Last edited by a moderator:
Would this not make the Christian God... evil?
- Thread starter w1z4rd
- Start date
Bizarre. I ask you a simple enough question that you avoid in preference of pretending you actually know me. Now, answer the question please without dragging this discussion into personal statements concerning people you don't know.
I see. So all those children with leukemia actually decided in a past life that they wanted to be reborn as children with leukemia?
I see, so if.. for instance, you're a smoker in this life, you'll get cancer before ever having a smoke in the next one, even though you probably already got it in this one too?
Doesn't look like a yes or no to me.
Basically I seem to be asking you a yes or no question that you seemingly can't answer.
Still, for the sake of discussion.. I'm not arguing that a man that kills someone and then claims to not remember the event should be considered innocent by a court of law, I am saying that in his next life he shouldn't be struck down with leukemia at the age of 3.
yes it is kind of like a mario game, except its like you have unlimited lives - it ends when you get sick of wasting your time with it
as long as one wants to go on eating those mushrooms, the game continues
LG this comparison here is what I was referring to. This, insofar as the Hindu religion is concerned is utter rubbish.
Mortals cannot "get sick of wasting" their time with life and wilfully cease to reincarnate (eating mushrooms). Reincarnation is the process by which one achieves spiritual fulfilment...once there is something you must atone for (i.e. a karma-ic leftover) you will be reincarnated. According to the hindu religion there is no choice in that matter.
The only "choice" that mortals might have...again according to the Hindu religion...is death. The Hindu god of death can grant a mortal an extended life if it is justifiable and even then this is limiting...said mortal has only X points of death in his life timeline, assuming no extenuating circumstances like car accidents, natural disasters etc.
Snakelord
nothing to do with your personal issues or needs or concerns - obviously for one who views this life as the all in all, separations between death and life are quite clear since it is a duality such a person has no scope to surmount (issac asimov fictions aside of course)
Inasmuch as a criminal decides to receive a 20 year jail sentence the moment they perform a crime
actually you illustrate a nice point - some sinful reactions bear a result even in this life
obviously I am going for a 'yes' but not a 'yes' that favours new born babies as bereft of previous karma
basically you are resisting the further investigation and clarification of your inquiries - if you don't have the stamina to discuss answers to difficult questions, perhaps you shouldn't ask them
if a person can perform crimes towards a three year old in this life, why isn't it fitting that they receive reactions in their next body as a three year old (not to say that everything that happens to a three year old is perpetuated to the same degree in a previous life - it is however a singular example of how the networks of karma entangle the living entity)
they can however get fatigued of materialistic life and develop a desire for liberation (and if that desire is properly applied, then the process of repeated birth and death in the material world ceases)
numerous quotes to back this up
SB 1.8.26:
incorrect
reincarnation is the result of material desire
once again, numerous quotes to back this one up
BG 8.16:
there is the choice of getting free from karma however
once again, numerous quotes
SB 7.15.54:
SB 7.15.55:
actually the only choice one has is t whether one will exploit the resources of the material nature
BG 7.5:
which boils down to
BG 15.7: include the mind.
or engage in the service of god, understanding what is actually meant by the word 'god"
BG 5.29:
true - but such extensions are limited, since even yamaraj (the demigod in charge of death) is subject to death (in other words even he is a mortal)
SB 6.3.12:
that may be a view of hinduism but it is not a view of hinduism backed up by the scriptures which hinduism is based
BG 13.20:
once again, many quotes are available on the subject
Last edited by a moderator:
LG: what I posted came from a friend of mine who has both learned taught Hindu theism for quite a number of years thus far, backed up by his own authority figure...and old wizened octogenarian pundit with decades of study.
While I personally don't lend any credibility to theisms at all, especially that which seems to follow your process of epistemology (lol), I think his interpretation holds more weight than yours, specifically because theologically and heirarchically speaking it makes more sense. Your interpretation grants humans access to "godly" powers...which no religion has ever alluded to as far as I know. This defeats the whole point of believing in a greater power, if we can access those abilities from time to time.
BTW, reincarnation as a path to spiritual fulfilment is by it's very nature the same thing as reincarnation as a "punishment" to materialistic desire. Tending towards spiritual fulfilment necessarily means a diminishing of materialistic desire - given that we're talking about 'religious measurements' here.
I think we've gone off on much of a tangent tho. The original statement is not even hindu!
With regards to the topic, it speaks to the evolution of humanity's moral code. Clearly what we regard as evil now, was regarded as just centuries ago. I would say yes, all the heavenly executions, persecutions and threats can be regarded as quite ... unsociable.
That being said, this behaviour can also be attributed to an omnipotent 2 year old entity. All of the atrocities can be regarded on a cosmic scale as huge temper tantrums, and we're the unfortunate casualties of it. This perspective also affords a parallel to our own evolution of morals i.e. our 'child' version (acceptable biblical-time morals) has no measurement of violence, while our 'young adult' (current) set of morals cause us as a species to cringe at the carnage in the bible.
Comments?
While I personally don't lend any credibility to theisms at all, especially that which seems to follow your process of epistemology (lol), I think his interpretation holds more weight than yours, specifically because theologically and heirarchically speaking it makes more sense. Your interpretation grants humans access to "godly" powers...which no religion has ever alluded to as far as I know. This defeats the whole point of believing in a greater power, if we can access those abilities from time to time.
BTW, reincarnation as a path to spiritual fulfilment is by it's very nature the same thing as reincarnation as a "punishment" to materialistic desire. Tending towards spiritual fulfilment necessarily means a diminishing of materialistic desire - given that we're talking about 'religious measurements' here.
I think we've gone off on much of a tangent tho. The original statement is not even hindu!
With regards to the topic, it speaks to the evolution of humanity's moral code. Clearly what we regard as evil now, was regarded as just centuries ago. I would say yes, all the heavenly executions, persecutions and threats can be regarded as quite ... unsociable.
That being said, this behaviour can also be attributed to an omnipotent 2 year old entity. All of the atrocities can be regarded on a cosmic scale as huge temper tantrums, and we're the unfortunate casualties of it. This perspective also affords a parallel to our own evolution of morals i.e. our 'child' version (acceptable biblical-time morals) has no measurement of violence, while our 'young adult' (current) set of morals cause us as a species to cringe at the carnage in the bible.
Comments?
Last edited:
Again, under the assumption that you know anything about me.
