Slashdot Mirror
Unique ID In India Causes 'Fear of the Beast'
bhagwad writes "India's attempts to tag everyone with an ID number has run into a roadblock is some Christian villages. Apparently the villagers fear they will be associated with the devil since according to the Bible, everyone having the 'mark of the beast' will go to hell. These people are not afraid of punishment. They relish this opportunity to prove their faith because the Bible also proclaims that they will be persecuted."
Always good to see uneducated crazies are all over the world. I was worried that it was just the USA. Phew! /sarcasm
If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
I really don't care what arbitrary reason they picked. I'm just glad to hear of someone - anyone - standing up and saying that they refuse to be tagged like cattle. Good for you, Indians!
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
If you meant that it takes years of indoctrination before a normal human being is willing to let other human beings tag him like an animal, then yes, I suppose these people need more "educating".
They may be wrong about WHY consolidated power is dangerous, but they are absolutely correct that it IS dangerous.
They relish this opportunity to prove their faith because the Bible also proclaims that they will be persecuted.
It has been my experience, through years of informal religion studies, that the Bible can predict/proclaim/justify just about anything you want it. Thousands of pages of hear-say, from hundreds of authors, many only written after being passed down for generations, just adds up to way too much ambiguity and makes it way to easy to find a sentence or two that can support $my_action. Yes, this is part of what makes religion so dangerous.
No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
I am just sitting back, enjoying the show: religion versus state, no matter who loses, I win.
You can't handle the truth.
Great, another story where the discussion will be flooded with anti-religious posts, with everyone practically foaming at the mouth to condemn people who don't think like they do. Like any of it matters. You are all just yelling into the void for no reason, and doing a big anti-religious circle-jerk as you all congratulate yourselves on how much smarter you are than these people.
At lest that's the picture that I get in my head when I read all of these comments.
Yeah, a government issued ID card sounds exactly like a Social Security Card, something we've had here in the States since 1936. Generally people don't refuse them because you can't get a frickin' job without one.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Funny. Where I live(the US Midwest, FYI), the Christians are at the forefront of attacking human rights, demanding that non-believers kowtow to their deranged fantasies and attacking science when they aren't flailing about in fear of the devil driven liberal conspiracy. That's not what I would call being a good citizen.
All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
The Bible also says that it will be marked on your forehead or hand. Why is it that people remember the whole "Mark of the beast" part, but they forget about the details. It seems like this happens every time some government agency wants to roll out ID numbers. I can't find anywhere in the Bible where God is opposed to ID numbers.
- Derrick
Except that they don't. At least, no more than anybody else. Possibly less, actually.
In the US, Christians are about 80% of the population, but over 90% of convicted criminals.
And churches pay no taxes. Those who give money to churches get tax breaks for doing so. Assuming Christians also give to actual charities as much as everybody else does, that would mean they actually pay less taxes.
As for the "Mark of the Beast", we've had this in the US for a very long time now. Every citizen of the U.S. is given a unique ID number at birth. A number which you need in order to get a passport, or drivers license, or credit card. So we're already regulating the buying and selling of property without it. And have been since before most of us here were born.
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Nor is it being Christian.
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Tell it to the Christians. Or is this yet another stab at the "No True Scotsman" fallacy?
All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
It's inherently so. Ever notice how the Fundamentalists try to reshape the face of their religion so that they can conveniently decry those that disagree with them for not being true believers? The problem is that while a lot of these views are genuinely minority views, since the rest of the religious devotees let it pass without comment, since those other ones aren't true believers, you end up in a situation where it just stews and nobody knows what's up.
Personally I think Christians (practicing their faith in "loving others") are the best kind of citizen one can have. They follow the just laws, they pay taxes and help their fellow men.
History class: apparently you never showed up. Ever.
If the Christians were more like Christ, there wouldn't be any Christians around anymore:
But I [Christ] tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
more like a noisy and obnoxious minority of a community.
anytime you try to associate a trait with a group you're probably oversimplifying the truth.
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." -- Homer Simpson
Really? So I can walk up to a Buddhist and slap him on the face and he won't mind? I can take his coat and he will say: here take my shirt as well? If I ask money from him, he will give me as much as I want and not ask anything in return?
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Problem: Not all versions of the bible use the work "signify":
NIV:
NAS:
The Message:
NCV:
What makes your version any more correct than these?
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
In the US, Christians are about 80% of the population, but over 90% of convicted criminals.
[citation needed]
If that is your definition of liberty you lost your liberty a long time ago. In case you were not familiar, you cannot eat whatever you like (your offspring, tigers), you cannot drink whatever you like (moonshine), you cannot smoke whatever you like (cannabis). You cannot trade in ways beneficial to yourself (cocaine).
The faster you acknowledge that it makes sense to have rules in society and accepting these, the faster will you be able to convince others to modify these. If you start out by stating that rules that have been in place for centuries or decades trample on your liberty, people will take you for a crackpot.
Sounds like a reasonable experiment. Why not try it?
Yes, and this applies equally well to the comment by the AC who said:
...human beings are animals, no more and no less!
When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
The trouble with religion is that only God can say who's being a true Christian, and he's not saying.
In the US, Christians are about 80% of the population, but over 90% of convicted criminals.
That's a good one. But perhaps those criminals converted while they were doing jail time...
Hold on. You're doing two things wrong here. First, you're changing the definition of, "tolerant," to, "acceptance," or, "agreement." Second, you're lumping together totally different groups of people.
Nope, I'm not. I don't care what they believe in private.
The gays aren't knocking at my door, telling my children that they are going to burn in hell forever.
