Lit.Org - a community for readers and writers Advanced Search
 




Average Rating
1

(1 votes)


RatingRated by
1dao05

You must login to vote



I would like to know who on lit.org is anti-Bush,who liked Kerry better, and who is for abortion. Please tell me.


If you are wondering what I am I am not going to tell you till I get some comments.








PS who believes in evolution?



Comments

The following comments are for "ANTI-BUSH?"
by angelface

Questions
I am "anti-Bush." He's made blunder after blunder and appears on track to commit even more mistakes. I believe the U.S. is and will be worse off.

Kerry would have made an excellent president.

I don't like abortion but I think it should be a legal option until something effective is in place, for example, meaningful sex education and safe birth control available to anyone once they reach puberty.

Evolution is a fact though it doesn't answer life's spiritual questions. For instance, in the last 200 years we have evolved in physical stature - height, weight, etc.

( Posted by: gomarsoap [Member] On: January 31, 2005 )

angel
As a Canadian, I can't stand Bush, can't stand Kerry, and I believe abortion is immoral, but that it would do more harm than good to make it illegal. I realize that will make me unpopular, but there you are.

And only an ignorant halfwitted ninny doesn't "believe" in evolution. It's like not "believing" in gravity. Honestly, why is this such an issue with Americans? Don't you have schools?

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: January 31, 2005 )

Bushwhacked

I believe in evolution but there are individual exceptions. Political opinions are posted all over this site- look 'em up. See you in writingforums.com.

s

( Posted by: drsoos [Member] On: January 31, 2005 )

Come out of bushes...
Good answer Soos.

angelface: Read what writers write. Read what they (we) say. Do you believe everything you read?

B

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: January 31, 2005 )

Bush/Can't pass this up
This doesn't seem to be an article to me. A questionaire maybe? We have to live with who(m)ever is president, so your question is really irrelevant. We have to live with abortion too, so that question is moot, especially to those of us who are anti-abortion.

I must admit to being one of those ignorant halfwitted ninnys who believe in the fact of creation. Who but God could create everything with the appearance of age in the beginning? As to Gomar's Evolution of getting bigger the last 200 years; we eat better these days Gomar, it's as simple as that. And, we have the most powerful army in the world to keep it that way.

What a country!

williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: January 31, 2005 )

We're eating "better"..?..
Fluoride, antibiotics, hormones (HGH), steroids, semisythetics and/or a plethora of other synthetic (MAN-MADE) substances couldn't have anything to do with growth changes over past 40 or 50 years, could they?..If "eating better" means getting FATTER, then I suppose Charlie is correct. Eat some processed animal flesh and enjoy the "facts"..We haven't "EVOLVED" very far.

angelface: Evolution?...More like De-evolution.


B

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

egad
The rest of the world find it terrifying that one of the most ignorant nations on Earth has the most powerful military on Earth! There are exceptions to that general ignorance of course -- like williamhill! He's cool in my books.

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

vegeburgers&warmongers
If it weren't for the invention of eyeglasses, it is a fact that longivity wouldn't be as long. Why hasn't man's eyes "evolved"? What I should have said about eating better was that we are more Prosperous in this country over the past 200 years which allows us to choose our diet and consequently grow at the rate our feedbag allows.
OK, you got me on the military thing, but I would rather have those guys guarding me with guns and airplanes than look up one morning to find myself on an airplane bound for a tall building rendevous,no? Or better yet, maybe go to a voting booth and find a guy there ready to blow me to smithereens for marking a ballot. Jorge Luis is OK to sit on the fence politically and morally, even religeously if he wants, thats why this is America. I do take issue however, with the catergorizing of conservative Christians as intolerant just because of their beliefs. That is an easy thing to say if you are a fence sitter with ears aflame. By the way, Clinton was impeached,he just wasn't convicted by the Senate. Look at the evolution of sex in the past seven years because of Slick Willie. I wonder what he will evolve as.......

Charlie

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Anti-Bush, but...
being anti-Bush does not make someone pro-Kerry, or even pro-Democrat. being from the UK I have no vote in the US elections, despite the US President's influence in UK politics; if I'd had a vote it would have gone to a third party.

Abortion - depends on circumstance.

Evolution - I believe in it as a probability but not as an absolute, as we're still debating and discovering new data about it all the time - much like any other scientific theory.

(speaking of which, for those who dismiss evolution as "just a theory", I would like to point out that gravity, too, is "just a theory"...)

Jonathan.

( Posted by: JonnyT [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

JonnyT
Good points, Jonny. Thye fact of evolution isn't in dispute, as the evidence for it is overwhelming. There are still disputes about its mechanisms and some of the particulars, and that's as it should be. There are still debates about gravity, after all.

The "just a theory" line seems to be convincing to many people down south, and in parts of Canada, too. Again, I have to wonder about education. Do these people not understand what a scientific theory is, and the rigorous tests a hypothesis must undergo in order to become an accepted theory?

To some extent, you can't blame people for their ignorance, because others had a repsonsibility to educate them as they grew up. On the other hand, now that they're adults, they need to get their heads out of their asses and take some responsibility for their own minds.

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

re: south and evolution
I'm from the south and we were tought about Evolution even in grade school. Evolution is objected to by religion here, but not sweepingly across the board. I know of churches who say evolution and religion can agree with each other.

To answer the question raised, yes, I believe in evolution. Though the facts support it with or without my belief in them. As has been said, we could debate the extent of evolution, but I believe it exists.

( Posted by: Chrispian [Admin] On: February 1, 2005 )

Mr. Hill
...what do you mean, "we?" It's a little arrogant to assume I was referring only to people in the U.S.

JorgeLuis a "fence-sitter?" Seems to me he stated his thoughts rather clearly.

Uh-oh. I can hear the footsteps of the lit.org police approaching to sweep us off to the Forums!

So, "angelface" - you've got some comments. Isn't it time to reveal what you're on about?

( Posted by: gomarsoap [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Viper...
I think the problem comes with people's definitions of the word "theory":
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=theory

In the context of evolution I (and most others) would, from that list, go with the first definition, which is as follows:
"A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."

Others, though, go with the sixth:
"An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture"

For individuals whose definition of the word "theory" can be boiled down to "made up", it's hardly surprising that they find it so easy to disregard the theory of evolution.

Essentially, evolution is a fact. The *theory* is explaining why it happens, e.g. natural selection, divine intervention, random acts of buggery, etc...

