 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Pope in America
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 06 Nov 15 - 11:06 AM UK state funded schools are not allowed to teach creation as science. No school is legally teaching it in UK. OK? Of the 24 thousand plus of schools, only a few have yet to comply. You can not instantly close down a school, but it is being dealt with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Nov 15 - 10:13 AM I'm no good at doing links but I found the Telegraph article. Much of it is to do with the threats to withdraw funding from schools that teach creationism which haven't been carried out and I've left most of that out. Here are the bits that show that creationism is all too alive in UK schools . Creationism is still taught in dozens of faith schools despite Government threats to withdraw their funding, the Telegraph can disclose. Last August Education Secretary Nicky Morgan said schools found teaching creationism as scientific fact would not be eligible for any money from the taxpayer. Yet a series of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests show that 54 private schools are still being funded by local authorities, while continuing to teach that the Earth began with Adam and Eve. ....The campaign group [British Humanist Association] also found that some faith schools' science departments were teaching pupils to identify what happened on each of the days of the creation. The curriculum of one group of religious schools reads: "Creation stories give a holistic image of the origins of the earth, plants, animals and human beings." In another, it says that 'The Darwinian mechanism delivers clarifying power within a certain range of phenomena, but it is rooted in reductionist thinking and Victorian ethics and young people need to emerge from school with a clear sense of its limits.' Separately, the Christian Schools Trust's current guidance to their schools says: "Young children within the schools would learn from the start of their schooling that they are created beings, that they are very valuable to God and that they are made in His image. "They would be taught that He is the Creator of all things, including all living things, and that He has designed this Earth to be their home. They would also learn that creation was originally good but that it is now flawed as a consequence of sin introduced into the human race by Adam and Eve." The BHA investigation also found five schools under the US firm Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) are also teaching creationism as science. In the past, ACE has allegedly used the Loch Ness monster to discredit evolutionary theories, according to the BHA. Its content reads: "Some scientists speculate that Noah took small or baby dinosaurs on the Ark. Are dinosaurs still alive today? With some recent photographs and testimonies of those who claimed to have seen one, scientists are becoming more convinced of their existence. "Have you heard of the 'Loch Ness Monster' in Scotland? 'Nessie', for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur." The group has explicitly discredited evolution in its various textbooks, according to the BHA. Another excerpt reads: "No branch of true science would make these kind of impossible claims without proof. "Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative - that the universe was created by God - they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 06 Nov 15 - 08:58 AM but I also think that abortion is the taking of a life Define "life". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Nov 15 - 06:45 AM "Steve, it seems to me that you see all of life as ideology and indoctrination, and you want to make sure everyone has the correct ideology. I suppose those people demonstrating outside the abortion clinics have the same mindset - but in their case, opposition to abortion is the only correct ideology." Your mission in life seems to be to paint people whose thinking opposes your own personal and very simple-minded ideology as equivalent, opposite to yours and with theirs wicked to yours good. The people outside the clinics are wicked people, not because they oppose abortion but because they are outside the clinics. Mother Teresa was a wicked woman not because she opposed abortion but because she preached the virtues of ignorance and poverty to women and practised what she preached. I have every respect for people who oppose abortion. In fact (and I don't know how many more bloody times I have to say it), I'm a thousand times more opposed to abortion than the withered old virginal nun ever was. She loved abortion so much that she enthusiastically promoted all the policies that serve to increase its incidence. She wanted ignorance, poverty, abstinence, and absolutely not a hint of birth control of any kind. Her message, a bit watered down, is the same as the one your Church still promotes (and you love her so much that she's about to be sainted). The Catholic Church would be lost without sticks like abortion with which to beat its flock into line, and those people outside the clinics are its cheerleaders. You are doing a very grave disservice to every woman on the planet by indulging them in the way you do. You are allowed to condemn. As you're a Catholic, I'm amazed you don't do it more often. In sum, I want as few abortions as possible and I want the real means to achieve that, not silly dressed-up men in pulpits or hateful old nuns in hock with fascists preaching the wrong messages, or people standing outside clinics using every ugly tactic they can conjure to intimidate women who are in an extremely vulnerable state. And as a man I should really be minding my own business about what women decide what to do with their own bodies, but at least I try not to poke my interfering nose in too much to add a sanctimonious layer of my own personal moral compass