Okay, define how this is intolerant. Are they killing your kids if they do not convert? You always have the option of shutting the door if you don't like it.
No, they are applying social pressure to my kids. They are attempting to impose irrational fears of punishment in order to sway my childrens' beliefs. And I can't "shut the door" when the pressure is coming from authority figures like teachers(66% of the teachers in my children's school are practicing Christian preachers, and I have video-taped them pushing religious dogma in school).
They aren't shooting abortion doctors.
How many abortion doctors have been shot by self-described Christians? Less than a dozen (which I would say is still too much). And true Christians condemn these acts (that whole Sixth Commandment and all).
How many have been shot by non-Christians in this country? How many non-Christian groups are actively promoting such activities?
They aren't launching suicide attacks on my neighborhood.
Ah, now you're talking about Muslims, which is a totally different religious group. Fundamentalist Muslims will try to blow you up. Fundamentalist Christians just pray for your soul and witness to you.
Did you skip over the term "theist" that I keep using?
They aren't polluting science with their fictional delusions.
To turn this around, aren't you being a little intolerant in the way you're presenting their beliefs?
Nope. I'm not in their Sunday school classes, trying to inject rational thought into their religious dogma.
When the theists abandon their irrational bigotry, grow up and stop trying to control their neighbors, they'll be worthy of tolerance.
That also doesn't sound very tolerant.
Absolutely correct. I don't tolerate that behavior.
All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
If that is your definition of liberty you lost your liberty a long time ago. In case you were not familiar, you cannot eat whatever you like (your offspring, tigers), you cannot drink whatever you like (moonshine), you cannot smoke whatever you like (cannabis). You cannot trade in ways beneficial to yourself (cocaine).
Yes I would agree with you that we lost liberty a long time ago but there are degrees of liberty and there is no reason to keep going in the wrong direction. As for your examples, yes I disagree with all the prohibitions you mentioned except obviously eating your offspring (which doesn't involve my rights but my offspring's rights) and arguably eating tigers but animal rights are a bit more complex issue.
The faster you acknowledge that it makes sense to have rules in society and accepting these, the faster will you be able to convince others to modify these. If you start out by stating that rules that have been in place for centuries or decades trample on your liberty, people will take you for a crackpot.
Are there still people around who confuse liberty and anarchy? I guess there are and judging by your inclusion of eating babies as an example of an infringement of liberty you are one of them.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Not really the same thing. "No True Scotsman" aims to denounce Scotsman who would otherwise fit the definition of being a Scotsman by adding some arbitrary condition to the definition. This is denouncing so-called "Christians" who don't even fit the base definition of being a Christian as defined by their book.
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
Religion has nothing to do with it. Everywhere you go, the sky is the sky and people are people.
Our descendants will look back and say, "They should have known better. How did they justify that?"
And they'll respond, "Because those evil delusional fucking christians fought tooth and nail to block the teaching of basic biological facts and access to birth control due to their sickeningly twisted definition of 'morality' leading to tons of unwanted, unaffordable pregnancies due to ignorance of the basic biological facts the christians kept pushing for in order to increase the numbers of the poor and ignorant so they could keep preying on them since the poor, ignorant and uneducated make far and away the best fodder for such evil, idiotic delusions."
You either have to believe that humans are eternal beings or that we live, then die, and that's the end. If Christians are correct in accepting the Gospel (that Jesus sacrificed His life for their sins), they spend eternity in Heaven. If they are wrong, it doesn't matter. If you are wrong, you spend eternity in Hell. There are no merits that will get you judged "Holy". Everyone has sinned and sin is incompatible with Heaven. That was the reason that a perfect sacrifice was necessary. If we could do it on our own, we wouldn't have required a savior. God loves you so much that He will allow you to choose NOT to spend eternity with Him. He also provided you with a way TO spend eternity with him (accepting his Son as your personal savior). Ultimately the choice is yours. You owe it to yourself to take a closer look at what Christianity REALLY means.
Not all churches are the same. Not all Christians are the same. And not all Christians are Christians.
If you are serious about learning more about God, just read the Bible for yourself. If you want to focus on Christianity first, start at the book of Matthew and read sequentially through the New Testament. Not all of it will make sense at first, but believe the parts that do make sense, even if what you read goes against everything the world is telling you.
For example, the world tells us to worry about the future, save for retirement, protect our valuables, stay on top of the latest trends, and fight to get what's coming to us. But Jesus tells us not to worry about the future at all, and to take one day at a time. Why? Because focusing on something that cannot last, and something that you can't take with you when you die, will distract you from focusing on what will last.
Jesus says that God is spirit, and those that worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth. The Bible tells us that God wants us to be more concerned about our spirits than our bodies, more concerned about our minds (in knowledge and wisdom) than what we have, and more concerned about God Himself than ourselves.
Once our focus is on spiritual things, on God's knowledge and wisdom, and on God's righteousness, then the world falls into its proper place. We work to make money in order to give to the poor, feed the hungry, and clothe the naked. We care about justice in order to defend the poor, protect the widow, help the orphan, and seek justice for other people, not ourselves. And we do this not because we are trying to get closer to God, but because God has already brought us closer to Himself.
This is denouncing so-called "Christians" who don't even fit the base definition of being a Christian as defined by their book
Well, those guys say that their book has a definition that doesn't match yours. Why should I believe you over them?
And, yes, I've read that book. It's so vague and self-contradicting that, with a bit of a stretch (which both sides - Bible-thumping fire-and-brimstoners, and God-loves-everyone turn-the-other-cheek hippies - are guilty of) can be made to fit either way.
This is even leaving aside the issue of who defined the book (which is really a collection of texts, and we know full well that not all of them made it in there)...