Scientific Forums


Pages: (2) [1] 2   ( Go to first unread post )

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


> You Might Be..., right wing if
ontheleft
Posted: Feb 25 2013, 12:18 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 376
Joined: 17-June 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0



The Pope is quitting, first time one has quit in 600 years. He was reputed to lean to the right while he was in consideration for the job. That was confirmed in speeches after he was elected. Speeches like this one in Spain.

QUOTE
In his first speech, the Pope chose to condemn “the prevailing superficiality, consumerism and hedonism, the widespread banalisation of sexuality, the lack of solidarity, the corruption,” which he blames on secularism and left-wing thought.


Spain

Here in the States there is the Tea Party and from their beginging till now all they do is bitchbitchitch. Very right wing.

Another right wing mantra is to blame the media. Let me re-state that. Blame the "liberal media." And here, once again, the Pope shows his side

QUOTE
Vatican Accuses Italian Media of Spreading False Reports To Influence Papal Election.
The Vatican harshly criticized Italian media reports that linked Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation to the supposed discovery of a network of gay Vatican officials, calling the stories an effort to influence the cardinals who will be choosing the new pontiff, reports CNN.


blame

What do you do with a retired Pope? What if Jesus, with a sense of humor, tells him one thing and the next Pope exactly the opposite? I can see then sitting on a balcony with and empty chair between them, talking to it. Laughing at it's jokes.

Personally I thing Jesus is on the left, the good side. And I bet he liked the last Pope more then he likes this one. Bet it was Him who told this one to retire.
Top
flyingbuttressman
Posted: Feb 25 2013, 05:22 PM


noblesse oblige / nullius in verba
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 5918
Joined: 8-June 09

Positive Feedback: 68.66%
Feedback Score: 166


I strongly doubt that god, if he exists, has had any direct communication with any Pope. The office of Pope is somewhat antithetical to the message that Jesus preached.

This post has been edited by flyingbuttressman on Feb 25 2013, 05:22 PM
Top
ontheleft
Posted: Feb 25 2013, 11:05 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 376
Joined: 17-June 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


Ah, religion.

The current Pope has been asked to unass the chair of Peter. either by one of his cute male secretaries or Jesus.

And now a Cardinal, (dressed in whore red but not the bird) is also resigning "amid sexual misconduct allegations."

ABC

Ah, religion.

There was a pompadoured preacher on TV, a cousin of Jerry Lee Lewis, who got caught with his wick in the wrong place. And Jimmy Baker, paying for a rape he committed. There are more.

Hey, here's the list. And this is just Evangelicals.

Long list

And then there are the psychos, like the local buffoon who fantasizes about grabbing non-believers and shaking them in the name of God. In the name of God, please let him try that with me!

Ah, religion. A good idea gone to hell.

Top
ontheleft
  Posted: Feb 28 2013, 02:59 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 376
Joined: 17-June 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


Questions answered.

QUOTE
(Reuters) - Pope Benedict, with only hours left in his papacy, on Thursday pledged unconditional obedience to whoever succeeds him to guide the Roman Catholic Church at one of the most crisis-ridden periods in its 2,000-year history....

The pledge, made ahead of the closed doors conclave where cardinals will elect his successor, was significant because for the first time in history, there will be reigning pope and a former pope living side-by-side in the Vatican...

Some Church scholars worry that if the next pope undoes some of Benedict's policies while his predecessor is still alive, Benedict could act as a lightening rod for conservatives and polarize the 1.2 billion-member Church.  

2000 years

Here is the problem with religious people. They take upon themselves amazing abilities to communicate with and channel the wishes of an omnipotent, divine, and promise-all entity. With a contact like that you would expect them to be different, above the fray. But they aren't. They end up being like you or me or the wino on the street.

They are going to hammer his ring flat. And, most likely, his cell phone with the direct link to God.

