Deja Jew

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
41

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power.

42

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

First answer my question.

Do you believe it’s okay to steal from others in general?

[/quote]

No, because I believe in good and evil and derive a system of morality from that. Because I believe God gave men certain rights.

43

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power. [/quote]

You are placing the laws above men. You are agreeing to live by the laws. And you are enforcing them with authority that is about the individual. The fact that they could be changed some other time is irrelevant. You are worshiping. Laws absolutely are dogmatic. They are the exact definition of dogmatic. You are blind to yourself.

44

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power. [/quote]

You are placing the laws above men. You are agreeing to live by the laws. And you are enforcing them with authority that is about the individual. The fact that they could be changed some other time is irrelevant. You are worshiping. Laws absolutely are dogmatic. They are the exact definition of dogmatic. You are blind to yourself.[/quote]

Nope, we change laws all the time. In Canada abortion use to be illegal. It no longer is.

In order to be a dogma, they would have to be seen as incontrovertibly true. You could convince me and all rational secularists to change ANY law. Of course it would have to be accompanied with sound reasonable arguments.

45

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power. [/quote]

You are placing the laws above men. You are agreeing to live by the laws. And you are enforcing them with authority that is about the individual. The fact that they could be changed some other time is irrelevant. You are worshiping. Laws absolutely are dogmatic. They are the exact definition of dogmatic. You are blind to yourself.[/quote]

Nope, we change laws all the time. In Canada abortion use to be illegal. It no longer is.

In order to be a dogma, they would have to be seen as incontrovertibly true. You could convince me and all rational secularists to change ANY law. Of course it would have to be accompanied with sound reasonable arguments.

[/quote]

A law is held as incontrovertibly true. So, because Christianity changed it’s law on stoning people, the law and belief in stoning people wasn’t dogmatic?

So, you think the possibility to change your mind of child rape being wrong is a possibility? You think there is the chance you could be okay with child rape being legalized?

48

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power. [/quote]

You are placing the laws above men. You are agreeing to live by the laws. And you are enforcing them with authority that is about the individual. The fact that they could be changed some other time is irrelevant. You are worshiping. Laws absolutely are dogmatic. They are the exact definition of dogmatic. You are blind to yourself.[/quote]

Nope, we change laws all the time. In Canada abortion use to be illegal. It no longer is.

In order to be a dogma, they would have to be seen as incontrovertibly true. You could convince me and all rational secularists to change ANY law. Of course it would have to be accompanied with sound reasonable arguments.

[/quote]

A law is held as incontrovertibly true. So, because Christianity changed it’s law on stoning people, the law and belief in stoning people wasn’t dogmatic?

So, you think the possibility to change your mind of child rape being wrong is a possibility? You think there is the chance you could be okay with child rape being legalized?[/quote]

They didn’t change their law on stoning people, it’s still in Deuteronomy. They used their own mind to come to the decision stoning people was wrong.

Is it possible to change my mind? Yes. Is it probable? Not at all. You’d need sound reasonable arguments to convince me. As far as I know, none exist.

49

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power. [/quote]

You are placing the laws above men. You are agreeing to live by the laws. And you are enforcing them with authority that is about the individual. The fact that they could be changed some other time is irrelevant. You are worshiping. Laws absolutely are dogmatic. They are the exact definition of dogmatic. You are blind to yourself.[/quote]

Nope, we change laws all the time. In Canada abortion use to be illegal. It no longer is.

In order to be a dogma, they would have to be seen as incontrovertibly true. You could convince me and all rational secularists to change ANY law. Of course it would have to be accompanied with sound reasonable arguments.

[/quote]

A law is held as incontrovertibly true. So, because Christianity changed it’s law on stoning people, the law and belief in stoning people wasn’t dogmatic?

So, you think the possibility to change your mind of child rape being wrong is a possibility? You think there is the chance you could be okay with child rape being legalized?[/quote]

They didn’t change their law on stoning people, it’s still in Deuteronomy. They used their own mind to come to the decision stoning people was wrong.

Is it possible to change my mind? Yes. Is it probable? Not at all. You’d need sound reasonable arguments to convince me. As far as I know, none exist.[/quote]

So now what you are saying is that the actual church teachings (that do change), and are actually called dogma, aren’t dogmatic? Church dogma isn’t dogmatic? Are you sensing the

I don’t think you know what dogma or dogmatic means.