Jonathan.

( Posted by: JonnyT [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

re: forums
gomarsoap, as long as it stays on topic (it seems to be) and we don't start assaulting each other we'll keep it going right here, if that's alright with you ;)

This cleary isn't an article and would be better suited for the forums, but it's already here so keep it clean and I have no problem with it continuing.

( Posted by: Chrispian [Admin] On: February 1, 2005 )

Crowe and JonnyT
Good work, JonnyT. Thanks for sharing those.

Crowe -- I didn't mean "south" as in "southern US". I meant it as in "South of Canada". A sweeping generalization, but as long as we don't become too literalistic about it, it serves to make a point. Clearly, if we were going to have an actual debate, I would have been clearer! Sorry if anyone was misled.

To be honest, I've traveled all through the US and haven't noticed much difference between the "south" and the "north" from my perspective. Maybe you only see the difference if you're from one of the other regions, and perhaps the difference pertains less to real characteristics than it does to a need to define oneself by excluding an other. Everyone does that to soem extent.

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

whill:"Eyeglasses" and miniskirts...
Why haven't "eyes 'evolved'"? (with glasses).. For the same reason cardiovascular strength/health hasn't been enhanced by the golf cart... Will also writes: "Look at the evolution of sex in the past seven years because of Slick Willy" Do you refer to FOX's miniskirted, booted, hottie-blondes placed in middle seat for higher ratings? As far as how Clinton will "evolve", his middle name is "Jefferson".. Thomas had his slave mistresses, as did many of our "founding fathers"... Maybe you are on to something..NOT.

angelface: By the way, I'm FOR the hotties on FOX, so I guess I am for "Evolution"...Thanks Charlie, for helping me decide...

B

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Collective Consciousness- Labelling
Demeter: I agree, it is "complicated"..Consciousness level is a tricky thing. You can be living in mode of ignorance or mode of passion and appear highly intelligent. (Creative writing doesn't take a higher cosciousnees level, just a talent)This is not the same as having knowledge. Transcending this mundane material madness is no simple task. "We" can dummy down cuisine (just name favorite fast-food purveyor).."We" can dummy down the geo-political issues (Used to be a "Commie" under every bed..Now it's a "terrorist").."We" can NOT dummy down Self-realization. Karma has a way of dealing with simplified rationalizations and explanations. Labelling is part of problem and gives little, with respect to finding answers.

angelface: What say you?

Robert William

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

My turn
Ok, I can't help myself. I'm going to be brave and put my little comments on this one, or opinions whatever you want to call them. Now, I may be just a small town American country girl, but I think my beliefs and opinions are just as important as the next persons, so here I go.

I am pro Bush... I think he has been one of the more honest and straight forward presidenst that we've had in a while, if you compare him to others. He does what he says and he says what he means. He doesn't beat around the bush, cover up, sugar coat, blah blah blah. And in my books that's says something about his honesty and integrity. He stands up for his country, and for his people. I support him as president.
However, this does not mean that I agree with everything that he does or says. He is human too, he makes mistakes. But all in all I think he's done a pretty good job.

On to Kerry, personally I didn't like the buggar. Personally, I don't think he knew wheather he was coming or going. I don't think he would have been a very STRONG president, or a very leaderly one. Again, this is just my personal opinion.

Abortion, I am against it. My religion is against it, but that is not why I am. I do have a religion, but that doesn't mean that I am sinless, or that I practice every word that it preaches. I do have a mind to think and act for myself, and if this makes any sense, I do believe in some things that my religion would have me not. The reason that I AM against abortion, is simple. The moment that baby's heart beats, it is a seperate entity than your own. If you don't want the child, there are so many out there who cannot have children of their own and would gladly adopt. I'm not saying that it would be easier to give birth to the baby, but it would be certainly more moral, and kind, no matter what your belief.

Evolution, I think is hogwash. This may make me an enemy or 2, but oh well I guess. Viper my dear, evolution IS still in debate. I debate it. How can one look around and not belive in Creation is something that I don't understand. To me, the evolution theary is just too far out, and too made up sounding to be anything but something to laugh at. Some think that we who believe in Creation are to be laughed at, and that's ok because it's your free will to have your own opinions. This reminds me of a debate class incident when I was in high school...I was debating FOR Creation, and the other side was debating AGAINST Creation. I got so worked up and hot under the collar that I almost punched the girl. And I'm just a sweet lil thing...tee hee hee...

Anyway, I've enjoyed reading other's comments on this. I've nodded in agreement at times, shook my head in shame, and even had a laugh or 2...would certainly like to know who and why this was started, and what point there really is to it all. But interesting none the less

Reba

( Posted by: Reba [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Reba
Of course you'r entitled to your opinion, Reba -- farm girl or not (I'm actually a farm boy from the Canadian prairies).

Funny, I've never met a Creationist who knew the first thing about evolution.

And yes, technically there are still people who debate evolution, but they're ignorant. There's still a Flat Earth Society too. Their debate doesn't matter because their position, like the Creationist position, is ignorant, logically and conceptually incoherent, and demonstrably false.

A qualifier: just because someone is ignorant in this regard doesn't mean tehy're ignorant as a whole. They may know a lot about all sorts of other things. I, for instance, am completely ignorant when it comes to sewing (crafts in general actually -- I'm in awe of those people), pharmacology, auto mechanics, molecular chemistry . . .. It's a long list!

But that's another debate. Maybe I'll post one of my articles on this matter, since Creationism is one of my specializations. Seemed natural, since I used to be one (still feel kinda filthy)!

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Bush and my imput
In regards to Bush, I believe he is possibly the most dishonest president we've had in a long time. His lies about Iraq are well documented and plentiful. His attempts to create a crisis of Social Security is equally deceitful. He gave money (100 mill. to 200 mill) to the lumber industry cut down trees to prevent forest fires. This is sort of like killing the baby to prevent child abuse especially since forest fires spread due to dry leaves and branches not large living trees. I could go on, but there's no point.

In regards to abortion, I wish the republicans cared as much about living people as they do for a fertilized egg. I mean once you're born you're on your own...no medicaid, no education, no clean air, no clean water, no protections from industry, no rights to the legal system, no protections from incompetent doctors and no real say in our government. You should just stand on your own and pay your taxes...but don't be gay or have an abortion....give me a break.

As for evolution, I don't even know how it could be open for debate. If you do not see it, you must be blind. The world evolves... it changes... It doesn't mean there is no god...it could very well mean it was designed to evolve...but to argue that evolution doesn't exist....well, I believe that to be a little foolish.

