section 2 of the civil rights act says differently.
they have the right to access the same services that michigan state offers to any other group... or michigan state has the right to get sued for religious discrimination. A suit that they would lose.
:) you might want to look into rhetorical questions. I was asking the parent whether he'd asked himself the fundamental questions regarding his own beliefs.
all christians, and i may be wrong, believe in the divinity of christ. this is largely based on his works, the primary one being his resurrection. A literal resurrection doesn't mesh with the laws of the physical world that we've observed you know since we've been observing them. my point was that moderate christians who say that science is correct, and then claim that christ is a miracle worker are engaging in cognitive dissonance.
apathiests are agnostic because "atheist" leaves a bad taste in your mouth.:) very political. If you take a position, people can argue it, if you're just "not right" it's much harder to engage you:)
not to do with agnosticism, that's the example for moderate christianity. For agnosticism I use the simple example of... zeus. every argument one can make for the any diety can be made for zeus... thor, loki, ra, the spaghetti monster... my left nut. The only difference is the number of people who believe in each, and in consequence the number of people who can blindly mock the others.
Is mohommed any less credible than Xenu?
intellectual honesty says that the agnostic must also be on the fence for Xenu and my left nut, as much as he's on the fence for Zeus as much as he's on the fence for Jehovah. If that's your position, I find it ridiculous, but I respect it. That's balls out indecisiveness... if that's not, your position, then what makes the predominant religions so special?
backup of what exactly? you're looking at recording a person down to the molecular level. ions in motion, gradients, temperatures in microclimates on a microscopic level. what we are is probably very robust, but it's also never static.
on the other hand, we all have discontinuities every night. Who knows if you're the same person from one day to the next. In any regard, having the same person come back, involves recording nearly every molecule in their body, state, position and energy.
not really if it at all interacts with the public in a business relationship. you can't deny access to services categorically based on certain things. like race, religion gender etc.
i have, after looking into the matter. Used to think of myself as agnostic, but that became pretty damn disingenuous.
people who haven't really thought of it i'll give a pass, because it's really not that important.
I do not accept that moderate religion or agnosticism are valid stances.
either the resurrection occurred or it didn't... kind of end of story. without it, not much claim to divinity, and you've just a moral book. with it and you've got to reevaluate the very nature of reality.
do you know how fucking hard it would be to resurrect someone... like, really? the persistence of consciousness alone... or magic. a world with magic is not compatible with the world we think of ourselves in.
surely not, it adds flavor to humanity. if my neighbor has an extra constaint on him to be nice to everybody. so be it. as long as his views do not infringe on my life I'm fine.
nah, imo we've already moved past the point where the evidence is sufficient to say a knowable god is incompatible with a rational world view. Either we assume god doesn't exist, or that reality is an illusion, can't really be both at this point.
aimed at those annoying agnostics. I respect the creationists more than those that say that their faith and science mesh. no, it really doesn't if you take the bible as literally anything other than complete allegory.
yes, but you're also not trying to "win" the debate as you would a chess game. if your argument speaks to the audience more than your opponents' then you've won.
civil rights isn't just for the politically correct. Good men and women marched in the streets for the right to do business in the places that were open for business, sit in the places that were open to the public and take part in a society that didn't restrict them based on the color of their skin.
You would have us close off a public institution to a group for what they believe?
if i were them, i would be accepting. It would mean that my government and my people would never keep me from these kinds of opportunities if someday I were classified as some niche movement. Freedom means freedom for ALL people, especially those with distasteful views. The tyranny of the majority is something very real and something to be feared.
free speech is more important than my distaste. And I believe it should extend to more than government intervention, but that's my own minority view. In any case. All views should be heard. As the inimitable and greatly mourned Hitches said, at the very least it will clarify your own position on what you believe to be truth.
Why are they wrong? why is it pseudoscience? can you back it up? why do you trust what your believe to be true to be true? Let them come. If your convictions cannot stand this test, it may be time to reexamine your beliefs.
Me, I know why i believe what i believe. Mostly because i have great faith in the pride and greed of men. Peer review is our best process because science is a great rewarder of one-ups-man-ship... even if sometimes the other guy is yourself. A great theory stands the test of everybody and their mother trying to bring it low, and failing.
does it really matter? I respect them more than the fence sitters. Pick a side, at least the creationists don't incorporate cognitive dissonance on such a mind-numbing scale.
he's not trying to appear greater in god's eyes... it's a story about having pride in one's work. He's basically saying, even if nobody else knows that it is there and it is beautiful, i will know, god will know.
or that's what it meant to me. And it's a beautiful idea.
Slashdot Mirror
section 2 of the civil rights act says differently.
they have the right to access the same services that michigan state offers to any other group... or michigan state has the right to get sued for religious discrimination. A suit that they would lose.
