Miracles

[Slartibartfast]

To throw a wrench in things, couldn't a sufficiently advanced alien also be able to make everyone believe they are a god when in fact they are just aliens. I don't mean through showing you bad-ass weapons or abilities, I mean through poking into your brain using a mind control ray or nanosurgery and making you BELIEVE they are gods.

[wolf]

You reading Childhood's End again, slarti?

[lumberjim]

GREAT BOOK

the aliens' devil image was a memory echo from the future, if i recall that part right?

[Happy Monkey]

Straczynski used a variation of the Childhood's End concept in Babylon 5. I'm rewatching that show on DVD, and we recently saw the episode where Kosh (a member of a species which genetically programmed the image of angels into younger species) gives G'kar a vision. It's a spiritual epiphany for G'kar, who then becomes a bit of a Jesus-figure, but it has an extremely creepy undertone because it was essentially mind control by an alien.

[mrnoodle]

If there is no God, then all us religious nuts are gullible, misguided fools who use the notion of a higher power as a crutch for not dealing with reality.

If there is a God, then all the atheists are blinded, self-deluding fools who are playing with eternal damnation like it's a game of checkers at the corner store.

If we are controlled by an alien race, we're probably nothing more than a source of entertainment. Kind of reality TV for the cosmos.

We're probably overestimating our own importance in the grand scheme of things, in any event. I still say the safest bet is God. Even if hell doesn't exist, at least you won't go there, and religious arguments played out in the public arena make alien TV ratings go up during sweeps week.

[Happy Monkey]

Using that math, the best bet would be whichever religion threatens the worst hell.

An odd way to pick a philosophy.

[Undertoad]

As long as you're comfortable with the notion that your God will find your worst-case-scenario equation to be the equivalence of faith.

Personally I find that kind of moral equation to be the ultimate cop-out. And personally, I find the notion of a God demanding belief as the ticket out of eternal torment to be directly at odds with any notion of love, fairness, etc. that I have found here on earth.

Frankly my worst-case scenario is leading my entire life in fear of some centuries-old claptrap bullshit fairy tale somebody handed down, all dependent on some afterlife that there is no evidence of, in a world where people always seem to make shit up when they can't explain things.

[Slartibartfast]

Originally posted by wolf
You reading Childhood's End again, slarti?

Most of my ideas are recycled, I just never remember from where.

[mrnoodle]

Actually, I was being deliberately flippant, because it frustrates me sometimes that some people seem to think that faith is some kind of mental illness. IME, certain people use the excuse that since some Christians are asshats, it's evidence that God doesn't exist. Nobody ever questions that kind of logic. Others claim to need some kind of quantitative proof -- that's at least a legit argument. That annoys me a little, but not as much as the ones who want to be exempt from any kind of established behavioral guidelines, and who get their feelings stepped on whenever you suggest there might be such a thing as right or wrong.

I haven't seen alot of that here, mostly people are intelligent (if kinda hostile towards my belief system). It's more what I witness in my day-to-day life. You know, I don't care who sticks their peepee in who or what, it doesn't affect me in the least. But people claiming that their souls have been spit on because someone put a cross by the road, or had a bible study group at school, etc. etc., is retarded.

blahblahblah. lunch time, anyway.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally posted by mrnoodle
That annoys me a little, but not as much as the ones who want to be exempt from any kind of established behavioral guidelines, and who get their feelings stepped on whenever you suggest there might be such a thing as right or wrong.

I think this is a bit of a bogeyman. There are really very few people who truly amoral, and they usually have the excuse of a chemical imbalance in the brain. Even the philosophers who theorize that there are no universal truths don't run around raping and killing.

But "established" is no longer an excuse for a "behavioral guideline" that is hurtful to someone, no matter how outnumbered they are. For much of history, "we've always done it this way" was considered an extremely powerful argument. The radical original leaders of the United States started the process of removing that mentality, and the US changed the world. In my opinion, humanity has advanced more in the last 200 years than in the rest of the history of the species, more so in the civilizations that are less bound by tradition.

Of course, not all traditions are bad. We need to pick and choose which ones are useful, and which ones are based on our baser instincts. Unfortunately, when some people fight tooth and nail to defend the worst traditions, they cast a pall on some of the better ones. For example, The people screaming "God hates fags!" and equating it to polygamy are more likely to promote polygamy than convince anyone else to hate gay people.

There are nuts on both sides, of course, and I dislike PC police just as much as I dislike people pushing creationism in the classroom. I consider zero-tolerance to be a synonym for mindless, and I abhor clothing restrictions, be it religious iconography or heavy metal T-shirts. When a student-run Bible study class is banned, all that does is fuel the people who would like Bible study to be mandatory.


And please don't consider me hostile to your beliefs - consider me interested in lively debate.

[mrnoodle]

Originally posted by Happy Monkey
I think this is a bit of a bogeyman. There are really very few people who truly amoral, and they usually have the excuse of a chemical imbalance in the brain. Even the philosophers who theorize that there are no universal truths don't run around raping and killing.

I'm not thinking in extremes, but in terms of the darker shades of grey. Prostitution, for example. Completely sane, intelligent people can be found on both sides of that issue. Some say that since God's word says it's wrong, it's wrong, and brook no argument. Others feel prostitution is no more morally abhorrent than having a drink or two after band practice (which I've just done, so bear with me ). In the warm chewy center are the rest of us, who might feel that it's wrong for a married man to hire a prostitute behind his wife's back, but can accept a quadriplegic's use of one, simply because the quadriplegic has no other sexual outlet available to him/her. Of course the "middle ground" refers to a far wider range of opinion than that, but you get the idea.

