Rubber Band Beliefs

[Crazy Cooter]

I think Couter was saying that the Nail is the bad part.

Exactly.

[Dartful Dodger]

I think I'll just stick to being an atheist, so much less complicated.

Being an atheist means you believe there is nothing to believe, that is your nail.

If you are in a situation were you would like to believe in a higher power, you struggle to not believe in that higher power.

For example taking a chance or gambling of any kind.

[fredster]

Ann Coulter is so hot 

[Dartful Dodger]

Ann Coulter is so hot

[Grasshopper]

I think I'll just stick to being an atheist, so much less complicated.

Being an atheist means you believe there is nothing to believe, that is your nail.

If you are in a situation were you would like to believe in a higher power, you struggle to not believe in that higher power.

For example taking a chance or gambling of any kind.  You

[Dartful Dodger]

My 'beliefs' are based on evidence, and are subject to change in the light of new evidence. If you provide credible evidence of the existence of a higher power then I'll possibly start to believe in him/her/it.

Your 'beliefs' are your nail.

[jbox]

Grasshopper:

If you provide credible evidence of the existence of a higher power then I'll possibly start to believe in him/her/it.

Then you are agnostic (like me). An atheist would always believe the evidance was manufactured or otherwise falsified even if the majority of peer-reviewed studies found it was not. Atheist /= agnostic, and it always annoys me when either side mixes that up. 

Dartful:

For example taking a chance or gambling of any kind.  You

[DrewKaree]

So if jbox' nail is a turd, won't his rubber band quickly slice/slide through his nail and smack him in the face with force......and turd?

You said "turd"! heh heh he heh he he

jbox, it's so touching to hear you speak of making your feelings for others "efficient".  Have you ever thought about writing for Hallmark

Say turd again!  Heh heh he he heh heh he

[jbox]

Well, I wasn't sure what words would safely get through the censors.   I would have used a slang word for the male anatomy if I thought it would get through, but I figured that turd was the word with most of the connotations I wanted but least likely to get edited out. I hate it when people write ***hole for some reason. 

Of course I have feelings for other people, and they will also guide my decisions. But since some people seem to think that anyone who doesn't believe in God can't possibly believe that being nice to other people is a good idea, I figured I would phrase it in a manner that was less ambiguous for them. If you ask "who is it hurting", then you deserve to get an answer. 

And I still don't understand why people who can claim so violently that there is a perfect paradise waiting for us after we die are so opposed to the idea of letting people go there. After all, it's not the vegetable's fault they were "murdered", so surely only the murderer is going to hell and Terry gets a one-way trip to the pearly gates right?

[Bones]

I think I'll just stick to being an atheist, so much less complicated.

Being an atheist means you believe there is nothing to believe, that is your nail.

If you are in a situation were you would like to believe in a higher power, you struggle to not believe in that higher power.

For example taking a chance or gambling of any kind.

[DrewKaree]

And I still don't understand why people who can claim so violently that there is a perfect paradise waiting for us after we die are so opposed to the idea of letting people go there. After all, it's not the vegetable's fault they were "murdered", so surely only the murderer is going to hell and Terry gets a one-way trip to the pearly gates right?

That's for a different thread

Bones, I almost thought you were going to make it out safe there.  Did you hurt your hand when you punched the computer screen?

[Grasshopper]

Grasshopper:

If you provide credible evidence of the existence of a higher power then I'll possibly start to believe in him/her/it.

Then you are agnostic (like me). An atheist would always believe the evidance was manufactured or otherwise falsified even if the majority of peer-reviewed studies found it was not. Atheist /= agnostic, and it always annoys me when either side mixes that up. 

Funny you should say that. This issue came up in another thread a few months ago.

I used to call myself agnostic (actually sometimes I still do), but then after doing a google search I found out that there are several definitions for the words atheist and agnostic.

http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Atheist

http://www.2think.org/hii/atheism.shtml

At the moment if someone asks me what religion I am, my first response is simply to say that I'm an atheist out of laziness. Most people have at least a vague idea of what the word atheist means.

If pressed I give a more accurate description of my position, which is closer to most (but not all) modern definitions of the word agnostic.

[Crazy Cooter]

Most people have at least a vague idea of what the word atheist means.

[little old lady voice]
it means you worship the devil... get away! Wilbur help!

T T T TUR  TUR TUR

turd was the word

IMO, people need to have something to look forward to when they die.  They use faith to explain why bad things happen here on earth and they use faith to say they will be stronger when they get through it.  For all the "suffering" they endure here, if they follow the rules they can go to the arcade in the sky where the games are set to free play.  If the arcade was really full of broken games, who would follow the rules down here?  It would be anarchy.  Religion itself is (partially) aimed at controlling people.

[DrewKaree]

IMO, people need to have something to look forward to when they die.

It's a happy coincidence for me, but it sounds as if you are speaking of a specific religion, unless people believing in reincarnation (instant breakfast) are looking forward to the unknown possibility of what they'll come back as, for one.

As for faith explaining why bad things happen here on earth, it seems as if people want to choose one of two things to believe about faith.  Bad stuff happens for a reason, or how can you believe in a God that would allow bad things to happen. 

If "following rules" is the way to inner peace/salvation in the religions you're basing that belief on, you may wish to keep looking, or define what religion you are speaking of.  Legalism will exist in all religions - it's one of the reasons people keep redefining what's "right" - which very few religions are based on, if any.  I'm not certain what Judaism is specifically based on, but that's the only "religion" that seems to be based on "following the rules".

If the religion you believe in is based on controlling people, I'd wonder about what it is you believe in myself.  Most, if not all, religions aren't about controlling people, they're about giving people something to put their faith in.  Due to their beliefs, people will control themselves based on their beliefs. 