I do have one question about religion and religious organizations...why is it that almost every one who spreads the word(and I'm talking about organized religion, tele-evangelists, etc.) also always has their hand out. Further, if these groups were so "credible" and "kind" would they need to take so much from so many who just happen to be poor...especially when you consider how wealthy these groups are...I mean if you are religious, why not just step outside into god's church, not a man-made one, and say thanks...if god is great and humane, isn't that enough?

Pythagoras

( Posted by: Pythagoras [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Ignorance
Took you longer than I expected, Viper9. Just for clarification purposes, I never said I was a 'farm girl'. I said I was a 'country girl'. Big difference, Bein' a farm girl, I imagine, would live on a farm, and a country girl would live out in the country. Ok, your sarcasm is rubbing off on me. And also to clarify, I should mention that I totally believe in adaptation. People, animals, plants and the like, can and do adapt to their environments over a course of time. Adaptation, however, is not the same as evolution. I do not believe that we came from monkeys, or blobs of goo. I do not believe that there was suddenly out of no where a "big bang" and poof, LIFE. Only because I personally can't find any common sense to it. To me, it just makes perfect common sense that we were created, everything was created by a higher power, or being whom I choose to call God. I also believe that God gave us the ability and gift of free choice and opinion on our beliefs. Therefor I take no offense whatsoever to being called ignorant. In fact, it made me giggle. That is how confident I am in my Faith. And it's good to see how confident you are in Your Faith and belief. It is sometimes hard to understand another's point of view, especially when it is the exact opposite of your own. This is good excersice for my mind, something it needs since I've noticed it going to mush as of late.
Anywho, (typical country girl expression), call me a bull-headed ignoranamous, but I guess that's just me...keep it going
Reba

( Posted by: Reba [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Creation v. evolution
Viper, I'd be glad to have that debate sometime.
OK Gomar, (Have it your way) World birthrates and health,(and size for that matter) have gone up. But if you believe the Bible as a pure book of history, we ain't nearly as big as the pre-flood giants 4000 years ago. And while we carry our ages into our seventy's now, we still don't live as long as Methusalah (963 years). Evolution is fine as a theory for those without faith in the Creator, And I understand that I cannot explain all the mysteries of the universe, but one thing is clear to me, We think with the brains of mankind, not with the mind of a perfect Creator. So we already are at a disadvantage when it comes to explaining how things evolved. All I know is this, God (whoever He may be) made us the dominant species of this planet, and that in itself is not insignificant. We can talk of string theory and when viability becomes a child,and when too much beef is bad for you, but in the end you cannot create one more hair on your head nor extend your life a day longer than the One who made everything determines. It takes a more tremendous amount of faith to believe in the theory of evolution than it takes to believe in God. We do not run eternity,it runs us.

We get caught up in which leader is good or which one is bad, but in the end it doesn't matter, because they don't have control. Hating or liking one or the other is irrelevant. There will be leaders until the world ends.
One more little thing about evolution, The Dodo bird and the Passenger pigeon became extinct by our hand. Wouldn't you think if creatures were smart enough to evolve,that they would learn to duck and cover? Yet, we find ways to destroy them anyway.There is no evidence of evolvement, just adaptation. those are two wholly different things. And I'm not arrogant.

williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Talking Snakes, Too...
It is true certain species have not been able to survive our determination to kill them. But to say "there is no evidence of evolvement, just adaption", begs the question: At which Universities did your advanced studies of Biology, Phylogeny and Ecology bring you to this conclusion?

angelface: Are you happy now?

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Debate
Fun. I'm totally willing to engage in debate with anyone who's done their homework. Make sure you've studied evolution and understand it. Actually study it instead of listening to bullshit hearsay from preachers who fancy themselves scientists.

Then, if you're still willing, we'll enter into a debate.

I've spent years studying Creationist literature and evolution and will not enter into debate with someone who isn't up to speed.

Sound fair?

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Red v Blue? Come on now!!
Well, I think the person posting this is trying to gain support for an arguement rather than gain insight to base a decision off of. Judging by their tone, they sound very closed minded, especially in regards to their staunch determination to conceal the motivation behind posting thier question.

Perhaps a conservative trying to load up on amunition before a debate?

Perhaps a disgruntled someone trying to confirm a stereotype? i.e. poets are "anti bush."


Personally, I'd rather not have any man -or woman- in charge. I'd prefer a perfect society where people are their own leaders; not the weak people we are; obedeint little pawns all relying on their leaders. And in order to survive one not need live a life of hipocrasy.

but alas, back to the world of reality, where it stinks of cold, hard, meaningless life. Stupid shapers just building us up so we can fall down.


sorry, for the lengthly response. And for once, please don't turn this conversation into a red v blue debate - please; just once?



( Posted by: dao05 [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

red and blue
Better than black and blue, at least.

Let's all just come together and make purple!

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

flying walking snakes
Bobby, the snakes curse was that it would henceforth crawl on its belly for letting Satan use it to beguile man(Adam & Eve). The common belief was that the snake had legs and possibly was winged too. It makes sense given that there is evidence on some snakes that they at one time had legs. That is Bible history of 6000 years ago. Moses happened to be the author.

Viper, I haven't listened to a preacher in twenty years. I don't develop theory either. I can hang with you on Dr. Leakey and his excavations in Africa and France. I know a few other things too but it's been awhile since I last debated. I'll accept your debate proposal if you also don't rely on bullshit professors who change their theory with every change of the societal winds. And if you try to bring up carbon dating, It would be a huge mistake on your part. You must also be willing to accept the fact that "God" even though his name has been lost for centuries is a benevolent all omnicient, all omnipotent, and all omnipresent being with an agenda on His mind. If you can't do that, the discussion would probably be unproductive. And while your'e at it, would you please find the missing link? It seems I cannot find it anywhere.

williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 1, 2005 )

Subject.
I'm normally not one for self-promotion, but I have a piece on my political beliefs posted on this site. Check my list for Anti-American, if you're interested.

Those who do not believe in evolution are quite obviously under-evolved.

( Posted by: Spider [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

unproductive
William, I don't think we're going to get anywhere. Leakey's work has been outdated since the Beatles had mop tops, and you comments about "bullshit professors," carbon dating, and "the missing link" reveal a profound ignorance about how science works and what evolution is. It seems that you've already got your information from the poser preachers (whether you knew they were preachers or not), and don't have the attitude necessary to actually learn something. Sorry, bud.