This post has been edited by ontheleft on Feb 28 2013, 03:01 PM
Top
krash661
Posted: Feb 28 2013, 03:22 PM


transitioning sci-fi into reality
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2606
Joined: 11-May 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0




--------------------
While I am standing still, I prefer the stillness here. I am tired of earth, these people, I'm tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives [Dr. Manhattan]

Belief, like fear or love, is a force to be understood as we understand the theory of relativity, and principles of uncertainty. Phenomena that determine the course of our lives.These forces that often remake time and space, they can shape and alter who we imagine ourselves to be, begin long before we are born, and continue after we perish. Our lives and our choices, like quantum trajectories, are understood moment to moment, at each point of intersection, each encounter, suggest a new potential direction. [Cloud Atlas]

I understand now that boundaries between noise and sound are conventions. All boundaries are conventions, waiting to be transcended. One may transcend any convention, if only one can first conceive of doing so. [Cloud Atlas]
Send PM ·
Top
NymphaeaAlba
Posted: Mar 1 2013, 03:40 PM


Secular Sanity
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1958
Joined: 30-March 10

Positive Feedback: 73.17%
Feedback Score: 61


QUOTE (ontheleft @ Feb 28 2013, 06:59 AM)
Here is the problem with religious people. They take upon themselves amazing abilities to communicate with and channel the wishes of an omnipotent, divine, and promise-all entity. With a contact like that you would expect them to be different, above the fray. But they aren't. They end up being like you or me or the wino on the street.

Exactly...AND here is the problem with Apologetics.

Penn Jillette
Send PM ·
Top
Mekigal
Posted: Mar 1 2013, 03:54 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 3213
Joined: 22-March 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


does anyone know why they are gonna hammer his pope ring flat ?
Top
ontheleft
Posted: Mar 4 2013, 11:05 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 376
Joined: 17-June 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


QUOTE (NymphaeaAlba @ Mar 1 2013, 03:40 PM)
Exactly...AND here is the problem with Apologetics.

Penn Jillette

"They're not supposed to be modernizing."

Yea, like the Muslims. Bury a woman up to her neck and throw stones at her for adultery. Elbow the male part of the act and wink at him with a smile.

QUOTE
does anyone know why they are gonna hammer his pope ring flat ?


Because of the danger. "One ring to rule them all and in the darkness bind them"

This post has been edited by ontheleft on Mar 4 2013, 11:08 AM
Top
krash661
Posted: Mar 4 2013, 04:14 PM


transitioning sci-fi into reality
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2606
Joined: 11-May 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


QUOTE (Mekigal @ Mar 1 2013, 07:54 AM)
does anyone know why they are gonna hammer his pope ring flat ?

does anyone know why there is a pope ?

and the pope's purpose ?

I have no clue.


--------------------
While I am standing still, I prefer the stillness here. I am tired of earth, these people, I'm tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives [Dr. Manhattan]

Belief, like fear or love, is a force to be understood as we understand the theory of relativity, and principles of uncertainty. Phenomena that determine the course of our lives.These forces that often remake time and space, they can shape and alter who we imagine ourselves to be, begin long before we are born, and continue after we perish. Our lives and our choices, like quantum trajectories, are understood moment to moment, at each point of intersection, each encounter, suggest a new potential direction. [Cloud Atlas]

I understand now that boundaries between noise and sound are conventions. All boundaries are conventions, waiting to be transcended. One may transcend any convention, if only one can first conceive of doing so. [Cloud Atlas]
Send PM ·
Top
Quantum_Conundrum
Posted: Mar 4 2013, 07:52 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1943
Joined: 30-April 07

Positive Feedback: 30.43%
Feedback Score: -123


QUOTE (ontheleft @ Feb 25 2013, 06:05 PM)
Ah, religion.

The current Pope has been asked to unass the chair of Peter. either by one of his cute male secretaries or Jesus.

And now a Cardinal, (dressed in whore red but not the bird) is also resigning "amid sexual misconduct allegations."

ABC

Ah, religion.

There was a pompadoured preacher on TV, a cousin of Jerry Lee Lewis, who got caught with his wick in the wrong place. And Jimmy Baker, paying for a rape he committed. There are more.

Hey, here's the list. And this is just Evangelicals.

Long list

And then there are the psychos, like the local buffoon who fantasizes about grabbing non-believers and shaking them in the name of God. In the name of God, please let him try that with me!