[Crazy Cooter]

But don't you think that religion hands over a set of values that limit ones thoughts/actions?  How many times have you heard: "It's against my religion"?  Most people see religion as law and they just conform.  That's the nail.  It holds you back from seeing the rest of the pegboard.

Poeple are afraid of death so they make up stuff about how great it is on the "other side" and you shouldn't worry about it.  Heaven, reincarnation as a "greater animal", bunch of virgins, whatever.  The quest to meet the guidelines for reaching that destination controls your everyday life.

People shouldn't put their faith in anything but themselves.  Don't ask the nail what to think, ask yourself.

[Dartful Dodger]

How many times have you heard: "It's against my religion"?

[DrewKaree]

Even a sociopath has a set of values and limits.

I could have sworn that shmokes was just a godless heathen who was so evil it was starting to turn his face green.  You're telling me he can tell right from wrong?  Dartful, I think you're starting to go soft in the head.  Next you'll be telling us you think we need to enact more gun control laws!

But don't you think that religion hands over a set of values that limit ones thoughts/actions?  How many times have you heard: "It's against my religion"?  Most people see religion as law and they just conform.

Cooter, you just kinda explained my point.  If people see religion as law and they just conform, how can that be considered a "belief"?  Religions lay out their set of values and usually explain their case behind 'em, and if you agree with them, you DO follow them. 

People who tell you "it's against my religion" probably haven't stopped to consider why it is they do the things they do, or haven't the slightest interest in developing their faith by questioning the precepts it's founded on.  It's the same as lumping someone into a particular religion because you think a few of their beliefs fit your views of that religion, without questioning further to see what exactly their beliefs are.

[DrewKaree]

that didn't really "feel" right to me, and after re-reading it, mebbe this'll help.

We have laws that govern the use of roads in America.  We follow those laws, aren't they handed over and designed to limit your thoughts and actions?  We se them as laws and conform, but that doesn't make the DMV a church, their handbook with the laws explained isn't a bible, following the rules of the road isn't a religion.

Meh.

[jbox]

If an atheist feels he should be able to go 35 in a 30, he'll go 35.

Except there is a process for a speed limit to be changed even if the person currently administering the process doesn't agree with you. To equate religious institutions with government processes seems like agreeing with Cooter's point (rational malleability). 

I also agree with the observation that people tend to "shop" from their "religion" per se. For example, lots of people are aligned with religions that tell them that being wealthy will damn them to hell, but they still try to make more money...

[shmokes]

Religion does not create morals and values.  This should be obvious.  If only one religion is the "true" religion, that means the rest of the religions are man-made.  If man made the religion, then man decided on what values that religion would teach.  What if it turns out that all the 9/11 hijackers really DO get 72 virgins or whatever.  Does that mean that 90% of Americans have no values or morals cos without god (alah) how could there be morals?

If, somehow, it is proven conclusively that there never has been and is no god will you go out and start murdering people and stealing from them?  Doubtful.  The rest of us would still just throw your ass in prison. 

I suspect that for the most part most of our values boil down to instinct, self preservation/advancement, reasoning and, perhaps first and foremost, the golden rule.

[Dartful Dodger]

Except there is a process for a speed limit to be changed even if the person currently administering the process doesn't agree with you. To equate religious institutions with government processes seems like agreeing with Cooter's point (rational malleability).

Then I agree.

Even the Catholic Church has changed its views on its laws.  Once they had to fast of Fridays during Lent, enough people disagreed with that law, so it was limited to no meat.   The fish industry bribed the pope so it was changed to allow fish.

That seems like governmental processes to me.

Remember Jesus was a Jew.

Next you'll be telling us you think we need to enact more gun control laws!

I think we need to enact more laws which allow me to control more guns.

[DrewKaree]

Next you'll be telling us you think we need to enact more gun control laws!

I think we need to enact more laws which allow me to control more guns.

I agree with that point, however, "allowing me to control more guns" is something I prefer to call "aiming" or "sighting in", and I wonder if we need a law to do those things. 

Well, at least with a law to do those things, if the laws weren't being followed, we'd be throwing all the people who break that law in jail, right?

[Crazy Cooter]

The fish industry bribed the pope so it was changed to allow fish.

LOL.

It boils down to this:
1- "Mans law".
2- "God's law" (whomever you believe in).
3- "Individual law".

I say ditch the first two and live by the third.  The first is based in suppression, the second is based in conformity.  Each can be viewed as an "entity" that only bends for self preservation.  For example, the lent thing.  Nobody wanted it, so in order for it to survive the Pope said fish was cool.  The "nail" bends in order to entice more rubber bads around it.

[ChadTower]

Forget that.  I live by Ohm's Law.

[Dartful Dodger]

The "nail" bends in order to entice more rubber bads around it.

The nail isn't a church, or a government.

[shmokes]

Heh...my last post had a horrible type.  When I said, "Religion does create morals....," I meant to say, "Religion does not create morals."

Whoops....   Kinda changes the meaning a bit.

[Dartful Dodger]

Heh...my last post had a horrible type.

[DrewKaree]

It boils down to this:
1- "Mans law".
2- "God's law" (whomever you believe in).
3- "Individual law".

I say ditch the first two and live by the third. 

What if your "individual law" is harmful to another human beano?  What if my law states that anyone who steps foot on my property deserves to be shot and perhaps killed?  What if your law states that beating your child is the way you discipline your kid for any violation of your laws?

Your theory breaks down further and further as more and more people are included in the mix. 

[shmokes]

Heh....in my last post where I said "type" I meant "typo".