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

Two big problems
Religion has two big problems from my perspective. One, history has shown that religion has always been used to manipulate and control the masses...and it is still being used in this manner today. The egyptian leaders for instance claimed to be gods (or related to their god as offsprings) and ruled their people based on the fear of their wrath. Almost every society has used "god's words" to impart and enforce their morality on the masses. As people are more inclined to obey the word of god as opposed to that of man...even if the word of god is filled with man's failings (hate, prejudice, etc.). Even a rudimentary study of history should enable you to see through this disguise.

Problem two is "ego." When one considers the shear size of the universe, it would be utter egotism to believe that all of this was created for "us." After all, each of our lifetimes is a blink in proportion to the lifespan of other intergalactic bodies... Further, you would travel at the speed of light to traverse our universe at all. We don't live long enough to even explore our own environment...so how could it possibly be created for us? Isn't this like a flea thinking that Europe was designed for him?

Pythagoras

( Posted by: pythagoras [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

evolution
Pythagoras and Viper, I don't remember talking about religion as a debate technique. I do recall using the Bible as an historical reference guide. You (insert applicable names) assume that all religeous "preachers" influence my opinions and then you further dismiss very well educated men who became preaches later in their lives. In other words, it seems that you discredit discourse unless it is with someone that you happen to agree with. You further insult them(and me) by calling them ignorant. In any proposed debate on any subject, let the words stand on their own and see who prevails.

Moreso Viper, I used Leakey as an example of how the theory of evolution is evolving. What is seen as right today by scientists and archeologists may be disproven tomorrow by other learned men and women. It happens all the time. You want people to accept your theory, but are unwilling to have an open mind about anyone's theory as long as it has religeous overtones based in historical documentation. How unfair. It seems that debate is not what you want, but a blunt instrument to whack people over the head with to get them to agree with you. How Neanderthal of you.lol Such is the evolution of evolution. You have come full circle.

No harm, no foul
williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

re: William
I in no way meant to question your intelligence, and I'm sorry if what I wrote came out that way...I believe if you re-read my comment you will see that I am just expressing my view...in what I believe is a respectful manner.

I do believe that preachers influence the views of others...after all, isn't that part of the job?

And I don't have a problem with faith...my grudge is more with organized religion and the purveyors of it. I just don't see why poor people need to go to a man-made building and give what little money they have to an organization that is wealthy beyond reason, when they can just step outside now and again and say thanks. Further, if said organizations are really spreading the word of god, wouldn't he provide? Why do they need the down-trodden's cash?

lastly, do I believe in god? No...I recently heard a scientist say that science cannot disprove god, "...but when you study the immenseness of the universe and its workings, God seems very improbable." I guess that's the side of the fence that I stand on...you are welcome to yours, but when someone tries to guide you, while sticking their hand in your pocket, you may want to question their motives.

Pythagoras

( Posted by: Pythagoras [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

re to everything
I did not know I had all these comments. They did not get sent to my email sorry I have not written. I voted for bush only because he was better than Kerry
I am DEFINTLY not for abortion that is one of the things I hate worse. I guess I'm one ofe those halfwitted ignorant ninnies because I believe God made everything even scientists are starting to believe that God made everything.Reba I like your point of view exept I'm not so keen about Bush.I have not read all the comments so pardon if I havent answered any questions.Sorry JorgeLuis but if you voted for kerry You might want to have second thoughts. Thank you everyone for your comments now you will probably go and think I am weird.

( Posted by: angelface [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

This is the problem!
The problem: imputation of motives and beliefs not backed up by what I said. Happens a lot, especially when dealing with religious people.

Look, first, you've already committed yourself to a gross error of judgment by using the Bible as "a historical reference guide". As a book of spiritual advice, it may have one or two positive aspects. As a historical guide, it's unreliable (to put it as charitably as I can).

Second, evolution isn't a problem for Christianity in general. It's only a problem for literalists. That's why opposition to it has been a phenomenon confined, for the most part, to certain Protestant sects.

Third, it doesn't matter how "well educated" someone is. All that matters is the reasoning and evidence they use to support their position. There have been (and are still) some well-educated people who happen to be nuts or so beholden to a particular ideology (religious, political, or otherwise), that they pervert their thinking in its service.

I began my studies as a Creationist. Raised Pentacostal, joined a fundamentalist Mennonite sect at 14, and I entered a Religious Studies program with the sincere intention of heading to Div school once I was done. I started, in other words, with a full committment to the Creationist position. Clearly, I don't just respect the opinions of people that I agree with or I wouldn't have reached this point.

As I said earlier, all that matters is the reasoning and evidence behind a belief (or judgement, or theory). The belief itself is beside the point. And Creationism doesn't hold up. I came to this conclusion after spending many years of my life studying it. I've studied the propaganda on both sides, and I've studied the actual science. I call you ignorant in this regard because you clearly aren't aware of, or don't understand, the relevant information and arguments.

Leakey was controversial even when there was a (pretty large) contingent of people inclined to trust him. More to the point, however, his discredit is an example of science at work. Of course science changes -- new evidence comes in, new interpretations are discovered, new relationships uncovered, and so forth. Nobody would be doing science if it didn't continually grow. Leakey was discredited by scientists using scientific methodology. In other words, the process worked just as it was supposed to.

Change or not, we will never find ourselves in the position of saying, "I guess the world is flat after all!" or "I guess we were wrong about gravity all this time. Everything floats." Why? Because some ideas and theories are so well-supported that we have no reason at all to believe they'll ever be overturned. Others are not. They could be wrong, they could be right, but the jury's still out.

Still other ideas, such as Creationism and geocentrism, have been so thoroughly discredited that no educated (about this particular thing, not in general), intelligent, and honest person takes them seriously.

I am, as I stated, perfectly willing to debate people who have done their homework. But I've done this many times before -- once in public, in front of a hostile audience -- on both sides of the fence. What's frustrating is that the Creationists seem hell bent on not doing the work necessary to understand what they're talking about. They seem to enjoy their ignorance. So I end up having to spend the time allotted to the debate educating the Creationists about the relevant data, what a theory is, the history of their own position (most Creationists don't seem to know much about the history of their own position), and in general trying to bring them to the level they SHOULD have been at when they started the debate.