Ah, religion. A good idea gone to hell.

While I'm certainly not going to defend anyone on that list, it's easy to find fault with Religious leaders because all personal failures are viewed as hypocrisy by the outside.

While several on that list you posted are clearly hypocrites and even charlatans, I wouldn't say that for all of them.

I think, I know, there is such a thing as a failure through temptation as compared to "hypocrisy".

Further, in some cases there's not exactly proof that the person did anything legally wrong, only that they failed to live up to church standards. Additionally, the guy with the "multiple wives" thing isn't even provably unbiblical, as there is no direct forbidance of marry multiple women in the Bible, except that certain offices of ministry should have only one wife. Polygamy was even encouraged (but regulated) in the Old Testament. Without more details on that case, I can't exactly draw a conclusion either, because he may have been wrong in a Biblical context for other reasons anyway. The U.S. officially has polygamy as illegal, but it is never enforced directly. It is only used as a means to help break up cults where women and children are being abused against their will or through brainwashing.

The whole point of Christianity is that humans are imperfect, and as such they WILL sin in any number of ways. That's why the terms "salvation" and "forgiveness" and such exist. Being a church leader does not make somebody immune to sin or temptation.


Had a corporate leader or government official done any of these things, in most cases, nobody would even care unless public money was directly involved. A government official or corporate leader can have as many affairs, straight or gay, as they want, and none of you would have any beef with it. Some of you would probably even laugh and congratulate them.


I could list 5 or 10 local scandals, a few worse than those, and if I listed my 5 or 10 worst sins it would easily disqualify me from a leadership position in the majority of Christian denominations.

So what?

That's not a biblical standard of salvation, and it never was.

That's also not a reasonable standard of whether a message is true, or holds some truth, etc.

Since part of the point of Christianity is that nobody is perfect, why would anyone expect there to be such a thing as a perfect Christian?

According to Jesus' standard of adultery, it is impossible for a man to not be an adulterer, since if you look at any woman and "covet" (i.e. want) her, then you are an adulterer. I don't think that the point was meant to portray a negative view of sexuality, but rather to show people how controlled by baser instincts. That sin cannot be removed through human effort because it's so fundamentally involved in every detail of how we think.

If you see a woman you wish you could see her without clothing.
If you see her without clothing you wish you could have sex with her.
If you have sex with her you wish for more (maybe or maybe not).

All of those are coveting or emulations.

Now find any straight guy who can refrain from thinking that automatically. You can't.

Now you see a problem, because Christianity, and nature, demands that everyone be straight, but it's clear that a straight man cannot look at a healthy woman and not meet Jesus' definition of adultery.


Everyone fails the standard automatically, and it's meant to be that way.


P.S. Thank God for the female body and nude photos.

Begs the question, where did all those christian artists get the women who posed nude, since it's often more than one woman, so the "Girlfriend/wife" explanation doesn't work? Historic churches have nudity all over them in their murals and art, but looking at it is a sin...?!

Puritanism is harmful. I should know. I was raised very much that way, and there is very little good or useful in it. I suppose it will take a lifetime to be healed from it all.
Top
Quantum_Conundrum
Posted: Mar 4 2013, 07:57 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1943
Joined: 30-April 07

Positive Feedback: 30.43%
Feedback Score: -123


QUOTE (Mekigal @ Mar 1 2013, 10:54 AM)
does anyone know why they are gonna hammer his pope ring flat ?

It is a signet ring. It gives "royalty" authority of finances and legal authority.

in the modern world that is more of a formality, but technically he can pretty much spend anything he wants and such.

It is destroyed for security and records keeping purposes, because you don't want someone accidentally or intentionally attributing future transactions to a person (in this case the former pope) who wasn't even in authority at the time.

Anyone faking the ring or a transaction using the ring would be unlikely to be successful anyway.
Top
Quantum_Conundrum
Posted: Mar 4 2013, 08:53 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1943
Joined: 30-April 07

Positive Feedback: 30.43%
Feedback Score: -123


QUOTE (krash661 @ Mar 4 2013, 11:14 AM)
does anyone know why there is a pope ?

and the pope's purpose ?

I have no clue.