But I do like how you are actually using law interchangeably with religious teaching in this context.

And you said the possibility exists for you to change your mind on any moral belief. So do you or do you not acknowledge the possibility that you could be talked into accepting child rape? Yes or no. You haven’t answered any of my questions for the last 4 or 5 posts.

Are you sensing your cognitive dissonance yet?

50

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power. [/quote]

You are placing the laws above men. You are agreeing to live by the laws. And you are enforcing them with authority that is about the individual. The fact that they could be changed some other time is irrelevant. You are worshiping. Laws absolutely are dogmatic. They are the exact definition of dogmatic. You are blind to yourself.[/quote]

Nope, we change laws all the time. In Canada abortion use to be illegal. It no longer is.

In order to be a dogma, they would have to be seen as incontrovertibly true. You could convince me and all rational secularists to change ANY law. Of course it would have to be accompanied with sound reasonable arguments.

[/quote]

A law is held as incontrovertibly true. So, because Christianity changed it’s law on stoning people, the law and belief in stoning people wasn’t dogmatic?

So, you think the possibility to change your mind of child rape being wrong is a possibility? You think there is the chance you could be okay with child rape being legalized?[/quote]

They didn’t change their law on stoning people, it’s still in Deuteronomy. They used their own mind to come to the decision stoning people was wrong.

Is it possible to change my mind? Yes. Is it probable? Not at all. You’d need sound reasonable arguments to convince me. As far as I know, none exist.[/quote]

So now what you are saying is that the actual church teachings (that do change), and are actually called dogma, aren’t dogmatic? Church dogma isn’t dogmatic? Are you sensing the

I don’t think you know what dogma or dogmatic means.

But I do like how you are actually using law interchangeably with religious teaching in this context.

And you said the possibility exists for you to change your mind on any moral belief. So do you or do you not acknowledge the possibility that you could be talked into accepting child rape? Yes or no. You haven’t answered any of my questions for the last 4 or 5 posts.

Are you sensing your cognitive dissonance yet?[/quote]

I have answered everything you’ve asked of me.

I’m saying nothing written in the bible changed. What I’m saying is the individual minds of the believer changed as a result of secular morals they learned in society. Not as a result of an absolute morality handed down to them from god.

I already answered your child rape question above. But again: It’s possible to change my mind on any law (including child rape). However it’s EXTREMELY improbable. You’d need sound reasonable arguments to do so and to my knowledge none exist.

I’m willing to change my mind on anything if it’s accompanied with evidence and sound reasonable arguments.

51

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

So you think it’s okay to steal from others?

You consider criminal law a religion?[/quote]

lot’s of people do.

Believing in it, like you claim to, definitely is.

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?[/quote]

No.

There’s no worship going on, these rules are not taken dogmatically and can be changed in the future if we as a society see there’s a reason to.

We aren’t getting our source of morality from an absolute authority or a higher power. [/quote]

You are placing the laws above men. You are agreeing to live by the laws. And you are enforcing them with authority that is about the individual. The fact that they could be changed some other time is irrelevant. You are worshiping. Laws absolutely are dogmatic. They are the exact definition of dogmatic. You are blind to yourself.[/quote]

Nope, we change laws all the time. In Canada abortion use to be illegal. It no longer is.

In order to be a dogma, they would have to be seen as incontrovertibly true. You could convince me and all rational secularists to change ANY law. Of course it would have to be accompanied with sound reasonable arguments.

[/quote]

A law is held as incontrovertibly true. So, because Christianity changed it’s law on stoning people, the law and belief in stoning people wasn’t dogmatic?

So, you think the possibility to change your mind of child rape being wrong is a possibility? You think there is the chance you could be okay with child rape being legalized?[/quote]

They didn’t change their law on stoning people, it’s still in Deuteronomy. They used their own mind to come to the decision stoning people was wrong.

Is it possible to change my mind? Yes. Is it probable? Not at all. You’d need sound reasonable arguments to convince me. As far as I know, none exist.[/quote]

So now what you are saying is that the actual church teachings (that do change), and are actually called dogma, aren’t dogmatic? Church dogma isn’t dogmatic? Are you sensing the

I don’t think you know what dogma or dogmatic means.