Because of the paucity of their education and their hostile attitude to learning, it's a lost cause. That's been my experience with Creationists over the years. Maybe you're not like that, but I saw that same attitude flare up in your own posts, so I don't feel optimistic.

My intention is not to insult you. I have a lot of respect for your work. Please try to read my previous posts without an attitude -- try reading them in a friendly tone. Then, I hope, you'll understand my intentions.

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

Master Lilia speaks...
I'm smiling...

The word "reality" is derived from roots "thing" (res) and "think" (revi). "Reality" means "everything you can think about". This is not "that-which-is". No idea can capture "truth" in the sense of that-which-is. -D. Bohm

Robert William

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

OOPS
Sorry dao05 if I sounded like that I certainly did not mean to and I defintly am not trying to start a argument I was just in a hurry when I wrote it.



Angelface

( Posted by: angelface [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

Grand debate
I will not weigh in other than to say -- I'm enormously impressed by the quality of thought and the ability to translate it to word. Viper, you should be getting paid to do this.
Side note: I hung out with a couple Mennonites (as much as one can "hang out" w/Mennonites) during college and found them to be a wholly likeable lot.

( Posted by: brad [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

angelface: That's all you have to say?
angelface: I'm underwhelmed.

B

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

anti- bush started, continuing dialogue-
Demeter- I disagree (hi BTW, nice to see ya) This has been a very interesting dialogue, started by an extremely simple few questions. I too wonder what the motivation. You can look at my posts to see my opinions, or if I have enough wine, and time, tonight, I may espouse- ( aren't you all riddled with anticipation? ;) )
XO -Elizabeth

( Posted by: emaks [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

Oh!
I wondered where everybody went.

( Posted by: drsoos [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

Someone's advocate?
Wow, so many great things brought up to comment on. How does one choose where to start?

I thoroughly enjoyed reading through this and seeing so many extremes in belief. This is great! People should learn to enjoy challenging questions - particularly when they fly in the face of their own - not be afraid to entertain them, and not to be closed-minded and defensive as a knee-jerk reaction.

Even the Bible says not to be ignorant but to have an answer for why and what you believe.

Christians are not asked to check their brains at the door. Saying, "It just comes down to a matter of faith" (although there's a core value in that as a main tenant of Christianity)is lazy and easier than research and genuine contemplation.

I would rather offer some food for thought, than say what my stance is. After all, what matter does it make what I believe? All that matters is reality and truth. My perception of it is of no consequence.

Here goes:(oops, an opinon?)

Abortion? How about partial birth abortion?

To me... this would only be a real issue if birth control was not a viable option.

Where does responsibility come into anything anymore?

It is my body and my decision to have or not to have a child. Okay. When have I already made my decision and when is it no longer my body we are talking about?

Let's see, I make a decision to have sex and take the chance of creating a baby. Oops, I created one. I guess I made the decision. I am now responsible for the life I created. Not my parents, not my "village". I know women who have had 7 or more abortions. This is not a poor thing in a bad place. This is sheer irresponsibility. These are not ignorant women who need better sex education.

When the scissors reach in to chop up "the fetus" (as we have seen on film), the baby attempts to "swim" away from the sharp instrument.

As it is harmed, it flinches in pain. Isn't photography wonderful for dispelling myths? So, if it is the baby that flinches, the baby that bleeds, the baby that dies, tell me again how this is about my body?

Partial birth abortion? Let's film the partial birth abortion of a puppy. Let's pull the head out, live, thrust scissors into the brain stem and continue the heinous procedure until completed. Then, let's air that on t.v. Then let's say there's nothing wrong with it. How long would it take to hear the outcry? How long before someone determines that it is not humane, and the owner of the dog needs to take responsibility for the dog's breeding (meant literally)to prevent this kind of unexcuseable procedure.

Then let's count how many dogs are killed in this country each week (using the different forms of abortion - I'm still waiting to hear of the humane way it must be being done somewhere that they are keeping a secret because people can't be that callous)- if they equalled the number of babies killed. Any reader here able to provide the numbers for me? If so, please respond.

I forget the name of the woman who wrote the autobiographical book "The Scarlet Lady", but she made some good points to ponder.

She opened up a great number of abortion clinics after Rowe vs Wade, and made a killing (sorry - no play on words intended)doing so. Some of the things she said stick with me:

1. They didn't pay taxes and the government never went after them for tax evasion. Why?

2. They maimed many, even killed some women. They never got sued - why? Abortion is about covering something up, you can't do that if you try to expose something like this, so nothing is ever done about it.

3. It was a business about money - not meeting a need of the mother. They gave free planned parenthood counseling to women with unplanned pregnancies. She said it was nothing but a sales-pitch for the abortion - not an objective presentation of facts and options.

4. In one wing in the hospital she worked in, tiny pre-mature babies were born. Entire staffs of professionals did everything they could to save these babies. Down the hallway, live, aborted babies who were stronger than they should have been, were left, crying in a basin until neglect would end it. They were not murderers. They just didn't help them live.

The difference between these babies? The unwanted one was a clump of cells. The wanted one was a baby.

There was more. But this is enough to ponder, isn't it?

I look forward to posting and reading more thought-provoking items here.

Felicia

( Posted by: feliciastone [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

bush q & a- hi demeter
I'm wondering now what I disagreed with, Demeter- usually you and I seem to be fairly in synch. I'd have to go back and read so instead let me say, I may have been right at the time, but that's a common excuse... ;)
From Viper to Wm Hill, this has been a lively exchange,
Thanks angelface, whatever your motives. This has produced a bit of introspection-
Elizabeth

( Posted by: emaks [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

Robin-droos-ANGEL...
Hey Angel, WOW! I'm with droos... actually, most interesting at the least. What say droos? I'm
cool with what say not. I love a good debate as
long as there is good crowd contol, I will admit
I am impressed with the comments and the intellects behind them...Robin...

( Posted by: Robinbird [Member] On: February 2, 2005 )

Partial Birth ha-ha's
You make a strong case about partial birth abortion...its terrible...it almost makes you wonder why so many liberals would be for it. After all, the liberals paint themselves as the ones looking out for the young, poor and old, while the republicans mostly represent the wealthy.

Well, I'll let you in on a little secret. Democrats and liberals are against partial birth abortion as well...in fact, legislation to ban it passes through congress every few years...however, the republicans always add clauses to it...that they know will prevent it from passing.