The criminal being aware of the law concerning his crime right? Up until now I never knew that if I kick a dog that I might get leukemia in some future life. Can you source me to the 'rulebook' concerning this, (only of worth if it goes into actual crimes/punishments). If it just says "do something bad and pay in a future life", it's not going to be of much help considering 'bad' is subjective. We could go by the bible; thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not be a homosexual but then the bible doesn't say anything about future lives or getting leukemia. Is the bible wrong? Can I throw it out with the banana peels? Or did it just omit this important information? Why would it do that?
I do illustrate a nice point, yes.. But could we put drooling over it aside for a moment and just answer the question?
Basically I'm not resisting anything, but if you cannot even manage to answer a simple yes or no question then there's no point going further. If you don't have the stamina to answer questions when posed, don't make posts at all.
It seems more 'fitting' to carry out the sentence at that time, not when he has been reborn as a different person with no knowledge of crimes committed when he was his former person. How can it be fitting to punish a completely innocent 3 year old child? (That child, that life has done nothing to anyone).
then he is either a fool or you are not a reliable medium for communicating his ideas (BTW its not uncommon to encounter persons who are connected to some historical tradition - even I am - what is more uncommon however is to encounter persons who can offer references for their statements (either scriptural or writings by acknowledged authorities on scripture)
this would probable make it more difficult for you to transmit ideas on the subject from a third party
its still not clear how you determine whether something is theologically and theologically more sensible - if you are applying it according to how you think the universe should be run (ie using your insignificant sense perception) , we can safely disregard it
what on earth makes you say that?
i would have thought that your description would, what with advocating that yamaraj can call the shots on mortality on his own whim
we may get them (and even then they are limited in comparison to god - like we may get wealth, but we don't get all the wealth in the universe) but we can be more certain that we will lose them - and the easiest way to lose them is to misuse them (ie use them in the service of our own sense enjoyment instead of god)
punishment however does not automatically mean the propensity for materialistic desire diminishes - some people can't even learn the hard way
once again, these terms are actually explained in the Bhagavad-gita so there is no need to speculate - regarding spiritual fulfillment verses material punishment .....
BG 2.59: The embodied soul may be restricted from sense enjoyment, though the taste for sense objects remains. But, ceasing such engagements by experiencing a higher taste, he is fixed in consciousness.
even if one is restricted from material desire, material desire remains - material desire only diminishes in the presence of experiencing a higher taste
Snakelord
“
doesn't matter whether you know or don't know
“
well its not like you have kept your disdain of the notion of life after death a secret
try breaking the law (particularly in a big way) while being unaware what the laws are and see for yourself whether ignorance is any excuse
doesn't matter whether you know or don't know
there are indications in various parts of the vedas - it all leads however to a discussion of what they call the three modes of material nature (sattva-goodness, rajas - passion, tamas - ignorance) which correlate to moving upwards, sideways or downwards in the next life
subjective to god - that's the point
disease pestilence and famine get a brief mention
no
you can if you want, but you might get a reaction for that
if a person is intelligent they can scope the general principle (namely adopting a lifestyle in the mode of goodness) and avoid murder, kicking dogs and throwing scriptures out with the garbage
i thought i did answer it - the reaction comes after the action (obviously)
some q's particularly if they have a weak theoretical foundation cannot be answered yes or no - like for instance if you ask how many pounds are in the bag I could say do you mean english sterling pounds or a unit of measurement, upon which you could have a hissy fit at my not answering yes or no to a straight forward question
just in the same way that the original perpetrator could punish a completely innocent 3 year old - material nature can rise to meet us on the platform of ruthlessness
That depends, but I personally see little value in an eternal life stuck in a Jerusalem made out of gold while knowing that others, (some I might respect or call friends), are burning for eternity. I would have to live with that knowledge every day forever. What if my daughter, for whatever reason, was one of those people burning for eternity? I have just written an article concerning this, which starts with a letter from a daughter to her father. The last line says: "Dear dad, it seems we are both destined to eternal suffering". (she's going to hell, he's going to heaven- he has to live with the knowledge of his daughter burning for eternity, ergo: it's suffering for both of them).
So in that regard, I wouldn't consider myself a fan of an eternal afterlife. I can certainly entertain the notion however.
Of course I now have the dilemma of not just fearing an illness my daughter might get in this life or the burning she might face upon dying, but also that she might live again a gazillion times with every manner of pain inflicted upon her by these space beings of yours from leukemia to progeria etc etc.
I would submit that there aren't going to be many people that are unaware of the law, (in a big way) - and thus it's a hard one to test. I do know that we were unaware that the child seating laws had changed and got let off when stopped because of that ignorance.
Why doesn't it matter? While you obviously are a fan of complete ignorance, I would submit that everyone being aware of such a perverse law would only help them to be good in this life to save them from that god induced suffering in the next one. Why would the gods not want to inform everyone?
I see, and which way does ignorance take you?
So then that god or gods must define what they consider as good and bad in full so that everyone is aware of it- and needs to define it properly. Killing is a bad thing, I assume, and yet can be a thing done with love - ultimately a good thing, (euthanasia [my subjective opinion]). How do the gods feel about assisted suicide? I suppose they would be against it considering they probably gave the person their illness in the first place - not to make life peachy for them, but to induce that abject suffering.
That's right, yhwh loves his plagues. However, to restate again: the bible does not mention future lives or getting leukemia for past life actions.
It's interesting perhaps to note that the bible says nothing against paedophilia or indeed necrophilia. Is that to say that regardless to my moral stance on the issue, the gods do not deem it as a bad thing? Here is the point, how can anyone abide by laws and prevent future lives of abject suffering if they are completely ignorant of the laws of the gods - laws that have not been defined? Your country has a rule book. In it are only two laws: don't kill, don't steal. If you then rape someone you cannot be held accountable as rape hasn't even been defined as being illegal.
Why? Furthermore, my dog actually ate one of my bibles.. He ripped it to shreds. Does that mean my dog will be reborn with leukemia, (remember, his ignorance is no excuse)?
And if they're not intelligent?
Further to which, we have already discussed that morality is subjective. Who's "general principle" are we talking about? Forgive me, but I personally don't see anything immoral about throwing a book in a dustbin, it's just a bunch of paper with ink printed on it. I can buy a new one for £3.99 including VAT. I wont do it anymore now I know doing so will get me leukemia, and I will spend the remainder of the year praying to the gods to leave my dog alone - he didn't mean anything personal by it. I suppose that's where you and I differ - My concern is for others, your concern seems purely self centered.