But I do like how you are actually using law interchangeably with religious teaching in this context.

And you said the possibility exists for you to change your mind on any moral belief. So do you or do you not acknowledge the possibility that you could be talked into accepting child rape? Yes or no. You haven’t answered any of my questions for the last 4 or 5 posts.

Are you sensing your cognitive dissonance yet?[/quote]

I have answered everything you’ve asked of me.

I’m saying nothing written in the bible changed. What I’m saying is the individual minds of the believer changed as a result of secular morals they learned in society. Not as a result of an absolute morality handed down to them from god.

I already answered your child rape question above. But again: It’s possible to change my mind on any law (including child rape). However it’s EXTREMELY improbable. You’d need sound reasonable arguments to do so and to my knowledge none exist.

I’m willing to change my mind on anything if it’s accompanied with evidence and sound reasonable arguments.

[/quote]
"So, you are saying that we should get together and come up with a codified system of beliefs, and practices then force that on everyone else and thereby avoid the pitfalls of religion?

You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion?

It is a religious belief to establish a rule among a group of people that an action is evil, yes. But again, how do you believe it isn’t?"

So let me get this straight. Dogma isn’t dogmatic. The teachings of the church aren’t what the rules and beliefs of “real” Christianity. The real laws of Christianity are as written in the bible and interpreted by you (not the church) and could never change in practice or be seen under any other light. You aren’t sure if raping a child is wrong. And Laws are like the church teachings, but not like religion, because real religion doesn’t change, (so church teachings aren’t religious presumably?). And if the whole world just believed what you did and established good and evil the way you see things and was never willing to absolutely hold to any of that morality, the world would be so much better off, because you have an insight to the truth of the world. That about sum it up? LOL

Wow, the logical back bends you are going through to keep your little world of belief afloat are ridiculous.

52

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

"So, you are saying that we should get together and come up with a codified system of beliefs, and practices then force that on everyone else and thereby avoid the pitfalls of religion? [/quote]

No I don’t consider criminal law a religion.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

"You are establishing what is right and what is wrong in a codified system among a group of people. You think that isn’t religion? "
[/quote]

I think you’re willfully ignoring what I say now. We come up with acceptable laws so we can live peacefully together in society. I don’t like to be raped, neither do most people. So we outlaw rape. You’re trying to turn this into me worshipping these laws or them being written in stone and unchanging.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

So let me get this straight. Dogma isn’t dogmatic. The teachings of the church aren’t what the rules and beliefs of “real” Christianity. The real laws of Christianity are as written in the bible and interpreted by you (not the church) and could never change in practice or be seen under any other light. You aren’t sure if raping a child is wrong. And Laws are like the church teachings, but not like religion, because real religion doesn’t change, (so church teachings aren’t religious presumably?). And if the whole world just believed what you did and established good and evil the way you see things and was never willing to absolutely hold to any of that morality, the world would be so much better off, because you have an insight to the truth of the world. That about sum it up? LOL [/quote]

The Church’s interpretation of scripture changes over time so they can continue to rationalize their beliefs. Why did Christians suddenly start seeing slavery as immoral? What happened? Did someone edit Deuteronomy?

The thing is mostly secular societies have the lowest rates of crime especially violent crime in the world. Check Japan, check Scandinavian countries. Religious countries like the US have extremely high crime rates in comparison.

So maybe the world would be a better place if it were mostly ran by secularists? Huh?

54

“Christian views on slavery are varied both regionally and historically. Slavery in different forms has been imposed by Christians for over 18 centuries. In the early years of Christianity, slavery was a normal feature of the economy and society in the Roman Empire, and this remained well into the Middle Ages and beyond.[1] Most Christian figures in that early period, such as Augustine of Hippo, supported continuing slavery whereas several figures such as Saint Patrick were opposed. Centuries later, as the abolition movement took shape across the globe, groups who advocated slavery’s abolition worked to harness Christian teachings in support of their positions, using both the ‘spirit of Christianity’, biblical verses against slavery, and textual argumentation.[2]”

-wiki

55

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

"So, you are saying that we should get together and come up with a codified system of beliefs, and practices then force that on everyone else and thereby avoid the pitfalls of religion? [/quote]

No I don’t consider criminal law a religion.

[/quote]
Regardless of it being a codified system of beliefs and behavior for a group of people? lol. Okay.

