Which would you believe in more?

[redwurd]

Most things in this world are irrelevant. Just some are more so than others.
I do realize that this 'debate' has no bearing on any 'powers that be', cannot right any wrongs, or even cure the common cold.
What I was 'getting at' with my posts was an open discussion, where any and all could expound their two cents worth of opinions.
The concept that I was trying to 'wrap my head' around was if you actually believed what it was you were writing down, and some insights into the finer workings of what is ticking in BM's brain.

Now what has actually 'blown my mind' is:
"what I think is right or wrong, when I'm saying that's irrelevant. ", with that statement, you BM have in a round about way, said that your opinions are irrelevant. So now any future debates you may have could now be..... well it's irrelevant, so um how bout the weather?

Oh and if I could cast my vote I'd go for anarchy, because democracy is evil relatively speaking.

[yash3ahuja]

Well red, he isn't saying his opinion is irrelavent for every discussion. We're discussing morals, and me and BM both agree on the fact, that our opinions on morals won't affect your morals, thats not what were arguing. We're argueing that these morals, these opinions on right and wrong, should not be what determines the world. That it's unfair to judge someone els with your morals.

[BulgarianMenace]

We can't judge people who live in different cultures with our moral code.

In that context, what our opinions are is irrelevant. We may think they're disgusting or what have you, but that doesn't matter.

[redwurd]

"with that statement, you BM have in a round about way" - means IN A ROUND ABOUT WAY - I was poking fun of the little 'legal loop hole' that any future debater could make and say that in BM's post he said his opinion is irrelevant & doesn't matter! lol

And hey I'm not the moral police, far from it. In no way do I or would I sit in judgment of anyone, morals included.

Perhaps it is a generational or gender thing. I still foolishly believe in common decency and respect and hope to god (hey thats where this all started didn't it?) that there is still truth and justice in this world worth fighting for. That ultimately Peace could prevail and the avarice, the pettiness and evil we inflict on upon each other would cease to exist.
I was curious as to what and why you & BM's opinions were. I offered information that supported my opinions only, and I asked for your opinions. I don't recall ever saying 'you are wrong I am right'.
I know that it is unfair to judge someone else with my morals, but through discussion I may see a valid point in your opinion and that could in fact affect my morals.

[BulgarianMenace]

we're having two different discussions here.

You're talking about specific things you find moral or amoral.

Yash and I are discussing the role of morals across different societies. We don't want to affect your morals because that's really not what we're talking about, although you seem to think it is.

I was poking fun of the little 'legal loop hole' that any future debater could make and say that in BM's post he said his opinion is irrelevant & doesn't matter! lol

And yash was just pointing out that anyone who might think to do that would only be showing their ignorance of the context of the quote and their abject stupidity.

[redwurd]

"No you can't infringe upon another nation's sovereignty and dictate what morals they should and shouldn't have."

"Again no one country has the right to dictate their morals on any other country ..."

does this not mean that I was in agreement with you? I just differed on the absolute monochromatic ideals of it because in my experiences the world is in Technicolor, and tried to proceed in offering my views as to why, when called upon to defend them.

I will state yet again that in no way should one country or individual dictate their morales upon another. so we done here?

[yash3ahuja]

I think we can never reach peace. Peace is a scam. Human nature doesn't work like that. It's in our nature to argue. There are too many people in this world. Until the ENTIRE world has it's morality reach equal levels. IE, it's impossible. Human's want allow it. The only peaceful society is no society. Those are my beliefs if you want to bring up world peace. But, what I believe on that subject is truly irrelevant. And, the world is in technicolor, but it's like a rainbow, DISTINCT differences between each. They aren't blended.

[Fober-dud]

Feb 10, 2010 9:42:47 GMT -5 yash3ahuja said:

This reminds me of star wars... "The sith are evil!" "From my perspective, the Jedi are evil!" There is no absolute. Opinions differ. You think the morals between you and I, and that of a mass murderer are the same? Our opinions are irrelivant, we want things to be fair, not moralic. And trust me, me and bm both probably think Saddam Hussein is wrong.