I guess it would be more fair to say that you should ask a Catholic.


As having been a protestant all my life, my understanding is the Pope is believed by Catholics to be an "Apostle" and have a direct conduit to God. Official catholic position on this appears to be that God only communicates to the Pope and that only church leaders in certain offices can understand scriptures for themselves.


However, a cursory reading of the Bible shows that such is not really ever presented in the Bible. In fact, more often than not, when doctrinal debates are recorded inside the Bible itself, the authors (or the speaker in Jesus' case,) is seen telling people to consult the scriptures, not tradition. Yet Jesus forbade the stoning of the woman (contrary to the literal interpretation of commandments,) for obvious reasons. If we stoned every person that the surviving versions of the Old Testament says "deserves" stoning, then we'd quickly find ourselves with only a few percent of the population remaining, and where is forgiveness or salvation anyway, if you're really supposed to stone people for sexual sins or for lying, cursing, or blaspheming?


In other words, there is much lacking from both Catholic and Protestant approaches to Christianity.


In the records we do have, Jesus is often seen rebuking and opposing religious leaders for putting traditions and hyper-critical or unforgiving interpretations above common sense and love.


Protestants believe Jesus is our "High Priest" and as such there is no heirarchical Earthly priesthood, as explained in the book of Hebrews and in Peter's own writings (contrary to the RCC teachings). Jesus is both the priest and the sacrifice, and he is not continually being re-sacrificed (as Catholics seem to believe).

A sacrifice from a sinner could not actually be received from God, at least in any salvific sense, which is the whole point. The symbolic washing of hte priest intends to show that you actually need to be forgiven and cleansed of sin before you make a sacrifice, but this is not actually possible to do. You cannot "undo" your sins. So the point is Jesus had to live a sinless life, and then make the sacrifice and die in mankind's place. It wasn't merely an appeasement to God, but that, according to the text, Jesus took upon himself the legal penalty of sin which was deserved by each individual, past, present, and future.

And for example, when Jesus died, the texts show that the Veil in the temple which seperated the inner court from the "Holy of Holies" (the place where the Ark of the Covenant was supposed to be and only the High Priest was supposed to go,) this shows that the Earthly priesthood was destroyed in God's eyes, because the real priest that it symbolized had been fulfilled.

Catholic priests pronouncing people's sins forgiven (via required confession to said priest,) is a heresy which is not unlike the "indulgences" Luther opposed, because the sins are already forgiven upon the person's repentance and confession to God directly, according to the actual original Apostles' teachings.

An "interpretation" or "explanation" should not logically contradict the parent document it is quoting.

I will also say that people selling (or giving) crap like prayer cloths or annointing oil or spring water in connection with "love offerings" claiming miraculous power is anti-scriptural as well.

In the Bible, the prophets who reportedly did healing miracles asked for no offering, and even refused it when it was offered, contrary to the behavior of both the catholic and protestants today.


So having said all of that, anything can be corrupted, or turned and abused for corrupt purposes given the intent and opportunity. Charlatans and cons exist in nearly every field of human endeavor. It just happens to look worse (usually) when it's in a religious situation.

I often wonder why God doesn't just show up as a giant vision in the sky, and yell at everyone and correct us all. It would seem to be a lot simpler than having all these preachers and popes and bishops and such and never quite knowing who should be trusted, particularly given scandals.

Then again, human perspective is often short-sighted and skewed. We may think that's the most efficient way of proving the truth (and therefore obtaining followers,) but God may have more important reasons than efficiency.
Top
ontheleft
Posted: Mar 5 2013, 08:07 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 376
Joined: 17-June 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


QUOTE (krash661 @ Mar 4 2013, 04:14 PM)
does anyone know why there is a pope ?

and the pope's purpose ?

I have no clue.

"Upon this rock I will build my church..."

Jesus said that about Peter. Even though Pete denounced him three times. Jesus was a forgiving man.

Anyway, the kingdom of God on Earth. Early Christians thought Jesus was coming back any day now to rule on Earth. And if he was the kingdom needed structure. The example they had was the Roman Empire with one, all powerful, not to be questioned ruler. The Roman Empire became the Holy Roman Church with it's own form of empire that has lasted till now.