on their every move. If you really don't like abortion as much as you say, well tell me how you're FIGHTING your Church's rotten policies that encourage it, instead of just gently advising its members that they can, well, interpret the rules (in other words, break them) according to their consciences. Don't say that too loud, though... "But then there are many others of us who aren't so sure about things. We have the nasty habit of seeing both sides of an issue, so we're not so eager to take a rigid stand on issues. I believe the choice to have or not to have an abortion should be up to the pregnant woman, but I also think that abortion is the taking of a life - and the taking of a life is always regrettable." Condemnation in such gentle words: it's your choice, of course, but to me you're taking a life, and that's regrettable." Not a bloody word about the doctrines that do nothing except help women to get to that point in the first place. "And I oppose capital punishment, but I can understand how the family of a murder victim might want the murderer to be executed. So, for me, such decisions are difficult because there is no right answer." Yes there is a right answer, and it is that justice is not served well if victims of crime get the first word on retribution. Another part of the right answer is that capital punishment is completely immoral and should never be used. "Most of the time, I have a reasonable amount of faith in God, but sometimes I'm an atheist or agnostic. And I could never bring myself to believe in the simplistic, anthropomorphic God that you and Raggytash describe." Well I call your God "he" purely for convenience, and any image of him that I characterise in my remarks is not mine, I assure you. I don't carry around in my head an image of something that doesn't exist, thank you. You've studied theology. Most Christians haven't, and it's a good bet that the vast majority of them either don't think much about a God at all or have the simplistic picture in their heads that you deride and which you condemn Raggytash and me for depicting. I think we're ten times more on the ball in this regard than you are, frankly. "Defining or describing God forces me into a rigid, limited understanding." But you see him when you look at the starry night. You don't want to limit your understanding of him, but you don't object if he stunts your understanding of the universe. Odd. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Raggytash Date: 06 Nov 15 - 05:24 AM The article I was trying to link to was from the Daily Torygraph of all papers. I typed "creationism schools UK" into Google, it was the second article that came up. Dated 02.05.2015 so very recent. Don't know why the links wouldn't work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Raggytash Date: 06 Nov 15 - 05:20 AM Try again |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Raggytash Date: 06 Nov 15 - 05:08 AM Wrong Again |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 06 Nov 15 - 04:47 AM there are schools in the UK & USA where this stuff is being taught as a science. Not in UK. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Blandiver (Astray) Date: 06 Nov 15 - 04:33 AM There was no flood deep enough to cover all the Earth and over the mountain tops! Creationist flood-lore makes for fascinating reading. In their version of things, the pre-flood Earth was a paradise of one continent, with no mountains, shallow seas and a sort of water globe surrounding the earth. It was steamy, tropical, moist and it never rained. Furthermore, it can all be accounted for by scripture. The flood was brought about by the collapsing in of the water sphere, thus flooding the entire planet. Afterwards the excess water was dealt with by tearing the continent apart, sinking the sea depths, raising the mountains and freezing the polar caps. Oh, and all of this happened in the year 2304 BC. Before we laugh too much, it's worth noting that there are schools in the UK & USA where this stuff is being taught as a science. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 06 Nov 15 - 03:45 AM I dunno, Raggytash. I think we're agreeing. When issues are complex, then opinions (and moral choices) will be all over the spectrum. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 06 Nov 15 - 03:34 AM Joe, you miss my point you said: "But in most situations of moral choice, people of good will will agree, and will usually choose the same thing" I used the illustration of varying degrees of support for the death penalty to show that other factors must be at play. I have no reason to doubt that people on both sides of the pond are of good will so that the reason for the difference in attitude to the death penalty must be ascribed to something else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 06 Nov 15 - 12:51 AM Steve, it seems to me that you see all of life as ideology and indoctrination, and you want to make sure everyone has the correct ideology. I suppose those people demonstrating outside the abortion clinics have the same mindset - but in their case, opposition to abortion is the only correct ideology. I can't venture a guess what percentage of people have that ideological mindset, but I'd say it's significant. Still, I never worried that I might harm my children by exposing them to my beliefs and religious practices as they were growing up. They grew up to be non-ideological, which is what I hoped they would be. But then there are many others of us who aren't so sure about things. We have the nasty habit of seeing both sides of an issue, so we're not so eager to take a rigid stand on issues. I believe the choice to have or not to have an abortion should be up to the pregnant woman, but I also think that abortion is the taking of a life - and the taking of a life is always regrettable. I am generally a pacifist, but I don't know if I'd be much of a pacifist if my town were under attack. And I oppose capital punishment, but I can understand how the family of a murder victim might want the murderer to be executed. So, for me, such decisions are difficult because there is no right answer. Most of the time, I have a reasonable amount of faith in God, but sometimes I'm an atheist or agnostic. And I could never bring myself to believe in the simplistic, anthropomorphic God that you and Raggytash describe. Don't ask ME to define or describe God - my thoughts on that change from one moment to the next, and I like it that way. Defining or describing God forces me into a rigid, limited understanding. That's not real to me, and I don't want to go there. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Bill D Date: 05 Nov 15 - 10:58 PM Yes... that's called 'preaching to the choir'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 15 - 10:09 PM Yes he can! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Bill D Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:45 PM No Pete... "a lot of the water" did NOT "come from below". That is a wild guess trying to account for 'water covering the entire Earth'...which simply did not happen! There was no flood deep enough to cover all the Earth and over the mountain tops! At some time in the past, there was some sort of local event...**probably** when this happened! There have been searches of the bottom of the Black Sea that found artifacts dating to that era. It was a HUGE event, and with no TV coverage, stories would naturally grow about 'water covering everything'. Maybe someone with a boat actually escaped with his family & some animals, but NO actual writings cover it, as writing barely existed back then. You cannot just toss in bad science to explain bad theology! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 15 - 09:04 PM Consensus on abortion is impossible while the Catholic Church, along with other big religion, sticks its interfering and unhelpful nose into the issue. Abortion is the tip of a very large iceberg that is largely of religion's making whether you like it or not. Almost all those horrible people who harass women outside abortion clinics are members of your club. But the people like them who hector decent people about abortion are the self-same people who oppose birth control, unfettered sex education in schools, equality for women in the Church and society and who, ludicrously, are the arch-advocates of "abstinence". If you want a constructive consensus on abortion, these revolting people, and their cheerleaders such as every pope and that disgusting Romanian nun, seriously need to be sidelined. They are the champions of abortion. While their ignorant views prevail, abortion numbers will remain high. You don't get rid of abortion by criminalising women, sending them down the back streets by having draconian time limits or other barriers, keeping boys and girls ignorant about sex, trying to persuade people to go against perfectly good and normal human nature, banning contraception and making saints out of nasty and highly-illiberal people. You in your Church are the problem, absolutely not even in the remotest sense a part of the solution. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 05 Nov 15 - 08:40 PM It just keeps getting better! THIS really DOES sound like pete! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 05 Nov 15 - 06:07 PM Raggytash sez Joe sez: "But in most situations of moral choice, people of good will will agree, and will usually choose the same thing." Raggytash sez: This is an interesting though Joe. In the USA a Gallup poll indicated that 61% of people supported the Death Penalty. Note, Raggytash, my entire paragraph and not just the one sentence: There will be differences of opinion on some moral issues, especially in matters like abortion and warfare and capital punishment - matters where there are good points on both sides of the discussion. But in most situations of moral choice, people of good will will agree, and will usually choose the same thing. There is no broad consensus on the issues of abortion, warfare, and capital punishment. The argument has not been settled, so people are likely to respond in a wide variety of ways until consensus is reached. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 05 Nov 15 - 04:53 PM Looks like Pete and Dr. Batshit Crazy have a lot in common! Egypt's pyramids were built by the biblical Joseph to store grain and were not, as archaeologists believe, tombs for pharaohs, Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson has said. "Now all the archeologists think that they were made for the pharaohs' graves. But, you know, it would have to be something awfully big if you stop and think about it. "And I don't think it'd just disappear over the course of time to store that much grain." Asked on Wednesday if he still held these views, Carson told CBS News: "It's still my belief, yes." Article Here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 05 Nov 15 - 03:48 PM Well maybe it's a bit like your Big Bang and rapid expansion ....slowed down now ! And of course the floodwaters are in the oceans now.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 15 - 02:05 PM Maybe pete could explain to us why the plates are still observably moving after all this time. Are they floating on Noah's floodwater? :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 05 Nov 15 - 01:45 PM Face it, Pete! All you (think) you know about plate tectonics, and other geological phenomena, comes from 'Creation.com'. The authors of that stuff are extreme religious fundamentalists who are pissed of with science because it demolishes their pious 'certainties' one by one. If all you can do is parrot the words of those sad 'fruit loops' you cannot be surprised if no-one takes you seriously. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 05 Nov 15 - 01:21 PM While genesis is history rather than science Sorry, Pete, "Genesis" is not history in any way, shape, or form. Its a fairy tale. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 05 Nov 15 - 01:10 PM While genesis is history rather than science it does allude to geologic activity in the flood account. A lot of the water came from below. And just as a sideline, a lot of rushing water can push heavy rocks and transport them distances. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 05 Nov 15 - 08:42 AM evidence and reason tells me that the evolution story is impossible Sorry, pete, but creationism is the antithesis of reason and is based on no real evidence whatsoever. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 15 - 05:14 AM "In fact catastrophic plate tectonics is a flood model." Plate tectonics is a phenomenon that is well explained by a good theory. It is not a model. As a flood involves water, and rocks are heavier than water, it is not ... Bugger, why am I bothering... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 15 - 05:03 AM Well, the things I listed are religious traditions. You didn't qualify your statement. Perhaps you'd care to give us a list of the traditions you do approve of. "To me, plate tectonics just makes sense - as does evolution." Well I'm glad you think they make sense. Now the job of science is to explain them. I hope that plate tectonics makes a bit more sense to you than evolution does and that you can manage to leave God out of it. By the way, I was wondering why you have so far failed to delete the obnoxious Guest post from last night. Is he a fellow Christian?
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 05 Nov 15 - 04:30 AM Not denying plate tectonics joe . In fact catastrophic plate tectonics is a flood model. And if evolution makes sense to you , you don't seem to have explained why , other than just accepting the ruling paradigm because it is the ruling paradigm ! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 05 Nov 15 - 03:54 AM Joe: "But in most situations of moral choice, people of good will will agree, and will usually choose the same thing." This is an interesting though Joe. In the USA a Gallup poll indicated that 61% of people supported the Death Penalty. Gallup Poll In the UK in a poll earlier this year the figure was 48% and would seem to be falling UK Figure Given that the chice of a Death Penalty is very much a "Moral Choice" here we have a situation were "people of goodwill" are opting for two very different and very stark options. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 05 Nov 15 - 03:09 AM Well yes bill, if the folding only happens over deep time, I can see that it can't be observed, and you have to then interpret the data. Now you say , or imply , that ...science....shows us this happened,,however ....science....has shown us lots of geologic processes before ( supposedly ) that have turned out to be wrong in light of subsequent geologic activity or experiments conducted . ...science...has also said lots of things cannot happen quickly, but then had to revise when it did.. ( of course, if Steve or shimrod ask me for examples or "reference please"...just" do your homework" !) the fact is you need to come to the conclusions you come to, whether current or the ones revised now, because you require deep time for your belief. It is your "primary premise" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 05 Nov 15 - 02:44 AM Joe: "But in most situations of moral choice, people of good will will agree, and will usually choose the same thing." Bill: Hmmm, Joe... isn't that a way of defining people who do "choose the same thing" that we approve of as people of good will"? ;>) Bill, I look on "people of good will" as people who have a reasonable amount of concern for other people. I think most people are "people of good will." For the most part, they won't hurt other people, or steal from them, or do other things to cause others harm. And I don't think they do it because of fear of punishment. Joe: ...and "I think that perhaps there is no "free will" in most situations;.." Bill: That is certainly one way to look at possibilities... was it freely chosen? ;>) Seriously, I don't think free will can be so easily relegated to just odd moments. Maybe I didn't explain myself clearly enough. I think that most of our actions are automatic, or semi-automatic. We don't have time to think deeply about how we will respond to a particular situation. But I think we DO have times when we can reflect and decide freely how we will respond to situations in the future. As I said, bastards choose to be bastards...and "people of good will" choose to be the way they are. Steve Shaw hasn't said anything reasonable for quite a while, so I don't think I'll take the time to respond to his blathering.... But Steve, just to assure you, I also "don't respect human sacrifices, the brutality of Moses that somehow manages to get him a bye, inquisitions, torture, stonings, antisemitism, the exclusion of women, circumcision, waging imperialistic wars and quite a few other religious traditions that I won't go on to list." Why in the world would you imply that I would respect any of these atrocities? You're blathering, Steve, so your comments are not worthy of response. Can't say I have much to say in response to Pete, either. To me, plate tectonics just makes sense - as does evolution. Here in California, it's very easy to see the action of plate tectonics along the San Andreas Fault. Just about twenty feet to the west of the San Juan Bautista Mission, the ground drops off dramatically - that's the San Andreas Fault. Other missions were destroyed by earthquake and destroyed. It makes me wonder why Junipero Serra and the Franciscan padres built their missions along the Fault - almost all of them are in constant danger of destruction. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 05 Nov 15 - 02:29 AM Isn't it extraordinary? Pete has set himself up as some sort of 'expert' or 'authority' on evolution when it's become very, very obvious that all he's read is 'Creation.com' and the Bible! It's also become very, very obvious that he knows nothing about science or how it works. One thing that REAL scientists DON'T do, Pete, is to immediately attribute any odd/inconsistent/inexplicable/equivocal evidence to God! They look for more evidence to clarify the situation and during this process they keep an open mind. As I have told you in the past and Steve has just told you, you need to do a LOT more homework. If all of your information has come from a heavily biased source and an old book, you have NO credibility whatsoever! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST Date: 04 Nov 15 - 11:41 PM The End of Night |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Noctes Date: 04 Nov 15 - 10:17 PM ProBably ( - : |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Bill D Date: 04 Nov 15 - 07:54 PM ". Has there been any observational evidence of rock layers folding without cracking once hardened?"" Golly Pete... that is, by definition, not possible for humans, as we only live for a hundred years or so. (and not only that, but 'hardened' is a relative term for some types of sediment. Just imagine rocks mixed with clay... you can bend a layer s-l-o-w-l-y AS it hardens) You keep returning to that theme about everything related to 'very old earth' and evolution. It is a nice convenient argument to deny or cast suspicion on processes that **science** shows us took a long time, but you can't disprove lots of scientific evidence by just demanding that it MUST happen as we watch. What do you want...video of evolution and geologic processes? (You actually can have that when large earthquakes happen and one piece of earth rises several feel above another) You are using very awkward and artificial criteria for your criticism. I could use the same type of argument about other things in everyday life, and you'd immediately see why it was not fair... but you NEED that demand for 'observational evidence' in real time to support your primary premise of 'creation' being only a few thousand years ago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST Date: 04 Nov 15 - 07:08 PM Do you work at being a prick or does it come naturally? No, don't bother answering that. We already know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 15 - 07:00 PM Ah, the good old God of the Gaps. So Bill will tell you, eh? Do you sit around waiting for people to tell you stuff all the time, or do you ever grab knowledge for yourself? No, don't bother answering that. We already know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 04 Nov 15 - 06:51 PM Steve sez...do some homework... Well maybe bill will answer the question, unless of course there is no observational evidence for hardened rocks folding without cracking. And I still reckon, that as the moon has been visited, samples collected, and measurements calculated or whatever else in observational , repeatable science, that it's present .....or minutes recent !.......consistency and features can be pretty confidently settled. Contrast that to collecting data about the long gone past from what's been left to the present, is open to different interpretations ....even among evolution believers... Added to that is the added problem for evolutionists of not having explanation for when experimentally verified science contradicts the evolution story. Steve sez....no evidence for God. Tell me please, do you think that all there is in the universe is matter and energy ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 04 Nov 15 - 06:39 PM " ... evidence and reason tells me that the evolution story is impossible. And to ask who made God is a non sensible question as the God Christians believe in did not need making , and is eternal uncreated spiritual, ..." Absence of evidence - and reason - tells me that that a God who did not need making and is "eternal uncreated spiritual" is impossible! Or rather such a God sounds like something invented by people who desperately want Him to be exist and who are prepared to re-define what is "sensible", or reasonable, in a vain (and very dim-witted) attempt to deter others from asking obvious questions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 15 - 06:24 PM "But note that Joe, a Catholic, has a respect for the ancient religious traditions of the various cultures of the world. Steve, an atheist, does not." Well I don't respect human sacrifices, the brutality of Moses that somehow manages to get him a bye, inquisitions, torture, stonings, antisemitism, the exclusion of women, circumcision, waging imperialistic wars and quite a few other religious traditions that I won't go on to list. You respect 'em if you like. "Steve wonders why Jesus didn't get more "press coverage" in Roman documents. To most Romans, Jesus was just another Jewish preacher. There were lots of them, and many were executed as revolutionaries or zealots. Why should the Romans take any special notice of this Jesus?" You don't know that that's what the Romans thought as there was no press coverage. Stop making it up as you go along. The more likely explanation is that there was never a Jesus as we know him. Of course, I don't know that for sure. Reading your paragraph, it seems that you have that certainty that only comes with faith. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 15 - 06:04 PM "Thanks bill. You may know more about geology than me, but I would have thought that rock layers would only bend before hardening . Has there been any observational evidence of rock layers folding without cracking once hardened?" You thought wrong. The process is perfectly well understood. Do some homework. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Bill D Date: 04 Nov 15 - 06:01 PM "But in most situations of moral choice, people of good will will agree, and will usually choose the same thing." Hmmm, Joe... isn't that a way of defining people who do "choose the same thing" that we approve of as people of good will"? ;>) ...and "I think that perhaps there is no "free will" in most situations;.." That is certainly one way to look at possibilities... was it freely chosen? ;>) Seriously, I don't think free will can be so easily relegated to just odd moments. Obviously, prior events and various peer group pressures influence our decisions in various complex ways, but assigning determinism to 'most' of them is a stretch. Determinism is usually...(in philosophy)... an all or nothing position. The concept of tabula rasa in Psychology suggests that we are born "open" to all possibilities, and stuff immediately starts happening that affects everything we do. What it doesn't explain clearly is how we can even reflect on that idea if we are "determined". I claim that a lot of the argument is just linguistic.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 15 - 06:00 PM The heheh was for pete's less than erudite contribution. As for moral issues that generally end up with people of good will making the same choice, it's rather unfortunate that you brought abortion into the frame. Catholicism, and it's not alone, is on extremely shaky ground here. The promotion of ignorance about sex, the pointless advocacy of abstinence, institutionalised misogyny and the ban on contraception go a huge way towards creating what you call the moral issue of abortion. And it strikes me that it's the very last thing that has attracted people of good will to find common ground, and anti-abortionists find considerable succour in the Church's illiberal stances on sexual matters. Fitting bedfellows indeed. Religion is crazily mixed up about all this and it's about time we made it take a back seat as any kind of moral arbiter. We'll find our own morality without you, thank you very much. You're just lousy at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 04 Nov 15 - 05:51 PM Thanks bill. You may know more about geology than me, but I would have thought that rock layers would only bend before hardening . Has there been any observational evidence of rock layers folding without cracking once hardened? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 15 - 04:43 PM Heheh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Nov 15 - 04:43 PM Hi, Bill- There will be differences of opinion on some moral issues, especially in matters like abortion and warfare and capital punishment - matters where there are good points on both sides of the discussion. But in most situations of moral choice, people of good will will agree, and will usually choose the same thing. I think that perhaps there is no "free will" in most situations; but perhaps there are "crisis moments" in our lifetimes where we make the free choice of one mindset or another - and the long-range mindset we have chosen then predetermines our semi-automatic response to immediate situations. For the most part, I think that bastards choose to be bastards. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 04 Nov 15 - 04:34 PM Well Steve, evidence and reason tells me that the evolution story is impossible. And to ask who made God is a non sensible question as the God Christians believe in did not need making , and is eternal uncreated spiritual, as you have been told often, and of course you will remember that from when you used to accept that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Bill D Date: 04 Nov 15 - 04:15 PM I don't often differ with Joe in explicating this sort of thing, but Joe... 'moral choices' have been defined subjectively forever, even as intellectuals such as Kant tried to define them formally and objectively. When this is done we get rationalizations to justify almost any behavior. Certainly, some 'know' what is morally wrong, but 'choose' to ignore it; but many do apply premises that make heinous behavior seem 'right' to them. It is an awkward fact that many issues in human behavior are always a matter of personal, subjective choice....such as abortion and capital punishment and WAR in general. "Thou shalt no kill" has a myriad of exceptions for the majority of humans. Ask a Jain about what he is allowed to eat..... (Or have I missed your point, Joe?) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 15 - 02:41 PM Well, a good moral choice would be to accept that there is almost certainly no God, which evidence and reason tells us is the case. This would have some excellent effects, such as an end to lying to children about bogus supernatural forces, a big step towards ending misogynistic mindsets and the liberation of people's minds so that they may better explore the real truth about the world and the universe. Of course, there would be a downside. All those poor priests, imams, rabbis, ayatollahs and popes would have to think about doing an honest day's work for a change. Theologians and all the other self-interested hangers-on wouldn't come off too well either, I suppose. The fact that billions of people have yet to make this choice gives the lie to your claim about how we're all so good at making our own minds up, I'm afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Nov 15 - 01:17 PM Steve Shaw says: In moral choices, a lot of people are choosing what someone has told them is the moral choice. I don't believe that's true. A moral choice is a choice between something that is harmful or not harmful, constructive or destructive, good and bad. Most of us adults are smart enough to figure these things out without having somebody tell us. I suppose there are a few "sheep" who are dominated by external forces, but I think most adults do quite well making such choices by themselves. -Joe- |