Cool but maybe the 'lucky charm' is imbued with thoughts that help the person.
Only if they are open to the unlikely charming effect and woe betide them if they should lose the thing.
Yet you would probably accept placebo if a scientist suggested it.
No I wouldn't. I'd demand the real thing.
But reject the power of the mind, if anyone else suggests it.
Why is that?
I certainly don't reject the power of the mind. Good people are killing each other over differing ideas. Some commit suicide. Most are able to control their natural urges. Civilisation proves the power of mind.
You seem to be having funnier ideas than usual today. Full moon?
Why wouldn't I admit to being to being Christian if I was ? I was bought up Christian but since being an adult I don't put my eggs in one basket and keep my mind open, as none of us know for sure how we got here or what happens when we die, I have also never read the Bible or any other religious book.
Perhaps it would help to contemplate subjects like life and death if you did read the bible and other religious books? To get a wider perspective of the views of religion and different aspects of belief, even only for interest's sake?
Mockery and criticism of Islam, Hinduism and Judaism is often perceived as "racist" by people who want to place their religion beyond censure.
In the case of Islam, the consequences of drawing something as pathetic as a funny cartoon can be fatal.
While there's a fear of mocking or criticising certain religions, I don't see atheists being "pro" the non-Christian religions. Where is the evidence for this ludicrous claim?
Mockery and criticism of Islam, Hinduism and Judaism is often perceived as "racist" by people who want to place their religion beyond censure.
In the case of Islam, the consequences of drawing something as pathetic as a funny cartoon can be fatal.
While there's a fear of mocking or criticising certain religions, I don't see atheists being "pro" the non-Christian religions. Where is the evidence for this ludicrous claim?
Yet another thread based on a false premise.
Nail on head.
It isn't that difficult to understand,
Christians tend not to hunt you down and chop your head off if they think you've insulted them.
Jimmy Carr is one of the few comedians that is honest about this.
That's true in the 21st century but in our medieval past, definitely not - people were imprisoned and then hung or burned alive for teaching the wrong brand of Christianity.
As for Atheists being more anti-Christian than anti-religion in general, that's nonsense in most cases, except that many people are often 'afraid' to be openly anti-Islam for fear of being labelled racist - even though Islam isn't a race.
Putting ancient myths over science and reason deserves to be mocked. You wouldn't go back in time and ask medieval doctors to sort out your injury or illness, so why put their beliefs about human origin above modern day understanding?
Mockery and criticism of Islam, Hinduism and Judaism is often perceived as "racist" by people who want to place their religion beyond censure.
In the case of Islam, the consequences of drawing something as pathetic as a funny cartoon can be fatal.
While there's a fear of mocking or criticising certain religions, I don't see atheists being "pro" the non-Christian religions. Where is the evidence for this ludicrous claim?
Yet another thread based on a false premise.
I'm no supporter of Islam ( or any religion ) but that cartoon would be like drawing a 'funny' cartoon of Angula Merkal doing a Nazi salute - in other words, not funny but offensive
I'm no supporter of Islam ( or any religion ) but that cartoon would be like drawing a 'funny' cartoon of Angula Merkal doing a Nazi salute - in other words, not funny but offensive
I don't care how offensive the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo were - they did not deserve to be slaughtered.
I don't care how offensive the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo were - they did not deserve to be slaughtered.
Of course not - and I'd ban the teaching of any backwards religion in schools - but I'm bemused by people who thought that cartoon wasn't offensive or that it wouldn't drum up extreme tensions.
Mockery and criticism of Islam, Hinduism and Judaism is often perceived as "racist" by people who want to place their religion beyond censure.
In the case of Islam, the consequences of drawing something as pathetic as a funny cartoon can be fatal.
While there's a fear of mocking or criticising certain religions, I don't see atheists being "pro" the non-Christian religions. Where is the evidence for this ludicrous claim?
Yet another thread based on a false premise.
In the case of Islam simply drawing an image of their prophet is considered blasphemy and a good enough excuse to some for murder.
Yes, that's why people are said to revert rather than convert to Islam.
It really is a hideously controlling ideology.
There you go OP (although I'm just a plain old atheist rather than a radical one).
But wasn't Christianity in medieval times?
'Bloody Mary' had many burned alive for teaching the wrong version of Christianity, Atheists ( at least those who admitted to questioning the existence of God ) could be thrown in prison - which wasn't as 'cosy' as prison today - and young women who had sex outside marriage could be whipped by their local church.
The Koran COULD BE even more aggressive and controlling than the original Bible but is all this control really down to a book or is it more about culture - like violent gang culture today?
I wish people would realise the difference between a faith and a religion - the latter is used as an excuse for bad behaviour - from the sublime to the ridiculous and the downright evil.
'Bloody Mary' had many burned alive for teaching the wrong version of Christianity, Atheists ( at least those who admitted to questioning the existence of God ) could be thrown in prison - which wasn't as 'cosy' as prison today - and young women who had sex outside marriage could be whipped by their local church.