At least that's what this six-pack of Coors has been telling me.





Top
NymphaeaAlba
Posted: Mar 6 2013, 04:24 PM


Secular Sanity
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1958
Joined: 30-March 10

Positive Feedback: 73.17%
Feedback Score: 61


Lefty/Righty…I don’t have a political label, yet. I’m politically illiterate, partly due to lack of trust. The number-flinging is as bad, if not worse, than the poo-flinging. It’s difficult to sift through all the ѕhit. I was watching this video about wealth and income inequality in America. However, Alan Reynolds claims that income inequality is a statistical illusion brought about by technical changes in the tax law that alter what income gets reported to the Internal Revenue Service and what income does not. Of course, he is heavily criticized by Timothy Noah and Brad DeLong, but not without merit.

Alan Reynolds discusses measures of income inequality on C-SPAN
QUOTE
Those who obsess over income shares should welcome stock market crashes and deep recessions because such calamities invariably reduce 'inequality.”

“The incessantly repeated claim that income inequality has widened dramatically over the past 20 years is founded entirely on [Piketty and Saez's] seriously flawed and greatly misunderstood estimates of the top 1%'s alleged share of something-or-other. The politically correct yet factually incorrect claim... fill[s] a psychological rather than logical need. Some economists [i.e., Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez] seem ready and willing to supply whatever is demanded. And there is an endless political demand for those able to fabricate problems...
Read more at:
Tax Rates, Inequality and the 1% by Alan Reynolds
QUOTE
A second hypothesis, ''skill-biased technological change,'' situated the cause of growing inequality not in foreign trade but in domestic innovation. The torrid pace of progress in information technology, so the story went, had increased the demand for the highly skilled and educated. And so the income distribution increasingly favored brains rather than brawn.


The technology revolution hypothesis sounded plausible, especially after reading “The Great Gatsby,” but Paul Krugman pointed out that this may explain why the salary premium associated with a college education has risen, but it's hard to match up with the huge increase in inequality among the college-educated, with little progress for many, but with gigantic gains at the top.

QUOTE
But then why weren't executives paid lavishly 30 years ago? Again, it's a matter of corporate culture. For a generation after World War II, fear of outrage kept executive salaries in check. Now the outrage is gone. That is, the explosion of executive pay represents a social change rather than the purely economic forces of supply and demand. We should think of it not as a market trend like the rising value of waterfront property, but as something more like the sexual revolution of the 1960's -- a relaxation of old strictures, a new permissiveness, but in this case the permissiveness is financial rather than sexual. Sure enough, John Kenneth Galbraith described the honest executive of 1967 as being one who ''eschews the lovely, available and even naked woman by whom he is intimately surrounded.'' By the end of the 1990's, the executive motto might as well have been ''If it feels good, do it.''
Read more at:
The Disappearing Middle


I don’t know. What do you think? Was it due to a social change, rather than an economic force?

At least that's what this cup of coffee has been telling me. cool.gif

This post has been edited by NymphaeaAlba on Mar 6 2013, 04:31 PM
Send PM ·
Top
Mekigal
Posted: Mar 6 2013, 05:23 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 3213
Joined: 22-March 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


it is fetus dependent < If you grow the baby then you are entitled to equal compensation of growing the baby.

So if are reasonable for making a corporation x amount you are entitled to fair compensation by the abilities you bring to the table . Now back in the day money was worth more or less depending on your perspective . Another words it didn't take as much to have the same value as today . It looks obscene now but percentages of compensation really have not changed much and some even have come down .
6 percent of a mill looks a lot different when it is 6% of a bill .

The real prob is the system is geared to a greed factor of success by fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit for stock holders . Which could be your 401K retirement plan . That is the house of cards right there and now you couple a mass exodus out of the work force by baby boomers expectation to retire by entitlements promised leaving a dwindling human workforce do to technological advancement .

It is a doomed system and we are merely popping up the past by continuation of the doomed system . It is intrenched so changing course is difficult at best
Top

Topic Options Pages: (2) [1] 2 

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


 

Terms of use