So, who's right? Certainly not all viewpoints can be equally valid, since at least two of them are mutually exclusive of one another.

Prostitution encourages the spread of disease, breaks up relationships, and is tied to all kinds of other anti-social behavior, from hard drug use to petty theft to murder. Unless you don't have a brain, you have to admit that much. Maybe the answer is to legalize it and let it fall under government regulation and supervision. The US government can't even regulate the senatorial haircut budget, much less the world's oldest occupation. Please.

So, we have decided as a society that whoring is generally unsavory, bad for the client, bad for the whore, bad for the populace at large. Even the pimp, who gets all the money, doesn't exactly get invited to join the local rotary club.

Well, guess what? That's what the bible says. I believe that God condemns prostitution because it's bad for His creation, not because He has some kind of problem with people having orgasms. The 'morality' aspect (in the Christian sense) encompasses not only the earthly consequences of engaging in prostitution, but adds the component of obedience to God, who has supposedly set down His rules and expects His followers to abide by them.

I can already feel the condescending, negative vibes from some of you; not just because I'm being a little sanctimonious, but because I'm invoking my "fairy-tale, white-bearded imaginary friend" -- worse yet, I have been capitalizing pronouns referring to Him. Isn't that just precious? To be perfectly honest, I can't claim that I'm not deliberately being 'religious' just to invite more fun arguments . I don't think I am; it feels like respect for my God, who I claim to worship. Let the chips fall where they may, I guess.

(puts little train back on tracks) My point is that I get frustrated when people snigger at the fact that I believe there is a God who will hold us accountable for what we do. Far from being a crutch, my beliefs make my life more complex, if only because I usually fail to live up to them. A crutch. lol. I almost deleted all my "StaceyV's-husband-is-a-twat" posts because I spent an hour questioning the morality of taking shots at him. Yah. You too can become a Christian and enjoy the 'escapist fantasy'. Bite me.

I don't feel attacked, HM. If everyone agreed with me I would have lost interest in this place after the first hour. I haven't even gotten a chance to respond to your second paragraph yet. I'm just out of feisty for one night.

[Undertoad]

My point is that I get frustrated when people snigger at the fact that I believe there is a God who will hold us accountable for what we do.

That's funny - I get frustrated when people tell me that my beliefs will result in suffering eternal torment. But sniggering...! Oh dear, that must be really rough for you! I can hear you getting all tense and uneasy from here! However do you cope?

Xtians who complain about judgementalism: You haven't got a clue until 20 fifth-graders come up to you one-by-one to tell you you're going to hell.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally posted by mrnoodle
So, who's right? Certainly not all viewpoints can be equally valid, since at least two of them are mutually exclusive of one another.

Actually, no they're not. The people who oppose it on religious grounds shouldn't do it. The others should take into account the reaction of their significant other, if any. There's no difference in that sense between that and, say, not keeping Kosher. A big problem for the deeply religious, could be painful for loved ones, and if you're unattatched, who's gonna know or care? The problem only arises when the religious people try to stop other people from doing it.

Prostitution encourages the spread of disease, breaks up relationships, and is tied to all kinds of other anti-social behavior, from hard drug use to petty theft to murder. Unless you don't have a brain, you have to admit that much. Maybe the answer is to legalize it and let it fall under government regulation and supervision. The US government can't even regulate the senatorial haircut budget, much less the world's oldest occupation. Please.

Don't be so quick to denigrate the police. Everything illegal gets tied together. Prostitutes only need pimps because they need protection - from predators and from police. If it was legal, they could set up a safety-oriented facility, with medical testing facilities and good security. In fact they've done this with the Bunny Ranch (nsfw) in Nevada, where there have been no drug, theft, murder, or disease problems. I vaguely recall some tax problems, but that hardly separates them from any other business (except perhaps in the zeal for enforcement).

I can already feel the condescending, negative vibes from some of you; not just because I'm being a little sanctimonious, but because I'm invoking my "fairy-tale, white-bearded imaginary friend" -- worse yet, I have been capitalizing pronouns referring to Him. Isn't that just precious?

Hey, I do the same thing. It's no skin off my nose, it's a harmless convention, and it can sometimes sort out pronoun ambiguity.

(puts little train back on tracks) My point is that I get frustrated when people snigger at the fact that I believe there is a God who will hold us accountable for what we do.

If you run into those people, ignore them. But please try not to ignore people who don't share your faith, and therefore don't want to be bound by the aspects of morality that are justified only by your faith. Just as the US government doesn't require all food to be Kosher, it should not support the religious strictures against homosexuality (to mention one current event). People within a religion can subject themselves to that religion's rules, but the religion must not attempt to force it's rules on others.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Monkey, for a guy who didn't think far enough to buy a truck to deliver my furniture, you're an intelligent and eloquent sumbitch. Kudos.

UT, it appears you've got a lot of baggage to deal with but that's what probably makes you such a likable guy. Love ya, man.

[Undertoad]

(A full 5-piece Samsonite deluxe, buddy. But not heavy enough to keep me from slogging it through a decent life.)