Tee-hee, isn't that funny? The party that is so against abortion is the one that actually perpetuates it, and all these people who hate abortion keep voting republican...trying to ban partial birht abortion, and the republicans just keep it going....I'm sorry, but I find that humorous...they're so friggen deceptive...lol.

Why would the republicans do this? The cynic in me says they need these wedge issues to stay in power. They realize that if they didn't have abortion and gay marriage to get their base angry, their base may actually look at their voting history and the flaws in their policy and stop voting for them.

But hey, you're right partial birth abortion is terrible...it should be banned...I just wish the republicans would allow it to be.

Pythagoras

( Posted by: Pythagoras [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

Abortion
Okay, I said last night that I wouldn't post any more comments for a few days. Yet here I am. I'm a liar (sob)!

Jorgeluis made some good points. We sometimes forget that not only are most Christians not literalists, but that most people are not Christians. There are a variety of religious ideas regarding life, its origin, and its development (or lack thereof). My motto is "Put up or shut up," so I'm not inclined to accept those religious ideas, but I'm not against those who do as long as they don't try to present their religion as fact.

I do think that evidence and clear reasoning can have an effect even on religious people, though. It isn't as though religious people have lost their minds. They're still there! After all, it was rational analysis that led me to leave the Creationist camp. It was a slow process (I resisted for several years), but it worked in the end.

Pythagoras is right about partial birth abortions. They're not endorsed by any major party, and politics gets in the way of banning them. I certainly agree with Felicia that they're horrible. As I said above (WAY above!), I don't think abortions are ethical. But that's consistent with my ethical position, since I'm a pacifist! So I'm against killing Iraqi babies as well.

However, let's be careful. LOTS of businesses don't pay taxes, and go for many years without being caught. Some are never caught. There's no reason to suspect a "tax evasion conspiracy"!

Regarding abortion clinics existing for the purpose of making money: that's the primary motivation behind your medical system. Again, the problem isn't confined to abortion clinics. Without a socialist medical system, you're going to have predators in your clinics who take advantage of people for money. Plain and simple.

Finally, yes, fetuses flinch when you hurt them, and they pull away. That's instinctive. There's no reason to assume conscious awareness there -- microscopic lifeforms do the same thing. Those in favour of abortion don't argue that fetuses aren't alive, nor that they aren't human. Everyone concedes that. What's at issue is whether the fetus is a person -- and that's a moral/legal classification, not a biological one.

We don't give a "right to life" to every sentient organism (organisms that can feel pleasure and pain). We don't even give it to people who live in other countries if their interests are thought to conflict with our own.

So we can't use sentience as a basis for opposing abortion unless we're consistent. If we're going to argue that we shouldn't kill fetuses because they are sentient, we need to concede the same for other organisms (even if they aren't fuzzy and cute!) and other humans. And if we're not willing to do that, we need to explain what the relevant difference is.

After all, given the reasoning used regarding the war in Iraq, one could argue that abortionists are merely "liberating" fetuses, in the name of bringing freedom to their dark lives!

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

It's Casting Pearls
jorgeluis, it is so appropriate that you would half-ass use a Biblical quote to refer to people like myself who actually believe the book. Since you can't quote it correctly, here is one that shows God's intent(agenda) directly: God is not willing that any should perish, but all come to repentence. It is true that most of the world is not Christian, But when you add the Jews and the Moslems into the mix, it nearly becomes a majority of people who belive in a literal God and creation. I also never said that I believe the literal point of view of the Bible, no one can because some of the scripture is figurative.

When this discussion began, it was about (for my part) evolution. It has devolved into other realms that evokes more emotion than debate. Some people accept evolution by faith and someone else's interpretation of fact. That's ok by me. other folks believe the literal account of creation which in the end ,makes a lot more sense to me. When a man says that evolution is a million or billion year process, he seems to be limiting God's ability to do as he chooses. Since none of us were around when the "beginning" happened, it is arrogant for anyone to say definitively what happened and when it happened.
It seems to me that most people who take the evolution path have an axe to grind with the creator because of some wrong perpetuated by some religeous letdown during the course of their lives, and they just can't reconcile it with God. They get angry and look for alternatives, maybe just to spite Him. I've seen it a lot. I've seen it in this discussion as well. I believe what I believe simply because it takes far less faith and energy to believe it as fact than the convoluted theories of Charles Darwin and his followers.The point is, we will all find out the truth when we leave this world, I'm ready, are you?

Casting pearls,
williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

Williamhill
Now Williamhill, that's quite enough. You're making it difficult for rational people to respect you. "Casting pearls" (before swine)? Come on now -- we all left grade school a long time ago.

Your latest post indicates that you haven't paid any attention to what I (or others) have posted. You've come at this with an attitude, "an axe to grind" and a lot of erroneous assumptions and preconceptions. You haven't listened to what's been said.

When you're ready to think like a grown-up, I'll be waiting for you! Until then, I'll keep reading your poetry and pretending I never caught a glimpse of what lies behind it.

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

Can it be?
I really wish someone would give me some numbers to work with. No one knows how many abortions are performed in a week here in the good old US?

My point being, "women will maimed themselves to be rid of the baby if abortion's illegal"... are we using some old news here to support our point?

The motivation for taking the risk of shoving a hanger up your cervix simply isn't there like it was when having sex and being pregnant out of wedlock was taboo. Birth control is even free for the taking for most women.

How many women that you know personally would sit on a hanger instead of taking birth control?

I'm sure it was not the same situation when a puritan became pregnant than now in our current society. When was the last time you gasped when you heard some single person was pregnant?

I'm not trying to take away anyone's rights to have an abortion, I'm just saying, please engage brains and consciences (use birthcontrol if you don't want a baby) before wielding the abortion sword. Let's get these crazy, unacceptable numbers down. The abuse of abortion is unacceptable.

And... let's just say that tomorrow it became illegal. Let's say 30,000 babies a week die in the US by abortion. Do you think 30,000 women would die by the hanger in a week, or would someone have an epiphany?

Just food for thought...

Felicia

( Posted by: feliciastone [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

billyhill
God's been good to me so far -- no complaints!! Still, I believe in evolution.
Brad

( Posted by: brad [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

viper
You crack me up man. I don't share my pacifier with anyone. And now you chide me? Don't you think if God intended for us to know everything he would have just told us up front like any good God would do? Instead, we dig out the nuggets(secrets) one by one, and He, being a fan of baseball throws us curves that we can't hit. The problem here then, is that we (you and me and everyone else) is swinging at and not hitting the pitch that is thrown. We are minor leaguers, my masked friend. Relax,(I think you told me that once) we all will find out in the end. My arrogancy only extends to the end of my arm, which is considerably shorter than other more intellegent people than myself.