I heard someone quoting C.S. Lewis the other day, saying something about how humans have a capacity to hunger only for things that exist, or humans can only hunger for a sensation that can be fulfilled (e.g. they hunger for food, because food exists, but they can only hunger for food because food ultimately exists; if food didn't exist hunger wouldn't exist).

So, if he (C.S. Lewis) was right about that theory, then you can logically infer that since humans definitely have a hunger for absolute truth, more specifically, a hunger for knowing that they are in the right (or that what they believe is "true"), then you could make a statement that there is absolute truth.

Lol, and Yash, Obi-wan says "Only a Sith deals in absolutes.", then turns around next second and says "Anakin, Chancellor Palpatine is evil!" .

[NexsusX (Fury)]

to pose several questions

Who told you about god?

Can you be 100% ciertain that this person is not lying to you?

(if you respond with that because many people say this to be true as well)

take a look at this link and answer the following
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol3NRuMOEGk

-after seening this-

Is it possible that everyone is being fooled into this idea of god?



(i got to love that this topic was a hit 10 pages of debate ftw)

hanz WERE DID YOU GO

even though the topic when into a tangent ima try to get it back on track

[czrk147]

i believe columbus never sailed the ocean blue in 1942, godzilla attacked tokyo, we went to teh moon, dinosaurs were birds, darwin named iguanas, that i exist, or moose can kill people, and the damn fact ea is closing the servers for good.

[NexsusX (Fury)]

dude completely off tangent of the debate

[The Oracle]

As a Christian, I believe what someone else has already said, which is that the Bible is the Word of God and it is his way of communicating with us.

[The Oracle]

However, even though I have my beliefs, I am an open person to hear other people's ideas. I am not one of these to attack and try to 'convert' others; I believe that we all have a choice in what we believe and that must be honored, no matter what.

I enjoy debates about religion and philosophy and just talking about it as well.

[BulgarianMenace]

LOL AT THE POLLL

[NexsusX (Fury)]

lol no one wants to be stigmatized even though the person who actually does one isn't shown. or they believe both are in separable which unfortunately they can

@ oracle unfortunately it is not the word of god but the interpretation of gods word people tend to forget the fact that "GOD", not only in judeao Christan religions but in many others, is a perfect being he would not have the need of language or even if he did have it we only understand the word in English( or what ever language that bible is written in) which means things "could be lost in translation" when the bible is reprinted retranslated ( which has been done many times over the life times of kings, presidents, dictators etc etc.)

/// ever wondered why there are so many versions of the bible? king James version ect////

how do you know what has been told to you is really the word of god. what evidence can you give that Joe blow didn't write it ( or rather the equivalent in those times)

the idea of god as a creator is something that should not be touched by humans for ( as it is a perfect being we do not have the capacity of understanding even a fraction of god as we are imperfect beings)

are we so arrogant to say that we have the best understanding of god? what makes us so right? how do we know we are in the right for there are many religions in the world that pre date the word of the Judeo Christan god?

These are questions people should be asking for the moment they let themselves believe what they are told is an actuality things like ....

Orson wells the war of the worlds happens in which a few take advantage of the situation which in turn they gain fame glory money and a place where they can situate themselves and their families for life ( aka the catholic church system) which was built on the blood and money of kings, the common people and those who wouldn't accept the catholic way of life (before the Protestant reformation)

now you can come and say well my religion is catholic but thats not the point I'm trying to make what this topic was really about is to get people to think am i being lied to by those who i look up to.

if you really look at it religion serves a great purpose by forming great societies and regulating how a society should function (thy shall not kill, thy shall not lust for thy neighbors property etc etc etc, always respect your father)

in todays world the sciences do provide many of things but its not to be mistaken that they are perfect for they are always changing and even i find myself questioning the very fabric of this idea of science. things are always being disproved and things that change can never be reliable sources of information.