Where in your statement is the answer to; does god/s give kids leukemia, (be it this one or the next)?
So you're saying you can't answer the question? I also fail to see how you could consider the question as having a 'weak theoretical foundation' considering you were the one that brought the issue to light - indeed telling me you saw no problem with my statement that the gods give people leukemia. I just wanted a definitive answer, (yes or no), because you do tend to waffle on with a load of irrelevant verbal sputum.
I didn't ask how many pounds are in a bag or anything like it. Does god/s give kids leukemia for actions in their past lives?
Unless of course that original perpetrator is just punishing the 3 year old for something he unwittingly did in his past life - meaning the 3 year old wasn't innocent at all, (according to you), and thus we should have no sympathy but indeed take it as a lesson learnt. The child deserved to die, deserved to get abused, strangled and dumped in a wood because in his past life he threw a bible in the trashcan, (*shock horror*).
Snakelord
but on the topic of killing, it is neither a good thing or a bad thing in and of itself - it does however have its correct and incorrect applications (after all, the BG was spoken on a battlefield)
the bible is only one book - the vedas are thousands of books - but the essence is still there in the bible, namely that one can adopt a life in the mode of goodness that is the precursor to transcendental life, and thus be on the same platform as one who has detailed knowledge of reincarnation anyway (there is also the argument that these ideas were originally in the bible, evidenced by origen, but were turfed out by the reformation of constantine for political reasons)
“
BG 18.19: According to the three different modes of material nature, there are three kinds of knowledge, action and performer of action. Now hear of them from Me.
BG 18.20:
BG 18.21:
BG 18.22:
actually I have indicated that the misuse of a propensity or opulence results in it being withdrawn - I wasn't aware that I had suggested throwing a bible in th bin gives one leukemia - I indicated that it tends to give a result more catastrophic since leukemia is only present in one life, and with or without leukemia, one still has the opportunity to be fully god conscious
As regards the child being innocent, I thought it would be quite clear by now that a person suffering/acting under the laws of karma is not innocent
so it seems you have more of an issue with eternal hell than eternal heaven - but anyway back to the issue at hand, it still leaves you at the default position of any atheist within dualities- namely one's greatest pleasures are one's greatest pains and all the minor losses are merely a lead up to the major loss (namely death) - which is why there is no scope for an atheist to retreat from death, for to do so is to retreat from life
don't worry - you will have numerous opportunities for grief (and also rejoicing) even in this life - as for how ever many births she will take in the future, there is no need to worry too much about that, since it is unlikely that you were her parent in the previous life, what to speak of the next
and if you had plowed into a semi trailer because you weren't aware that it was a one way street, what then? (although point given, just like there is a small threshold for ignorance in minor affairs in everyday law, so too for the laws of karma - namely if one knowingly performs something wrong the reaction is harsher - if the same police man catches you next week would you expect to get away with it? - or to jump ahead to your dog example - your dog doesn't know that the bible is sacred, but you do however, hence the reactions between you and your dog desecrating scripture would be different - PS - I discuss the dog thing in more detail later on, so if you want to address that specifically, better to hold out for a few more paragraphs)
well thats why religion usually plays a dominant role in society - god's representative and god's instruction (through scripture) is there - much like if you throw the instruction manual in the bin and proceed to burn out a new piece of electronics, whose fault is it?
further into ignorance
people also need to be convinced of the necessity for making spiritual inquiry too - hence its not uncommon for religious institutions to have a preaching wing to fulfill this requirement
practically in all cases suicide is not regarded as a positive alternative - the reason is that one is due an allotted amount of suffering (and also happiness) in one's life, and to try and short cut it simply results in the remainder of one's sinful reactions being delivered in the next (with compounded interest due the sinful act of suicide itself) - that said, if one is artificially maintaining one's life through machines, there is no sin in removing the artificial treatment
but on the topic of killing, it is neither a good thing or a bad thing in and of itself - it does however have its correct and incorrect applications (after all, the BG was spoken on a battlefield)
the bible is only one book - the vedas are thousands of books - but the essence is still there in the bible, namely that one can adopt a life in the mode of goodness that is the precursor to transcendental life, and thus be on the same platform as one who has detailed knowledge of reincarnation anyway (there is also the argument that these ideas were originally in the bible, evidenced by origen, but were turfed out by the reformation of constantine for political reasons)
“
I guess the bible takes it for granted that the reader has already surmounted such attractions - also you will note that in the BG krishna doesn't tell arjuna that one should not have sex with other people's wives - the reason is that he was already fully aware that he shouldn't and that there were more important things to discuss - you can take it for granted that if a religious personality is establishing rules of conduct such as "don't have sex with children" that persons who have sex with children are prominent (and also that there is the hope that they can refrain from such activities) - in other words by comparing religious texts you can find a whole social graduation
"why am I suffering?" is the common catalyst for sincere spiritual inquiry
once a person comes to the mode of goodness there is no need for them to have weighty tomes with such things as "don't have sex with anaconda's, don't have sex with antelopes, don't have sex with ants etc etc" because their outlook on life places them on a higher platform of existence
the human form of life is a special opportunity to inquire on religious matters - there is a good reason dogs don't attend church
animals are not subject to the law of karma - they are automatically evolving through the 8 400 000 species of life - just like if your dog jay walks or steals food from the butcher it doesn't get a fine or a jail sentence (it may get beaten by a stick however)
they will adopt a lifestyle in the mode of passion or ignorance
BG 18.19: According to the three different modes of material nature, there are three kinds of knowledge, action and performer of action. Now hear of them from Me.
BG 18.20:
BG 18.21:
BG 18.22:
obviously when we talk of reward and punishment in this world it is god's jurisdiction - of course the implications of action are very complicated in this world, hence the best course of action is to become conscious of god
do you throw your pay check in the bin too - after all thats just ink on paper with a few funny numbers on it
the result of such an action is that you are cultivating an adversity towards god - and as long as one is adverse to god one must remain in the material world - and as long as one is in the material world one must suffer from the actions of other living entities, from one's own body and mind and from natural calamities such as earthquakes - sometimes you may be experiencing this as a king or greater , sometimes as a dog or lower
maybe your dog's concern for you is more valid
Actually you were talking about a smoker getting lung cancer before seriously taking up smoking
you assume that your understanding of god's relationship with the living entity is faultless, hence your lack of theoretical understanding leads you to take a joy ride into "... and what did a three year old do to deserve getting leukemia" etc etc)
thats the point - your question is very much like it, since there are details in your question which have to be examined or clarified if one wants a yes/no answer - if you don't want to discuss it, fine, but it is hardly the manner of discussion
actually I have indicated that the misuse of a propensity or opulence results in it being withdrawn - I wasn't aware that I had suggested throwing a bible in th bin gives one leukemia - I indicated that it tends to give a result more catastrophic since leukemia is only present in one life, and with or without leukemia, one still has the opportunity to be fully god conscious
As regards the child being innocent, I thought it would be quite clear by now that a person suffering/acting under the laws of karma is not innocent
Last edited by a moderator:
w1z4rd
Valued Senior Member
Got it. Thanks. I suppose if people will believe the Bible, the Quran, the book of mormon or scientology... they will believe anything.