As for the casting pearls thing,I didn't use it first, and interpreted it as a dig. Turnabout is fair play. You don't like digs either, even if they aren't meant to be.(you didn't do it in this case, and I don't remember you having done it before.) It's just that all of us think we're too intellegent for our own good. I have the ability to recognize someone who is smarter than me and give credit-- and pay homage. Smart doesn't make a person right though, and in the case of evolution, being smart doesn't help the situation. Belief in the one who created you would be more prudent-- we are fearfully and wonderfully made-- which says it all to me. That is a quote from the Book. I can stand on that. The great thing about it is, so can everyone else if they choose. This is a lot of fun to say the least. I've enjoyed the discussion and look forward to more. I read all of your stuff, and think that you have a funny bend to your head--- which is good.
Later
williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

Williamhill 2000
Good enough.

Let's go write poetry!

(skipping hand-in-hand)

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

"What we think"...
"An open mind is the first step in the process of enlightenment".."We believe what we take to be true, based upon our perceptions. What we perceive depends upon what we look for. What we look for depends upon what we think"...- from "The Dancing Wu Li Masters (An Overview of the New Physics)", by Gary Zukav..(Religions {Psychologies}play role in this fascinating read)

angelface: I highly recommend this book, a TABA (The American Book Awards) winner.

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

brad
I think that you must begin posting your work again and have a little more fun. You could evolve more fluently that way old chap.ok?
williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 3, 2005 )

Commies and polytheists
I didn't figure it would take so long for somebody to bring religeous persecution into the mix, but the way your comments were going, I was betting it would be you. Most members of the big three you accuse seek peace. Peace seems to be hard to capture in a physical world ruled by Satanic power. But consider this if it's not too hard, Of all the killing done inthis world in its history,no one has been more prolific than the communists of Russia and China which seems to enamor so many "enlightened intellectuals". If you go back and read "The Rise And Fall of The Roman Empire" and the writings of Josephus, you will find more ritualistic slaughter by Romans and Huns and Vandals than your mind can comprehend. I am a Christian. I have said it before that I know of no sect of Christianity today who advocates killing anyone anytime, anywhere. You can throw the maniacal Nazis in there too for good measure when it comes to murder and genocide. In a true debate, evolution isn't really the argument anyway. It is what do we do to help our brother in spite of our philosophical differences.
Hoping that you get it, I'll try to explain. Good and evil in this world are peculiar only to humans. There is no such thing as an evil plant or an evil animal, or an evil fish. If evolution is correct in its hypothesis, evil would evolve, and so would good. But like you said in a previous comment, they've always hung around. Wouldn't you think that one would finally destroy the other? Well? If there is order in all things in the universe, then why after thousands of years of evolution is there still good and evil? There is a logical answer, and I know what it is. I could explain it to you but...........

Hoping,
williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

And in this corner...
First let me post a section of one of William's posts from a bit beforehand:

"It takes a more tremendous amount of faith to believe in the theory of evolution than it takes to believe in God. We do not run eternity,it runs us."

I think he's one step away from some serious inspiration here. Leaving your fate in the hands of "God" is a very easy thing to do. It requires no extreme faith, no effort, not much other than complacency.

Things didn't go your way? It was God's will. Your neighbour cheated you and you didn't win the court case on Judge Judy? God is all seeing and will avenge the wrong done to your car's paint job. Why do people die of famine? God wills it. Should we intervene? Let us ask God for direction while we scarf back a cheeseburger.

Science requires you to face life and its realities square in the eye. When Zeus doesn't come down from the mountain to bring you dinner, you have to dial Pizza Hut to take his place.

Now I'm not going to diverge this into evolution, but will tie this in regardless. Once you've accepted that the fate of the human race is determined by our own actions, by our own paddling down the river of time, you have to start feeling accountable to yourself, your offspring, and those around you. Plato, Hobbes, Rousseau, they all recognize a social contract as being a requirement for mankind to survive at a level that surpasses bestial existence.

In building this social contract, we must make many important decisions that extend beyond our own person. We decide, WE DECIDE, the moral customs of our people and their ethical application. From these morals come our laws, and at that point we charge members of society to safeguard these laws, these moral decisions, on our behalf.

Morals change, and in today's society we are able to perform certain actions that were once considered amoral. Aborting a pregnancy is one of them. We've determined a line at which life begins according to the LAW, and we've moved forward. When a child is actually a child is moot, because law can exist seperate from reality; it needs only fit with our morals.

I think Bush preys on the concerns felt by people such as William and other God fearing individuals. They preach a Christian doctrine, and yet would rather go to war and kill rather than resolve the issue in a non-military manner. Any non-violent method of resolution should be exhausted prior to even considering murderous actions such as were taken in the illegal invasion of Iraq.

As such, to answer one of the original questions, I am not a Bush supporter. He does not in action exemplify the wishes of the people who voted him in. He speaks to the public while dancing for corporate interests and only family friends. His most important task should be securing the democratic rights and social health of his own country prior to contaminating the world with his vitreol wrapped in a star-spangled flag.

The other question: Abortion is legal. How I personally feel about it is moot. This is an issue of self-determination. In a situation such as this, where an individual is seeking for control over their own fate, or more directly their own body, it is not within my rights to try and legislate that for them.

Trying to enact laws to the contrary will be detrimental. People will only follow laws they believe in, and buy in to. If you outlawed abortion, we'd return to the days where clothes hangers decided the life of both mother and child. Better to bring it to light and educate on options than push it back into the alleys.

However you feel about topics such as religion, abortion, and other self-determining items, you should remember that "self" means making the decision for yourself only. Respect the rights of others to safely determine their own future, as I'm sure you wish the same for yourself.

( Posted by: Capulet [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Viper - You're the best!
Loved your most recent comment here. Very timely. Very today. Very wow.

