7/13/2004: Baited bull

[Happy Monkey]

And if you give your kid a puppy, is it funny if he pokes it with needles until it dies?

[jaguar]

pdaoust you sound quite reasonable, it's just we get people like onyxcougar who feels the need to point out that evolution is clearly wrong at every given opportunity.

Personally I just love the phrase "every creeping thing that creepeth", I can't wait to work that into conversation somehow.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by jaguar

pdaoust you sound quite reasonable, it's just we get people like onyxcougar who feels the need to point out that evolution is clearly wrong at every given opportunity.

I don't think I said evolution is "clearly wrong", but it's certainly NOT provable, and it's certainly not science. Evolution is a RELIGION, just as much as Christianity, Buddhism, Paganism, Islam, Confucianism, Agnosticism... (insert your particular ism here...)

And no one can PROVE that God exists any more than we can PROVE he doesn't.

It's all about faith, brother. Just a matter of what flavor yours comes in.

And for the record, there have been plenty of opportunities where I *could* have mentioned how evolution isn't science and DIDN'T. So it's not "every given opportunity". But it's nice to see you noticed when I did.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

I don't think I said evolution is "clearly wrong", but it's certainly NOT provable, and it's certainly not science.

There's a good set of articles on evolution in the new (Nov. 2004) National Geographic, if you're curious.

[pdaoust]

yes, I know; I enjoyed the lovely layout and photos.

oh yeah, there were words there too; I didn't read them ^_^ sometimes I'll get way into a Nat'l Geo article -- but that night I was tired so I just looked at the pictures and read a few captions.

And I'm not ashamed.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by pdaoust

yes, I know; I enjoyed the lovely layout and photos.

oh yeah, there were words there too; I didn't read them ^_^ sometimes I'll get way into a Nat'l Geo article -- but that night I was tired so I just looked at the pictures and read a few captions.

And I'm not ashamed.

I have 56 years of back issues you can read.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

There's a good set of articles on evolution in the new (Nov. 2004) National Geographic, if you're curious.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/1106ng.asp

[lumberjim]

yeah, you're right. I was grumpy this morning. It's just that we've had that discussion several times, and it twists my nipples when people tell me that GOD said it because it's in the bible. God did not write the bible, man did. and the hippie thing was a joke, because I'm some fucking hippie. the dumbass comment was indeed a generalization, but it isn't neccessarily incorrect. dumbasses HAVE been regurgitating that line of thinking. There are several christians here that i completely respect, like smooth, OC, and mrnoodle?? (awol) but I think it's wrong for people to espouse the notion that we are free to do as we please to the other animals on this planet just because it says so in that book. If I were to believe in the christian god for the sake of this discussion, it would be my position that he'd want us to treat them with respect even as we eat them, or use their resources for clothing, etc. tormenting them and then killing them is NOT OK. I dont care if you're christian, muslim or martian. just common sense. I am tolerant of other religions. Intolerant of dumbasses.

[Troubleshooter]

As a non-xtian, but a student of people, language, and the mind, the word dominion makes perfect sense.

That was written at a time when there was a greater undestanding of the concepts of lordship and royalty. At that time dominion had more of an implied responsibility to whatever or whomever you had dominion over.

The concept "noblesse oblige" comes to mind.

[jaguar]

Similar to the suberviant wife you're meant to do a very good job of making sure is happy I think.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by jaguar

Similar to the suberviant wife you're meant to do a very good job of making sure is happy I think.

Heavy with the vitriole today jaguar?

I said it made sense in the context of the time it was written in and that it is now not understood properly by people.

As far as noblesse oblige goes, I'm fine with it as long as both people agree to the terms of the relationship. If one side or the other is unhappy about it, it is their responsibility to change the terms of that relationship or the nature of their relative power levels.

Relax.

[hampor]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

I said it made sense in the context of the time it was written in and that it is now not understood properly by people.

It also served it purpose in those times that it was rewritten, too.

[Skunks]

Just to poke needles at the burning ljim:

The Qur'an came fairly directly. God -> Gabriel -> Mohammad -> people; a little while after the prophet croaked, they wrote it down. A few years later they standardized it into one authoritative copy. The society then (and its remnants now) had a strong oral culture: memorizing stuff thoroughly was commonplace. Is it this more justifiably the 'word of god'?

[lumberjim]

nope

[Happy Monkey]

:p Wasn't Christ the lamb of God?