Not really, no - it was just one pertinent example that used both sides of eternal existence.
Please explain this.
And this, I don't see much sense in what you're claiming.
It is in my nature to care and worry about the wellbeing of my kids. You might find it easier not to, or perhaps better not to - pointless trying to lump it on me.
In a next life someone else will borrow my sperm?
Well, if the driver died that ignorance would save me from getting tried for murder. I'd probably end up with two years max instead of 30.
Certainly not - because he and I now both know that I am not ignorant of the law, which was the point.
Incorrect. The bible is a book - and not a very good one at that. It can be interesting from a history point of view, but 'sacred'? Lol.
Well, I wouldn't eat it - but that's not because of how we view this book, but because I don't particularly like the taste of paper.
I see. But what of the people that end up with one of these representatives comparable to Kenny's childhood priest? And which god exactly.. instructions vary largely between them.
And, to stay with the point, if that instruction manual forgot to include most of the instructions?
Which is what.. upwards/sidewards/downwards/squigglylinewards?
Well it wouldn't really matter would it? You've told me it's only temporary - no big deal. The thing is of course, if you don't remember anything about a past life in your next life, you haven't actually learnt anything - and thus the entire process was a complete waste of time. This very discussion is a complete waste of time. You could, (by some miracle), convince me that what you're saying is true... I then go and kick the bucket, come back to life and the whole lot has been forgotten. So what exactly was the point?
Fine, but something as important as past lives/next lives and karma could have found it's way in amongst all those wasted pages of how to burn a cow surely? (Considering burning cows was a temporary request but the issue of past/future lives seems to be an ongoing thing).
What seems to be the case here is that the bible refers to a different god, and a different set of instructions. In saying, the vedas instructions are of no value - unless you can show why they are.
Your 'guess' is interesting enough but clearly what it's taken for granted was in error.
Yeah I know, lottery winners don't go to church - they go out and party. However, the question was how can they prevent suffering in future lives? 'Spiritual inquiry' is pointless because once they're dead they forget it all. They get reborn unaware of anything they have done or learnt in a previous life and thus the value of it is completely negated.
I was talking about raping humans, not having sex with anacondas. If your country's lawbook had no such law against raping people, could you be held accountable if you went and raped someone? No is the answer.
That animal might indeed get a jail sentence. (it gets put in a cage). It's all the same thing.
Therefore doomed to keep reincarnating not because they are specifically bad, but because they're stupid?
I see. So god does give kids leukemia?
I don't get pay cheques, my money just appears in my bank.. It's magical :bugeye: However, to answer the question.. no, that is not just ink - it's food, it's clothing.. it's the way to survive. If you did throw that pay cheque away and thus starved to death, would that not be suicide? (which you say is a bad thing).
Which god? Of course it's meaningless to someone that lacks belief in those gods, I have no adversity - I just lack belief.
And the punishment of the gods, (it's their jurisdiction).
Oh I see, you reincarnate into all manner of things. The "sometimes as a dog" interest me because you said that animals are not subject to the laws of karma. What is the point in being one then?
Your statement is nonsensical.
The questions were all part of the same bundle. (that the smoker/child will be given a specific illness/disease by the gods in his next life).
I didn't assume anything, I asked you a question, (which, considering it's a question, would actually point at the opposite of your claim).
And that claimed lack of understanding will always be there if you fail to answer questions. Further to which, I don't care what the child did to deserve it, I am asking if the gods inflicted him with it because of what he did. Your lack of understanding what a question is leads you to take a joy ride into irrelevancy.
No it isn't.
You've already answered the question several times, I think you're just refusing to say 'yes' here because of some pride issue. It's ok.
Righty ho, more catastrophic. K. My apologies for using something more pleasant as an example.
And thus.. the person that abuses, strangles and kills him is not doing anything really worth worrying about.
Snakelord
“
“
“
“
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1162153.stm
however even if one is incomplete in spiritual life one does not lose
BG 2.40: In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear.
BG 6.38:
BG 6.39:
BG 6.40:
BG 6.41:
BG 6.42:
BG 6.43:
whatever - but animals are not treated with the intent for rehabilitation - the reason is because they are animals
you can wear money?
I admire your resourcefulness
“
so even if hell was only temporary you will still hold a begrudging attitude towards heaven?
name a pleasure and see if it will not be worth an equal amount of pain when it comes under the influence of the time factor
lets try it another way - if the material world is not perfect and if one holds that the existence of a perfect after life is a falsity, where does one place one's desires for perfection?
on the contrary such an attitude to parenthood is commendable, but even after all is said and done, your worrying will be insufficient to ultimately protect your child, since no fallible creature can offer protection to an equally fallible one
“
its unlikely
“
so inmany cases, particularly when the stakes are high, ignorance is no excuse
but what if you sincerely couldn't recall the incident even though the policeman was dead certain it was same joe goofing - would ignorance be an excuse?
so suppose you were attending a conference and there was a friend of your boss who you knew to be devoutly christian - your future economic stability hinged on a favorable outcome between the boss and his friend - suppose you were asked to jot down some contact details and the only writing materials on the desk were a telephone directory and a bible - which would you use?
for everything that exists there is always a cheap imitation - an intelligent person can discriminate
despite encountering a variety of head ache tablets in the supermarket, most people are capable of making a decision before they lose consciousness
then you haven't got a complete instruction manual or you don't have the sufficient resources to deem whether it is complete or not (its not uncommon for people to throw complete instruction manuals in the bin because they think they are incomplete)
I though it was obvious - downwards - since most people don't consider ignorance an elevated or stabilizing state
even placing your finger in a fire causes temporary pain
these things can be understood in the human form of life - of course if you are not interested to know you can go god knows where as you have been doing for god knows how many times
the human form of life is the opportunity to get out of repeated birth and death because one has the opportunity to understand god and all other things delightfully discussed on sciforums
“
if understanding reincarnation culminates in adopting a lifestyle and if understanding the bible culminates in adopting a lifestyle in the mode of goodness, where does the difference ultimately lay?
they both refer to a supreme god, omnipotent etc - differences are superficial - just like for a person who does understand what is meant by the words "good health" sees the distinctions between massage. allopathic medicine and surgery as contradictory
How do you determine the value of something?
a christian can perform pedophilia and the public won't blink an eyelid?
actually interesting that you bring it up - the general idea of teh materialist is that increased material opulence equals happiness but experience tells otherwise
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1162153.stm
after inquiry comes action
therefore a fortunate person, or at least one that is not a lazy oaf, can inquire and act before they die
however even if one is incomplete in spiritual life one does not lose
BG 2.40: In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear.