I think you’re willfully ignoring what I say now. We come up with acceptable laws so we can live peacefully together in society. I don’t like to be raped, neither do most people. So we outlaw rape. You’re trying to turn this into me worshipping these laws or them being written in stone and unchanging.

[/quote]
So the qualification is the peace of society? So, human rights are out? But again, on what authority is the peace of society important? I don’t think the peace of society has anything to do with morality, so that would instantly put us at an impasse on agreement of your moral code.

And again, I know you don’t believe anything is certain, you already admitted that you aren’t sure if raping a child is wrong. And further that you are willing to punish and take the liberty of someone based on a belief that you aren’t sure of. How that makes the world a better place, I’m not sure.

I also don’t know how being unsure of something and willing to go back on it, means you can’t worship it. Lots of people worship Christ and every one of them has doubts. If doubting disqualifies it from worship. No one worships religion.

I think you should look back in this thread to see who is rationalizing. But I like how you magically know the reasoning behind the evolution of thousands of years of church dogma. Got anything else you want to pull out of your ass. It must be getting sore.

[quote]

The thing is mostly secular societies have the lowest rates of crime especially violent crime in the world. Check Japan, check Scandinavian countries. Religious countries like the US have extremely high crime rates in comparison.

So maybe the world would be a better place if it were mostly ran by secularists? Huh?[/quote]

I’d say they worship government. I’d also say I’d rather live here. If you locked everyone in a cell and had machines keep everyone alive, the crime rate would be 0. Would the world be a better place?

Or if you made everything legal, the crime rate would be 0.

Uniformity and conformity. Freedom has consequences.

But the truth is that you are entirely failing to see the other side. You’re judgment between Japan and the US is only valid if your Atheistic beliefs are true. If Christian beliefs are true, then a US murder victim going to heaven is way better of than a rich Japanese guy getting drunk and sleeping with random women his whole life.

For all your “open mindedness” you don’t seem to be willing to step back and truly look at your beliefs, or the beliefs of others.

57

[quote]therajraj wrote:
“Christian views on slavery are varied both regionally and historically. Slavery in different forms has been imposed by Christians for over 18 centuries. In the early years of Christianity, slavery was a normal feature of the economy and society in the Roman Empire, and this remained well into the Middle Ages and beyond.[1] Most Christian figures in that early period, such as Augustine of Hippo, supported continuing slavery whereas several figures such as Saint Patrick were opposed. Centuries later, as the abolition movement took shape across the globe, groups who advocated slavery’s abolition worked to harness Christian teachings in support of their positions, using both the ‘spirit of Christianity’, biblical verses against slavery, and textual argumentation.[2]”

-wiki[/quote]

So Christians lead the movement from within the church using a combination of influence of the spirit (as in the bible), the churches teachings (non-dogmatic dogma), and the words of the bible itself? And out of that you are showing how secularism saved the day by subverting the written bible? I’m not seeing it.

58

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Raj, I’m trying real hard not to be too mean here for crying out loud but this Deuteronomy thing is making you look like an imbecile. The civil law set forth in the Pentateuch specifically applied to the Hebrew nation and those who practiced Judaism at that particular point in time and is not applicable to Christianity at all.

Why do you keep beating that drum?

You are so incredibly ignorant about Christianity that you cannot even begin to mount a credible argument against it. You have to have some knowledge about an opposing position in order to effectively debate it. You’re dumber than a box of rocks sitting on the wheel well of the short bus about this subject.

You are doing atheism, your religion, no service by displaying such ineptitude.[/quote]

I’m trying to avoid arguing with his version of the real Christianity.

59

[quote]therajraj wrote:
No one is suggesting we force people to give up their religion. I just would like to see what’s beginning to happen in Canada. It’s role in public life wanes and irreligion grows by choice.[/quote]

Holy shit you giant shit heads. Why don’t you read the part of his post I quoted and stop ignoring it?

60

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
No one is suggesting we force people to give up their religion. I just would like to see what’s beginning to happen in Canada. It’s role in public life wanes and irreligion grows by choice.[/quote]

Holy shit you giant shit heads. Why don’t you read the part of his post I quoted and stop ignoring it?[/quote]

I never suggested otherwise. I questioned what irreligion was and if he really believed in it.