:) you might want to look into rhetorical questions. I was asking the parent whether he'd asked himself the fundamental questions regarding his own beliefs.
all christians, and i may be wrong, believe in the divinity of christ. this is largely based on his works, the primary one being his resurrection. A literal resurrection doesn't mesh with the laws of the physical world that we've observed you know since we've been observing them. my point was that moderate christians who say that science is correct, and then claim that christ is a miracle worker are engaging in cognitive dissonance.
apathiests are agnostic because "atheist" leaves a bad taste in your mouth. :) very political. If you take a position, people can argue it, if you're just "not right" it's much harder to engage you :)
not to do with agnosticism, that's the example for moderate christianity. For agnosticism I use the simple example of... zeus. every argument one can make for the any diety can be made for zeus... thor, loki, ra, the spaghetti monster... my left nut. The only difference is the number of people who believe in each, and in consequence the number of people who can blindly mock the others.
Is mohommed any less credible than Xenu?
intellectual honesty says that the agnostic must also be on the fence for Xenu and my left nut, as much as he's on the fence for Zeus as much as he's on the fence for Jehovah. If that's your position, I find it ridiculous, but I respect it. That's balls out indecisiveness... if that's not, your position, then what makes the predominant religions so special?
backup of what exactly? you're looking at recording a person down to the molecular level. ions in motion, gradients, temperatures in microclimates on a microscopic level. what we are is probably very robust, but it's also never static.
on the other hand, we all have discontinuities every night. Who knows if you're the same person from one day to the next. In any regard, having the same person come back, involves recording nearly every molecule in their body, state, position and energy.
not really if it at all interacts with the public in a business relationship. you can't deny access to services categorically based on certain things. like race, religion gender etc.
i have, after looking into the matter. Used to think of myself as agnostic, but that became pretty damn disingenuous.
people who haven't really thought of it i'll give a pass, because it's really not that important.
I do not accept that moderate religion or agnosticism are valid stances.
either the resurrection occurred or it didn't... kind of end of story. without it, not much claim to divinity, and you've just a moral book. with it and you've got to reevaluate the very nature of reality.
do you know how fucking hard it would be to resurrect someone... like, really? the persistence of consciousness alone... or magic. a world with magic is not compatible with the world we think of ourselves in.
surely not, it adds flavor to humanity. if my neighbor has an extra constaint on him to be nice to everybody. so be it. as long as his views do not infringe on my life I'm fine.
nah, imo we've already moved past the point where the evidence is sufficient to say a knowable god is incompatible with a rational world view. Either we assume god doesn't exist, or that reality is an illusion, can't really be both at this point.
aimed at those annoying agnostics. I respect the creationists more than those that say that their faith and science mesh. no, it really doesn't if you take the bible as literally anything other than complete allegory.
actually, makes an interesting lead-in to the nature of a benevolent diety.
religious fanatacism and acceptance will outlive you.
yes, but you're also not trying to "win" the debate as you would a chess game. if your argument speaks to the audience more than your opponents' then you've won.
yes.
and by what right would you keep them out? :)
civil rights isn't just for the politically correct. Good men and women marched in the streets for the right to do business in the places that were open for business, sit in the places that were open to the public and take part in a society that didn't restrict them based on the color of their skin.
You would have us close off a public institution to a group for what they believe?
if i were them, i would be accepting. It would mean that my government and my people would never keep me from these kinds of opportunities if someday I were classified as some niche movement. Freedom means freedom for ALL people, especially those with distasteful views. The tyranny of the majority is something very real and something to be feared.
Brendan Eich and Donald Sterling say hi.
free speech is more important than my distaste. And I believe it should extend to more than government intervention, but that's my own minority view. In any case. All views should be heard. As the inimitable and greatly mourned Hitches said, at the very least it will clarify your own position on what you believe to be truth.
Why are they wrong? why is it pseudoscience? can you back it up? why do you trust what your believe to be true to be true? Let them come. If your convictions cannot stand this test, it may be time to reexamine your beliefs.
Me, I know why i believe what i believe. Mostly because i have great faith in the pride and greed of men. Peer review is our best process because science is a great rewarder of one-ups-man-ship... even if sometimes the other guy is yourself. A great theory stands the test of everybody and their mother trying to bring it low, and failing.
does it really matter? I respect them more than the fence sitters. Pick a side, at least the creationists don't incorporate cognitive dissonance on such a mind-numbing scale.
... what's there to destabilize?
they have the power to print more money... that's about it. they don't have the power to confiscate it.
100000 airplanes. the US can get shit done if it really gets behind it.
:) he wasn't doing work that nobody would appreciate. At the very least, he would always know.
you're taking it a bit more literally than i did.
he's not trying to appear greater in god's eyes... it's a story about having pride in one's work. He's basically saying, even if nobody else knows that it is there and it is beautiful, i will know, god will know.
or that's what it meant to me. And it's a beautiful idea.
yet again, ring species.