BG 6.38:
BG 6.39:
BG 6.40:
BG 6.41:
BG 6.42:
BG 6.43:
if it had a law about transgressing the personal rights of another individual, rape, and a whole host of other crimes would be punishable, without the need of extensive education programs
whatever - but animals are not treated with the intent for rehabilitation - the reason is because they are animals
bad acts and stupidity make good bed fellows
only to those persons who have allotted sinful reactions due to their past sinful activity
you can eat money?
you can wear money?
I admire your resourcefulness
so it seems that you agree that mere ink on paper can go a long way in certain circumstances
well if you desecrate scriptures with a zeal that is also not reserved for telephone books, if you take delight in offending persons who are religious, if you applaud people who perform heinous acts on recognized saintly perosns (or make jokes at their expense) etc etc then it seems to be an act of cultivation
most criminals also view the punishment that gets dished out to them by authorities as having a cause external to themselves
to explore different ways and means of the futile attempt to be content in the material world - there are certainly many types of enjoyments that are exclusive to the animals don't you think (of course in the animal kingdom you generally run the risk of being eaten alive quite frequently too, so there ar ea few cons involved)
both of you are subject to death, old age and disease (and according to the laws of karma, repeatedly) - what makes your concern any more valid than your dogs (at least your dog doesn't have to perform a day job to survive)
and part of that question is the assumption that the child who comes down with leukemia is faultless
I thought my stance would be quite obvious by now - just like a court gives out jail sentences to guilty parties due to their previous acts, god delivers similar results in the material world, which manifest as poverty, sickness, and other reductions of popularly desirable opulences
prove it
I think I have already answered it several times already
its not clear why you think like that
Last edited by a moderator:
heliocentric
Registered Senior Member
This thread nicely highlights the blind alleys and pitfalls that theistic litteralism always ends up leading you down.
Firstly materialism isnt really uniformly bad, you can enjoy material form, it only becomes bad when it takes over life and over-rides your other needs and the needs of those around you.
Just dont take it to extremes.
Like-wise using any theistic text as a A-Z manual for being 'moral' will just make you end up doing mental backflips in your atempt to get around all the logical inconsistancies that undoubtedly spring up.
You really have to think for yourself when it comes to modern issues like euthenasia or animal welfare.
Second-guessing what God would want wont get you anywhere; the whole point of being a sentient being is that you make your own judgements and create your own systems of value.
That in turn is the whole point of having free-will - its our creative self-agency afforded to us for the purpose of drawing our own conclusions.
By soley deriving ethics from an out of date theistic manual you ultimately end up side-stepping one of the central aspects of being alive, and ultimatley copping out.
You also have to be careful with over-subscribing meaning, there is order in the universe but theres also chaos.
Again its over-litteralism that leads people to believing that every slight and scrape is God whispering in your ear. Some things just dont happen for any reason atall, you can litterally drive yourself insane and become a deeply irrational human being atemping to percieve any illness and injury as God 'punishing people'.
Just look at the Christian right in America, Aids is 'God's way of punishing homosexuals', that's exactly where that type of logic ends up leading you.
Basically extremism and over-litteralism results in verbal cod-shit, middle way ftw.
Firstly materialism isnt really uniformly bad, you can enjoy material form, it only becomes bad when it takes over life and over-rides your other needs and the needs of those around you.
Just dont take it to extremes.
Like-wise using any theistic text as a A-Z manual for being 'moral' will just make you end up doing mental backflips in your atempt to get around all the logical inconsistancies that undoubtedly spring up.
You really have to think for yourself when it comes to modern issues like euthenasia or animal welfare.
Second-guessing what God would want wont get you anywhere; the whole point of being a sentient being is that you make your own judgements and create your own systems of value.
That in turn is the whole point of having free-will - its our creative self-agency afforded to us for the purpose of drawing our own conclusions.
By soley deriving ethics from an out of date theistic manual you ultimately end up side-stepping one of the central aspects of being alive, and ultimatley copping out.
You also have to be careful with over-subscribing meaning, there is order in the universe but theres also chaos.
Again its over-litteralism that leads people to believing that every slight and scrape is God whispering in your ear. Some things just dont happen for any reason atall, you can litterally drive yourself insane and become a deeply irrational human being atemping to percieve any illness and injury as God 'punishing people'.
Just look at the Christian right in America, Aids is 'God's way of punishing homosexuals', that's exactly where that type of logic ends up leading you.
Basically extremism and over-litteralism results in verbal cod-shit, middle way ftw.
Last edited:
No LG, clearly the problem here is you. You have statistically been proven wrong, inaccurate, posturing and even sanctimonious in your responses, usually backed up only by what you perceive to be reality. This is why I told you that he teaches hinduism, after being trained by the pundit dude...who btw IS an authority on hinduism with BI's and whatnot in various Hindu and Indian achievements. I don't care about such 'authority' but you should.
No...all this requires is a command of the English language.
My goodness LG, am I hitting a nerve? You have not been so critical before. When I say theologically more sensible, I mean comparing it to patterns in religions already invented, since we all know that every single one is a human invention, they should have obvious parallels.
So, you're saying choosing to STOP reincarnating isn't accessing 'godlike' powers? And the death thing is more of a begging scenario. Mortals can plea to the death god for an extension, but both his patience and your effect on the timeline has limits, thus the extension of mortality is just that, a temporary loan on life.
*Yawn* self-serving justification. A convenient loophole - mortals can be a little godlike but not fully godlike.
Very clearly. Extremely clearly. Brilliantly clearly. Indubitably clearly. Should I be any more clear LG?