Felicia

( Posted by: Feliciastone [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

move on
Only a suggestion, but maybe this is one of those topics that could be moved over to WWF or whatever it is. Just seems to me that the original post probbably doesn't deserve to have a disportionate amount of posting dedicated to it. Might be littering the primrose comment path a bit. This suggestion does not reflect the quality of the comments however. All sides of the discussion are so well represented. Impressive indeed -- we have scholars in our midst, or at least midsty scholars. Its only that I have two friends from grammar school who are still discussing this topic, some 30 odd years later. I fear the same could go on here. And like with my friends, I feel naturally excluded because I'm not smart enough to comment intelligibley. So let's talk about something I can get in on. Anybody see Project Runway Wednesday Night? Man, I can't stand the Pepper lady. TLA, Brad

( Posted by: brad [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Whill: Dead Russians
Numbers: 20,000,000 Russians lost their lives in WWII, at the hands of a nation thinking "God" was on their side. Tragic, as war always is.

Time: You refer to "thousands of years of evolution"...During the BILLIONS of years of evolution, 5 or 6 thousand "bible" years is a mere blink.

B

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Viper

Yes, I do use the Bible as my reference book and I will never stop! You used to be a pentecostal? So did I!! Why did you stop? That would have been much happier than what you are now.No offence I mean.Sorry I do not post much with school and all{Yes I am only 13}I can't get on everyday.Who all read that article Alaynna put on lit.org about her being disgusted at the lack of reverence for Jesus? I did and now I know why!Alaynna [better known as penprincess}has gotten of lit.org. I know Alaynna and we are both firm believers in christ.And believe me, despise me I DONT CARE but I will never NEVER give up that faith in christ I have never been in bad sin like drugs and things {thank God} And will never be!! Sorry but all this has gotten on my nerves!!!But then of course I havent been in all that sin I am an Angel!!![l.o.l]

( Posted by: angelface [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Pondering Penelope...
Thanks for reminding me..

angelface: Do you have an original piece to share?

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Abortion
How can any true woman have an abortion? A slut might be able to but not a true WOMAN!Let me ask you a question do you like to live? Of course who doesent want to live? but what if your mom had decided to have an abortion? Or if like Abe Lincolns mother decided to have one ? There would probubly still be slaves.But I guess all yall would like that.But do you get my point there would be a lot more good people in the world if there was no abortion.

( Posted by: angelface [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Evolution and Bible believers

Ok I have got the impression that yall think that whoever does not believe in evolution is weird and whoever believes and uses the Bible is stupid I want to know why! Why does everyone on here and people I talk to believe that?? mabye because they have never really understood that makes me sad because I know what the Bible means. People today do not know what happiness is.

( Posted by: angelface [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Whill:Creation and Evolution..
"One is not born at time of creation nor disturbed at the time of dissolution."..from the Vedas, the original scriptures on THIS planet..translated from Sanskrit to Hindu to English. Our consciousness level must "evolve" allowing a higher mode of living until we reach "Godliness"...

An observer from a "higher" planet visits two people. The first one sits down to eat, thanking his "God" for dinner . He then consumes "Hot Wings" and a T-Bone steak. The second person first offers his vegetarian meal (he would not offer animal flesh) to his "God"..Of course, "God" doesn't need it and leaves it, now blessed and pure.(This is called "Prasadam") ..Which of these two do you think the observer would find to be of a "higher consciousness level"? To be living in the mode of goodness and Godliness? Which would he find to be living in mode of ignorance and passion? I just thought of this, so hopefully my point makes sense.

Can consciousness level be raised? Yes, I believe that. Transcending this mundane material madness, in this age of "Kali" (Quarrel), is our self-realization mission on this planet. This is a "Karmic" step, in quest to return to "God"..It is a bit complicated. You can't dummy it down.

Robert William

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Demeter's "Undifferentiated reality"
Yes, This is an illusory reality. Nonetheless, it is the reality we live in. The same reality we are part of now and have always been...and always will...We can transcend it by "Enlightenment"..

angelface: Have you studied other religions? Have you read other religious literatures, beyond your own?

Robert William

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Demeter's gonna party
Sounds like a game plan to me. I like your "eclectic blend" thought:

Knowledge is only useful if you use it. There are many viable disciplines to draw from. Limiting yourself to one book, a book transliterated, added to and subtracted from, by men with motives (In Rome), seems a less than brilliant choice. It would be like only ever listening to George Jones. You are told about Mozart, Miles, Ray and Dylan, but choose never to listen. You may say you're satisfied with Jones, but you've missed so much.

Robert William

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 4, 2005 )

Abortion
Well Angel, if a fetus is a person with a soul within the womb, then when they are aborted they're going to heaven. How could they ever show their thanks for being allowed to skip the potential suffering and waiting for salvation? Abortion doctors should be given honorary canonization for sending so many pure souls back up to our creator. Amen.

( Posted by: capulet [Member] On: February 5, 2005 )

Capulet - Abortion
Exactly! You might like my article, "So You Want to Be A Saint?".

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 5, 2005 )

Curious 13 angelface
angelface: My comments were to counter simplistic points of view and to show other sides. They may not be my personal beliefs. (See my first comment to you, early on in this marathon)..

I do not care to know your spiritual orientation. I can figure out something about you, if I wish, by reading your works. Of course, you would have to post a poem, a lyric, a haiku, or some sort of article first.

At Lit., I am a writer. I hope you are, as well.

When asked, I reply...Soul member, First Church of the Open Mind.

Look forward to your artistic expressions.


Robert William

( Posted by: Bobby7L [Member] On: February 5, 2005 )

viper
Can't skip anymore, would be interested in a three legged race....

williamhill

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: February 5, 2005 )

Hill O' William
Well, all right. But if we trip I'm blaming you!

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: February 5, 2005 )

ANGELFACE...
Well might I add this....This somewhat delicate
matter "ripped"! Bobby, I know you, your're Great and a heart too, Vip you got one,too.((Did'nt say you didn't)) Some how, some way she HIT. True? I am happy for her. So, sensitive things are. Angel, near, at this point near 700 hits has to be some kind of record for a knew comer on their 1st
post. For all the right reasons "Bravo"!!!
Keep writing sweetheart, your heart found your-
self with us...WELCOME...Robin

( Posted by: Robinbird [Member] On: February 6, 2005 )





Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Commenting Guidelines:
  • All comments must be about the writing. Non-related comments will be deleted.
  • Flaming, derogatory or messages attacking other members well be deleted.
  • Adult/Sexual comments or messages will be deleted.
  • All subjects MUST be PG. No cursing in subjects.
  • All comments must follow the sites posting guidelines.
The purpose of commenting on Lit.Org is to help writers improve their writing. Please post constructive feedback to help the author improve their work.


Username:
Password:
Subject:
Comment:





Login:
Password: