credence to that religion. It holds up logically in theological debate as well, but no religion can be PROVEN true through debate. You just have to weigh the evidence and decide for yourself if something MIGHT be likely to be true. Weee :3eye:

Reality is not subjective. How that reality is defined is what is subjective. Rain falls, lightning crashes, and babies are born regardles of whether we choose to experience it or not.

And what about truth?

Religion is man's attempt to rationalize an unknown and apparently uncaring world into sometheing where he has some control or consolation.

Religion is also a social control tool that came about in the place of government or to replace, resist, assist government

There is no guarantee that any one of them is true.

If you think that what proof has been given is sufficient then more power to you, but if you dig a little deeper then you find that most of the myths of the bible are pulled from an earlier religion in the first place so wouldn't that then lend more credence to the earlier religions instead?

There are others that do it as well. I can't recall the various ones but there was a guy in New York who got busted for using scissors to saw his daughers labia off.

I'm not bringing it online. I'm treating him the way he treats his wife and child. I can be as indifferent as he can, and I'm through being considerate when I get no consideration in return. And I'm through taking the blame.

I always supported him, right or wrong, because he was my husband, and because I love him, and that's what you do for people you love. Since he's decided that the love of his family comes last, and means nothing to him, why bother? He doesn't acknowledge it, and he pushes it away. So why defend someone who refuses to take responsibility for his family and would rather throw it away so that he can do his thing?

So from now on, I'm going to let you know when he's being a hypocrite. And he is being a hypocrite. He's spouting all of this lofty moral BS, and that's all it is to him. I really don't think, from what I've seen, that he believes in any kind of morality other than the situational kind. One set of rules applies to the world, and another set applies to him.

Sidhe

You know what, everyone? I'm sorry. You're right. I shouldn't bring this online. I'm just so frustrated and hurt that I want everyone to know how he really is, as opposed to how he portrays himself. He's so worried about the image he puts forth to y'all that he's willing to hurt his wife to make it.

Don't get me wrong. He can be a good man...used to be a good man, back when he cared about other people. I don't know where that man went, though, and he won't let me talk to him.

If he has no regard for the feelings of others, then there's no reason anyone else should hold their tongue in regards to him. And I won't. I'm through putting his welfare above mine. I've done it for five years, only to get blamed for his indescretions.


Anyway...sorry. But I'm not going to let him get away with being a hypocrite.

Sidhe

ok, so you DO want to bring it online.


~~~fade in harps~~~~

And so begins another chapter of "As the Cellar Turns".

Nope. I'm just not going to hold my tongue when he outright BS's people, like I used to.

No, actually, I'll just let him spout. Yeah, that's better...because I'll look bad no matter what I do. I seem to have earned a place as an idiot/drama queen, and the last thing I want to do is give anyone ammunition. His sarcastic comment against me had everyone cheering him on, so I know where I stand. Anything I say will be misconstrued as bitterness, so I'm better off just not saying anything.

But I must say, he's pretty popular for a man everyone was vilifying in "need advice."


I've tried to be nice, but it's hard to be nice when you're hurting.

Shutting up.


Sidhe

oh FOR FUCKS SAKE. :angry:

Can we at least keep all these bloody personal spats in threads in the home forum so the rest of us can ignore them? It's like a bunch of white trash having a domestic in the middle of a supermarket.

:vomit:


oh and troubleshooter:
i suggest a reading of Plato's cave.

Yes. I'm sorry. You're right. It's inappropriate, and I apologize to everyone. No more personals. I promise. Cross my heart.

Sidhe

thankyou.

I have. It illustrates my point well. Everything that happens in that allegory points to the issue of interpretation, not reality itself. To us it was shadows on a wall, to them it was the totality of their experience. The one that got away learned that the shadows were just that and that there is a whole lot more out there if you are willing and/or able to encounter it.

My point was this plays both ways - we may experience it but it doesn't mean it does actually happen. Reality is subjective, it's subject to the limitations of our senses, all we have to work with is what we recieve in input, with no way of verifying that is in fact the 'truth'. Of course whether the truth is defined by what we see...

Posting logical arguments (or even semi-logical), will draw people who agree and disagree. No popularity involved, just discussion (or argument :haha: ).
I may agree with someones stance today and disagree with them tomorrow, or even the next thread. There's no liking or disliking, because I don't know them. Even people that post a lot only show what they want to show of themselves.
You may think you know someone from gleaning posts and reading between the lines but how do you know the whole package isn't crafted. How would you know I'm really a cross eyed, midget, nun with 8 fingers on each hand, that tortures kittens and slaps babies, from my posts? :)

Like I said, I was frustrated and stressed and I posted out of hand. All I can do is apologize.

Something MADE those shadows, though, and while the shadows were not the totality of what was out there, they were made by something DID exist in reality.

Spirituality is like that...we can only see shadows. You're insisting that the shadow itself does not exist.

If I see a shadow of a flower, and believe that is the totality of the flower, I may not be entirely correct in that belief, but it doesn't mean that the flower doesn't exist. It merely means that I have not yet grasped the totality of the flower's existence, only a limited part.

It seems that you are comfortable only with what you can experience with your senses, and are thus closing yourself off to other experiences. It's your choice to do that. If contemplating something greater than yourself makes you uncomfortable, that's your issue. But others, INCLUDING Plato, DID believe in one or more gods, ie, a conscious creator, and merely because you can't prove it to your satisfaction does not mean that it does not exist, and doesn't mean that those who DO believe in such a being are being silly.

I think Jaguar actually covered this already, but the difference to me is that rain might be falling (truth), but if I'm unaware of it, it's not part of my reality.

It's becoming pure semantics now, but religion requires the God component. Your first definition could also be the definition for "sports betting" or "beer".

Religion as social control is a byproduct of religious people believing they possess ultimate truth as revealed to them via their religion. It's a chicken/egg thing I guess.

I said 'if'. At any rate, the truth of something is not subject to any guarantee, warranty, or proof we assign to it. Without getting into some long epistemology discussion, it's a fairly recent arrogance on the part of science that restricts 'reality' or 'truth' to what is measurable by physicists or scientists.

As for older religions contributing to newer ones - of course they do. Our history wasn't erased when Jesus died, and the Christian religion was born. But Jesus was a historical figure, and the historical events surrounding his life and death did in fact fulfill Judaic prophesy. The fact that Zoroastrianism preceded either Christianity, Judaism, or Islam is irrelevant. Whether or not Eve ate a literal apple given to her by a literal snake is academic. What matters is that the consequences of that real or metaphoric event were answered, and the price paid, by the death of Christ.

This is the image of the day thread....I'll be over in philosophy if you want to continue (I sense rolled eyes from the people who came here to see nifty car wrecks and pet bison - I include myself in this group)

Have any boys? Circumcised? Barbaric or holy ritual?
[edit]Bah. Topic's already in this thread. Point still holds though.[/edit]

Quzah.

What if you're actually looking at the shadow of something entirely different that looks like the shadow of a flower. A tad tenuous to base your life around isn't it? Hey! That cloud looks like a flower.

In the end I'm with troubleshooter, I'm not going to base my life around shadows and ideas, while there is nothing solid I'll err on the side of caution and work with what I know, anything else is opening yourself up to irrational thought.

God is a little narrow. How about gods? spririts? fairies? small blue men? All religion requires is faith in something.

Glatt - no more crazy than half drowning your poor kid at only a few months old.

Reply is in Philosophy ;)

hey , look, Hot_pastrami!...i think i may have prevented some drama pollution! you were right!

Carryin' my ass to philosophy as well... (NT)
 

...

Yeah, sure, my son is circumcised. You have a good point.

You will notice, that further down in my same post where I said that they are crazy, I suggested keeping an open mind about other cultures.

"Keeping an open mind" doesn't mean that you have to agree with them, it just means that you should give them a chance before you label them as strange and deserving to die.