It has been repeated often that the perception of good and evil has changed over time. It was entertainment for lethal gladiatoral sports to exist, and now swords have been swapped with cushioned sticks. It was considered holy to have women in a servile role...even have more than one wife, now they run giant corporations and rule countries alongside male counterparts...and certainly don't stand for infidelity (usually). Just 2 examples off the top of my head that morality has evolved.
Come now LG, do we have to assume you've travelled thru time from the year 781 or something?
You seem to accept that the sins of the father must be paid for by the son. Pitiful LG. Pitiful.
LG hunny, don't be coy. We've done the death and destruction in the bible ad nauseam on other threads. Start with the thread that god killed 2M people as opposed to satan's 10, and go backwards.
Begrudging isn't really the word I would use. I wouldn't personally want to be there if such a place existed, (and was eternal). I have no quarrels with those that do. I don't personally really want to go to Toys R Us either.. does that mean I have a begrudging attitude towards it? No LG it doesn't, it just means I don't want to be there.
Can you cite me an example please, I'm unsure exactly what you're referring to.
Who's the one with desires for perfection?
An inability to protect someone wasn't really the point.
So uhh, how else is someone going to be her parent? Unless she's not who she is now.. In which case the whole thing's a waste of time.
But it is. That ignorance changes a life sentence into a minor sentence or perhaps no sentence at all, (some community service or something). It happens quite a lot in England at any rate.
Perhaps if you could prove that you had no recollection of the former incident. It's unlikely you'd be able to do so however.
The question is loaded: (i.e the owner in your example was a devout christian. As such I would use the phone directory - not because I have any respect for the bible but A) I generally put others feelings first and B) Apparently my future economic stability relies on me not pissing him off.
If, to use a better analogy, I was at home and some guy phoned up with some details I needed to jot. If the only thing present was a bible and my hand I would use the bible - I can't stand ink on my skin.
Needless to say, many people - yes even theists - do write in their bibles, (notes on specific passages and whatnot). At one of these church meetings back in March the priest even encouraged it if it helps people.
Any old idiot can discriminate - and they do. Something you deem as wrong you'll instantly go against, (and for some bizarre reason consider yourself intelligent for doing so), while not understanding that there are many equally and more intelligent people that consider you wrong. It's easy for you, anonymous on the internet, to think and be under the delusion that you have the say on what is and what isn't, and anyone that disagrees with you clearly only does so because they're not intelligent. No offence, but it's naive.
Didn't answer my question. Which god? You could just wildly choose a tablet, but then find yourself still with a headache because you didn't choose the right tablets. Instead of curing your headache you actually got laxatives and now spend the next 4 hours shitting constantly. Headache's still there. So.. which god?
An incomplete instruction manual is pointless.
If you say so, can't say I spend much time asking people what they do with instruction manuals. Are you perhaps projecting what you do onto everyone else?
Clearly it wasn't obvious, I thought the answer would be sideways. (up - heaven, down - hell, sideways - reincarnation. Surely if one is ignorant he must keep going until he loses that ignorance)?
Not if you're wearing special heat resistant gloves.
I don't see the relevance of your statement to mine. If you reincarnate without any memory of your past lives then anything learnt in those lives is a complete waste of time.
And that helps me how if I die and get reincarnated?
The difference lies in the fact that they feature different gods and different rules.
No they're not, only to someone that cannot give a decent answer regarding the fact that these entities are largely different beings.
The question isn't really relevant. I was saying that as the vedas are not connected in any way to the bible, the instructions in the vedas are worthless to someone that believes in the bible and the biblical god. How many christians do you think have honestly sat down and paid any attention to the vedas or the collection of blue, 6 armed, elephant headed gods therein?
What year?
Unfortunately the news report mentions lottery winners but then does a survey with nobody that's won the lottery. Instead they use a bunch of students, (who it is quite well known are generally piss poor). So, when asked what they enjoyed most in the last month it's unlikely to be "spent loads of money", because they don't have any. If you're a student, and thus most likely struggling financially, the very thought of spending money tends to make one unhappy.
Fortunate people.. I see.
Why the question marks? Forgot the dude's name?
If the only laws, as explained earlier, were murder and theft, could you be accountable for raping a person? No is the answer.
Neither were the convicts sent to Australia and in many cases neither are the people in prison cells around the world right now.
So that's a yes?
Ok, I wasn't under the impression that you were an intelligent individual, but c'mon..
The paper merely goes to the bank, you get paid, the paper goes in the bin. Bible gets read, you had brief amusement, bible goes in the bin. Btw, wasn't an answer to my question.
I suppose that depends. If you're that uptight and have no sense of humour then ok. Even the priest down the road writes in his bible, and probably on his phone book too.. and he can take a joke and even make a joke at his own expense. Perhaps you're just a bit... tender LG.
However this is largely irrelevant.. I have no adversity to gods, I simply lack belief in them. Should be easy for an intelligent person to grasp.
Not the ones I have spoken to and treated. You'll know more than me on the subject undoubtedly. Spend much time with criminals?
And how does that help when as a dog you wont understand anything and once you're dead and reincarnated you wont remember having been there?
Must be one of those magical invisible parts. Furthermore it should be plainly obvious that the question makes no such assumption considering the line just after that states: "I am asking if the gods inflicted him with it because of what he did." The 'because of what he did' shows beyond any doubt that the preceding question does not assume he is faultless. Quite simple really.
Fine, so god gives kids leukemia. Wasn't so hard now was it?
It should be plainly obvious.
Enterprise D
NoI 1: A sober person who can tolerate the urge to speak, the mind's demands, the actions of anger and the urges of the tongue, belly and genitals is qualified to make disciples all over the world.
BG 18.42:
actually its a whole thing how academic circles of hinduism are thoroughly corrupted by imperial british syllabuses aimed at making indian culture subservient or inferior to eurocentric versions
at the very least, you won't find mention in the vedas of persons to be accepted as vedic authorities if they have BI's and whatnot in various Hindu and Indian achievements
and I guess the internet is an indication of the clean cut pathways of communication in this regard eh?
what body of knowledge are you referring to here?