The Koran COULD BE even more aggressive and controlling than the original Bible but is all this control really down to a book or is it more about culture - like violent gang culture today?
"But you can't do that in Church of England, you can't say, "You must have tea and cake with the Vicar, or you die!" You can't have extreme points of view, you know. The Spanish Inquisition wouldn't have worked with Church of England.
"Talk! Will you talk!"
"But it hurts!"
"Well, loosen it up a bit, will you? Fine..."
‘Cause that's what it would be. "Tea and cake or death? Tea and cake or death? Tea and cake or death!" Students with beards, "
sorry but I can't see the difference especially when the God could be called Buddha by me but Allah by Mohammed.
As for surrendering and submitting to laws made 2,000 years ago, er I advise on caution.
The world is a vastly different place, we have evolved a lot since then.
archiver;83620356]Only if they are open to the unlikely charming effect and woe betide them if they should lose the thing.
Same as you would feel if you lost your placebo.
No I wouldn't. I'd demand the real thing.
You wouldn't know unless your doctor told you.
I certainly don't reject the power of the mind. Good people are killing each other over differing ideas. Some commit suicide. Most are able to control their natural urges. Civilisation proves the power of mind.
Assad kills people too in the name of socialism and secularism. And the difference is...?
You seem to be having funnier ideas than usual today. Full moon?
Noticing that some atheists can be aggressive in their own ways. Especially when faced with another way of life that isn't just like theirs. Then they want to force the other person, to be like them. That sounds rather like...fundamental religion, doesn't it.
Comments
No I wouldn't. I'd demand the real thing.
I certainly don't reject the power of the mind. Good people are killing each other over differing ideas. Some commit suicide. Most are able to control their natural urges. Civilisation proves the power of mind.
You seem to be having funnier ideas than usual today. Full moon?
Perhaps it would help to contemplate subjects like life and death if you did read the bible and other religious books? To get a wider perspective of the views of religion and different aspects of belief, even only for interest's sake?
I could not have put it better myself.
Nail on head.
It isn't that difficult to understand,
That's true in the 21st century but in our medieval past, definitely not - people were imprisoned and then hung or burned alive for teaching the wrong brand of Christianity.
As for Atheists being more anti-Christian than anti-religion in general, that's nonsense in most cases, except that many people are often 'afraid' to be openly anti-Islam for fear of being labelled racist - even though Islam isn't a race.
Putting ancient myths over science and reason deserves to be mocked. You wouldn't go back in time and ask medieval doctors to sort out your injury or illness, so why put their beliefs about human origin above modern day understanding?
I'm no supporter of Islam ( or any religion ) but that cartoon would be like drawing a 'funny' cartoon of Angula Merkal doing a Nazi salute - in other words, not funny but offensive
I don't care how offensive the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo were - they did not deserve to be slaughtered.
Of course not - and I'd ban the teaching of any backwards religion in schools - but I'm bemused by people who thought that cartoon wasn't offensive or that it wouldn't drum up extreme tensions.
Exactly, it is a complete contradiction.
In the case of Islam simply drawing an image of their prophet is considered blasphemy and a good enough excuse to some for murder.
But that stupid rule should only apply to muslims,like all stupid religious rules should own be for the people of the religion.
Can we have that again in English please?
Which is a specific problem with Islam. As I understand it at least some Muslims believe we are all born Muslim so no exceptions.
Yes, that's why people are said to revert rather than convert to Islam.
It really is a hideously controlling ideology.
There you go OP (although I'm just a plain old atheist rather than a radical one).
But we may not realise that in our current incarnation. ;-)
A Buddhist follows the religion founded by Buddha says most people. A Muslim is one who surrenders and submits to the laws of God say Muslims
Its we are all born Atheist
But wasn't Christianity in medieval times?
'Bloody Mary' had many burned alive for teaching the wrong version of Christianity, Atheists ( at least those who admitted to questioning the existence of God ) could be thrown in prison - which wasn't as 'cosy' as prison today - and young women who had sex outside marriage could be whipped by their local church.
The Koran COULD BE even more aggressive and controlling than the original Bible but is all this control really down to a book or is it more about culture - like violent gang culture today?
"But you can't do that in Church of England, you can't say, "You must have tea and cake with the Vicar, or you die!" You can't have extreme points of view, you know. The Spanish Inquisition wouldn't have worked with Church of England.
"Talk! Will you talk!"
"But it hurts!"
"Well, loosen it up a bit, will you? Fine..."
‘Cause that's what it would be. "Tea and cake or death? Tea and cake or death? Tea and cake or death!" Students with beards, "
Eddie Izzard
I'm a simple man. My brain hurts.
Same as you would feel if you lost your placebo.
You wouldn't know unless your doctor told you.
Assad kills people too in the name of socialism and secularism. And the difference is...?
Noticing that some atheists can be aggressive in their own ways. Especially when faced with another way of life that isn't just like theirs. Then they want to force the other person, to be like them. That sounds rather like...fundamental religion, doesn't it.
Yet oddly with a propensity toward religious belief.