I would have thought that to determine that the concept of god is a human creation would require at least omnipotence and/or omniscience - lol
“
BG 3.10:
SB 1.2.26:
SB 1.2.27:
SB 1.2.28-29:
etc etc
humans can be godly but not god (obviously)
and god can possess some qualities (omnipotent, omnipresence etc) that the living entity cannot
and there are some qualities of god that are unique to his his topmost original form, even amongst other forms of godhood
http://nectarofdevotion.com/21/en
Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, after consulting various scriptures, has enumerated the transcendental qualities of the Lord as follows: (1) beautiful features of the entire body; (2) marked with all auspicious characteristics; (3) extremely pleasing; (4) effulgent; (5) strong; (6) ever youthful; (7) wonderful linguist; (8) truthful; (9) talks pleasingly; (10) fluent; (11) highly learned; (12) highly intelligent; (13) a genius; (14) artistic; (15) extremely clever; (16) expert; (17) grateful; (18) firmly determined; (19) an expert judge of time and circumstances; (20) sees and speaks on the authority of Vedas, or scriptures; (21) pure; (22) self-controlled; (23) steadfast; (24) forbearing; (25) forgiving; (26) grave; (27) self-satisfied; (28) possessing equilibrium; (29) magnanimous; (30) religious; (31) heroic; (32) compassionate; (33) respectful; (34) gentle; (35) liberal; (36) shy; (37) the protector of surrendered souls; (38) happy; (39) the well-wisher of devotees; (40) controlled by love; (41) all-auspicious; (42) most powerful; (43) all-famous; (44) popular; (45) partial to devotees; (46) very attractive to all women; (47) all-worshipable; (48) all-opulent; (49) all-honorable; (50) the supreme controller. The Supreme Personality of Godhead has all these fifty transcendental qualities in fullness as deep as the ocean. In other words, the extent of His qualities is inconceivable.
As parts and parcels of the Supreme Lord, the individual living entities can also possess all of these qualities in minute quantities, provided they become pure devotees of the Lord. In other words, all of the above transcendental qualities can be present in the devotees in minute quantity, whereas the qualities in fullness are always present in the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Besides all of the above-mentioned fifty qualities, Lord Kṛṣṇa possesses five more, which are sometimes partially manifested in the persons of Lord Brahmā or Lord Śiva. These transcendental qualities are as follows: (51) changeless; (52) all-cognizant; (53) ever fresh; (54) sac-cid-ānanda (possessing an eternal blissful body); (55) possessing all mystic perfections.
Kṛṣṇa also possesses five other qualities, which are manifest in the body of Nārāyaṇa, and they are listed as follows. (56) He has inconceivable potency. (57) Uncountable universes generate from His body. (58) He is the original source of all incarnations. (59) He is the giver of salvation to the enemies whom He kills. (60) He is the attractor of liberated souls. All these transcendental qualities are manifest wonderfully in the personal feature of Lord Kṛṣṇa.
Besides these sixty transcendental qualities, Kṛṣṇa has four more, which are not manifest even in the Nārāyaṇa form of Godhead, what to speak of the demigods or living entities. They are as follows. (61) He is the performer of wonderful varieties of pastimes (62) He is surrounded by devotees endowed with wonderful love of Godhead. (63) He can attract all living entities all over the universes (64) He has a wonderful excellence of beauty which cannot be rivaled anywhere in the creation.
“
“
BG 11.32:
actually I back up my statements with quotes from the vedas - your stance is basically "I told some guy what I think you think and he said what you think is wrong" - without some clear authoritative reference its not clear how the discussion would progress (and a discussion related to hinduism would be inextricably connected to the vedas don't you think?)
and as I said earlier, like him there are thousands, but until you can venture into the specifics of the "pundit dude' or even what his exact stance was, it sa bit difficult to discuss anything but hearsay
actually who is qualified to speak or teach the vedas are established in the vedas
NoI 1: A sober person who can tolerate the urge to speak, the mind's demands, the actions of anger and the urges of the tongue, belly and genitals is qualified to make disciples all over the world.
BG 18.42:
actually its a whole thing how academic circles of hinduism are thoroughly corrupted by imperial british syllabuses aimed at making indian culture subservient or inferior to eurocentric versions
at the very least, you won't find mention in the vedas of persons to be accepted as vedic authorities if they have BI's and whatnot in various Hindu and Indian achievements
if you want to talk about authorities in the vedas why not consult the vedas?
.
and I guess the internet is an indication of the clean cut pathways of communication in this regard eh?
we already know that all religions are invented by humans?
what body of knowledge are you referring to here?
I would have thought that to determine that the concept of god is a human creation would require at least omnipotence and/or omniscience - lol
if you have no understanding of religion as a foundation, how would you determine parraleles - like if you have no conception of good health, how would you determine the parralels between massage, surgery and allopathic medicine?
“
stopping repeated birth and death requires coming to the platform of liberation which involves surrender to god (which is the essence of any religion BTW) - in other words it is a benediction offered by god, as opposed to a result that one wrings out by manipulating the world
therefore it is not recommended that the solution to death is to appease yamaraj (who is a demigod) - there are recommendations however to appease visnu or his pure devotees
BG 3.10:
SB 1.2.26:
SB 1.2.27:
SB 1.2.28-29:
etc etc
humans can be godly but not god (obviously)
and god can possess some qualities (omnipotent, omnipresence etc) that the living entity cannot
and there are some qualities of god that are unique to his his topmost original form, even amongst other forms of godhood
http://nectarofdevotion.com/21/en
Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, after consulting various scriptures, has enumerated the transcendental qualities of the Lord as follows: (1) beautiful features of the entire body; (2) marked with all auspicious characteristics; (3) extremely pleasing; (4) effulgent; (5) strong; (6) ever youthful; (7) wonderful linguist; (8) truthful; (9) talks pleasingly; (10) fluent; (11) highly learned; (12) highly intelligent; (13) a genius; (14) artistic; (15) extremely clever; (16) expert; (17) grateful; (18) firmly determined; (19) an expert judge of time and circumstances; (20) sees and speaks on the authority of Vedas, or scriptures; (21) pure; (22) self-controlled; (23) steadfast; (24) forbearing; (25) forgiving; (26) grave; (27) self-satisfied; (28) possessing equilibrium; (29) magnanimous; (30) religious; (31) heroic; (32) compassionate; (33) respectful; (34) gentle; (35) liberal; (36) shy; (37) the protector of surrendered souls; (38) happy; (39) the well-wisher of devotees; (40) controlled by love; (41) all-auspicious; (42) most powerful; (43) all-famous; (44) popular; (45) partial to devotees; (46) very attractive to all women; (47) all-worshipable; (48) all-opulent; (49) all-honorable; (50) the supreme controller. The Supreme Personality of Godhead has all these fifty transcendental qualities in fullness as deep as the ocean. In other words, the extent of His qualities is inconceivable.
As parts and parcels of the Supreme Lord, the individual living entities can also possess all of these qualities in minute quantities, provided they become pure devotees of the Lord. In other words, all of the above transcendental qualities can be present in the devotees in minute quantity, whereas the qualities in fullness are always present in the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Besides all of the above-mentioned fifty qualities, Lord Kṛṣṇa possesses five more, which are sometimes partially manifested in the persons of Lord Brahmā or Lord Śiva. These transcendental qualities are as follows: (51) changeless; (52) all-cognizant; (53) ever fresh; (54) sac-cid-ānanda (possessing an eternal blissful body); (55) possessing all mystic perfections.
Kṛṣṇa also possesses five other qualities, which are manifest in the body of Nārāyaṇa, and they are listed as follows. (56) He has inconceivable potency. (57) Uncountable universes generate from His body. (58) He is the original source of all incarnations. (59) He is the giver of salvation to the enemies whom He kills. (60) He is the attractor of liberated souls. All these transcendental qualities are manifest wonderfully in the personal feature of Lord Kṛṣṇa.
Besides these sixty transcendental qualities, Kṛṣṇa has four more, which are not manifest even in the Nārāyaṇa form of Godhead, what to speak of the demigods or living entities. They are as follows. (61) He is the performer of wonderful varieties of pastimes (62) He is surrounded by devotees endowed with wonderful love of Godhead. (63) He can attract all living entities all over the universes (64) He has a wonderful excellence of beauty which cannot be rivaled anywhere in the creation.
“
change is one thing - to say that what is considered evil and what is considered good are interchangable and fully capable of granting an environment that is progressive certainly does not sound intelligent
well if I assume that eating new born babies is evil does that mean it will be good in another thousand years or so?
“
actually its more along the lines that the sinful acts of the living entity in a previous life will come to fruition in a future life - maybe now you can see why I am doubtful of your capacity to represent me to another person in hinduism, and then transmit their reply back
maybe you should consider what the hell the living entity is doing in the material atmosphere in the first place (people are dying everyday by the thousands - they are also being born too) - the time factor reigns supreme
BG 11.32:
Last edited by a moderator:
Snakelord
“
BG 2.40: In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear.
why would different rules involve different results? (for instance there are different rules for different license holders but they all culminate in road safety)
I recall seeing the brahma samhita recited by the boys quoir in the vatican a few years ago
do you know that in the states it is mandatory for lottery winners to attend classes on how to utilize their money just so the lottery companies can be legally protected from being sued by persons claiming winning the lottery ruined their lives?
“
well all you have given us as to why an eternal heaven is the pits is because it would be along side an eternal hell - i suggested what if hell wasn't eternal (which means that the only avenue for eternal existence would be heaven) - you are still yet to say why you think that wouldn't work, or what is seriously wrong with such a notion
ok how about owning a new car
so you are happy to see people die and have your molars rot?
do you worry that your daughter is not protecting you then?
I thought it would have been quite obvious that reincarnation pertains to the life force in the body and not the body itself
only in minor affairs - if you start talking about things like fraud, national security and murder the stakes are quite constant - in the same way when you start talking about leukemia and the like, ignorant or not is not really an issue
hence even in minor affairs ignorance can be no excuse
so its not inconceivable to you that the bible is sacred - in other words if desecrating scripture is a sin, you couldn't offer some sort of excuse like you did to the police officer in regard to the seating of children in vehicles - of course you may not think the bible is sacred, but that is just like you thinking that the new changes to the law are no so important
hence there is intelligent discrimination and unintelligent discrimination - to determine the difference requires an examination on the foundation they lie
if you inquire how one determined that a person was a saintly person in whom one should invest one's faith and all they can come up with is that he was in a particular institution and wore a particular type of uniform (and if one cannot cite scriptural references as to the qualities of a saintly person) that doesn't come across as intelligent
so headache tablets have certain qualities and laxative tablets have certain qualities - they also share some similar qualities too, but those similar qualities are superficial - just like a person familiar only with the superficial qualities of head ache tablet could make such a mistake, a person only superficially familiar with the qualities of god, religion or a saintly person could make such a mistake
more pointless is a person who thinks a complete instruction manual is incomplete (in other words does a scripture require intrinsic information of every single facet of material creation to be complete or does it require the necessary instructions on how to surrender to god bereft of material desire to be complete?)
I have a friend who works on a customer complaint line - its a common trend
one keeps on down in ignorance until they come to passion (sideways) or even better, goodness (upwards)
hence understanding this, an intelligent person can develop the desire to understand things that are eternal and absolute, rather than temporary and phantasmagorial
yes
BG 2.40: In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear.
what is different about the gods?
why would different rules involve different results? (for instance there are different rules for different license holders but they all culminate in road safety)
prove it
its just a coincidence that they both deal with the nature of the absolute controller of the universe and how to know him?
quite a few (obviously you are not a big fan of attending inter-religious dialogs)
I recall seeing the brahma samhita recited by the boys quoir in the vatican a few years ago
preferably from an era that can be sufficiently historically analyzed
do you know that in the states it is mandatory for lottery winners to attend classes on how to utilize their money just so the lottery companies can be legally protected from being sued by persons claiming winning the lottery ruined their lives?
arm chair philosophers tend to lack a certain something
hence codes in religion indicate a general principle that an intelligent person can comprehend (and that a miscreant can misrepresent to suit their needs)
actually they could get a "ticket of leave" after doing a certain amount of time
hence they are subject to lobbying by human rights movements
is your middle name "lightning"?
I am also equally unaware how a person can view any printed medium as merely ink on paper (unless they have been brought up somewhere in an isolated part of the amazon basin)
so if its all about going to the bin why bother taking it to the bank first?
“
so as a parent you can roar with delight about pedophile jokes involving young girls or does the issue of bad taste arise?
I am sure he doesn't throw it in the bin, take delight in offending persons who are religious or applaud those who perform heinous acts to recognized saintly persons
if you were truly neutral to the subject, you wouldn't be actively cultivating an adversity towards it, as previously mentioned
no doubt you are involved in helping them process their grief (if they could process it without you, your assistance wouldn't be required)
yes - at least a 2 year stint on prison rehabone down and another 8 399 999 other species of life to examine
“certainly according to a reductionists view of the phenomena of consciousness, yes
then your next line is no doubt - "and what did the three year old do to deserve it?"
Snake "lightning" Lord
obviously not