There are prominent examples of *non-theists* who are proponents of ID
Such as the atheist UFO-cult of the Raëlians. That still a religious belief, however.
I read the sticker that the Kansas school board wanted to attach to the textbooks and didn't think it was all that offensive
It was carefully worded that way. The problem, however, is not the wording, it's the intent. It singles out one scientific theory with a warning label!
Like with most things, some slashdotters like me are being *extra* nerdy and insisting that mere theological theories don't get touted as fact. Evolution, having replaced "God did it" with "Random Chance did it" is particularily bad at this; as is the claim that ID is not science because of some incredibly arbitrary and subjective rules about who is a scientist and what a science is. Thus the argument every time it shows up.
BTW, it has nothing at all to do with creationism-
Oh, you are so wrong it hurts.
First of all, "design" and "create" are synonyms. It has everything to do with creationism, it's just cleverly worded to avoid any direct mention of the specific religion that it is meant to support, in order to attempt to sneak it into public schools despite a constitutional ban of such shenanigans. Hence the ruling to that effect.
ID is not science by the very definition of science! "the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding", ID is based on ignorance and misunderstanding, it's the entire basis of the argument: "There's bit we don't know or understand yet, so a magical, invisible hand did it!"
Just because it's a lie supporting something you agree with doesn't make it true.
Most celebrated scientists and great thinkers (Einstein, DiVinci, Archimedes, etc) believed in God.
DaVinci would have been tortured to death if he had dared hint that he didn't believe in the Church, wether or not he actually believed in a god is unkowable, because he was smart enough to fake it thouroughly, and motivated by a survival instinct to do so. However, he provided the basis of the scientific method, and logically proved that ghosts aren't a concern to anyone. I find it unlikely that he believed in invisible angels inseminating virgins in the night.
And you think Archimedes believed in "God", singular? As in a monotheistic judeo-christian god? That's quite a feat for a pre-christian greek from a polytheistic society.
First off: A septembre release is not an effort, that's the friday 8pm timeslot all over again.
Secondly, what the hell is up with that poster? Who is that? Is that supposed to be River? Hard to tell.
And finally, relying on viral marketig whilst at the same time bumming out all the fans by killing off one of the characters in a very powerfull movie moment. Seriously, depressed fanboys are not a good marketing move.
Well, in defense of the mods, in this case the post was actually flamebait.
Flamebait -- Flamebait refers to comments whose sole purpose is to insult and enrage. If someone is not-so-subtly picking a fight (racial insults are a dead giveaway), it's Flamebait.
Hmmm, I'm not convinced the sole purpose of the post was to insult and enrage, but you have a point.
See, this is why you made the foe list: You turn to religious arguments, then say you didn't. Saw that coming... and for the record, I'm not atheist, I'm agnostic. I'm waiting for proof either way.
Anyway, let's pretend you didn't for a sec there...
So no, violence and sex aren't the same thing, and should not be rated the same.
Yes, the U.S. has the sentence "sex and violence" ingrained in i's collective conciousness to the point where it seems impossible to discuss this matter beyond the scope of that conditioning, as this thread depressigly demonstrate, but that doesn't make it natural in the sense of "congenital", but natural in the sense of "habitual".
There's the futility of discussing subjects when the whole argument is split on different meanings of a word being debated.
So, yes, there is such a thing as sex and violence in movies: Rape scenes. You have both, or rough sex, but that's somewhat different. And as far as real sex VS simulated violence, that is a non-argument, as it only demonstrate how wrong you are to lump sex and violence together. There is real violence shown on TV, on the news, on sports broadcasts.
Hell, here's the ultimate demonstration of the insanity I'm decrying: The "wardrobe malfunction" incident. One split second of a niple: MAJOR outcry. Repeated violence and injuries: Good clean fun.
Football is violence, 100% wholesome American fun. Show one nipple, and it's been defiled! Lawsuits, fortunes in fines, outrage!
Black with white (dense) hollow hair, that acts similar to millions of small fiber optic pieces to channel light down to the black skin, where it is more efficiently used. So, more accurately think of an old black man with white hair. I know a few of those, and they are pretty cool!
Cool? But... But... But you said it was to warm them! I'm all confused now:-S
Or do you expect for me to be ashamed that I have a religious belief? Please. You're not dealing with a 12 year old looking for acceptance from his peers.
No, I'm just realising that your belief that sex and violence are the same comes from some religion, apparently you aren't pretending to be christian, whichever it is, I've had conversation about morality with people before who like you say "the atheist point of view", they usually mean that morality is god-given, and that infidels are immoral.
The example above was to illustrate how immoral religious views can be. Name me your organised belief, I will tell you an example of immoral teaching it has, if you want. There's always plenty to choose from.
Uh, this is a discussion about the ratings of film based on sex and or violence. This entire conversation is about the perception of sex and violence in popular media.
This specific sub-thread was about the origins of that perception. Nature VS nurture.
you're not getting the point or you're being a troll.
I lost interest and became flippant when you moved from "nature VS nurture" to supernatural origins of morality. Please, please, if you think I'm troling you, stop replying, by all means: Don't feed the trolls.
Re:This has been an urban legend here in Texas...
on
Marfa Lights Explained
·
· Score: 1
the cemetery became lost to the trees and such. Nowadays, teenagers use it for god-knows-what
I have seen them, and they are not headlights from cars. That is pretty obvious. You are most likely to see them in times of high humidity, and very late at night.
When cars headlights are on high, and the atmosphere is ripe to reflect them. Brilliant deduction, Sherlock!
And if we're going to go back to the atheist way of looking at things
Ah, bible thumper. Remember: You must not suffer a witch to live! I won't keep you, I'm sure you have a few bonfires to start.
violence and murder are just as valid an action as is sex.
I'll never trust someone who lumps "sex" and "violence" in the same category... Their girlfriends do tend to "walk into doors" and "fall down stairs" a whole lot.
designed the suit with that in mind, and added padding to deal with it.
In the 70's, the crooners put rolled up socks down their pants. Behold the 21st century! Now teams of costume designers labour for a month on a cod piece, and then "leak" information about how noticeable it is.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Main Entry: censor Pronunciation: 'sen(t)-s&r Function: noun Etymology: Latin, from censEre to give as one's opinion, assess; perhaps akin to Sanskrit samsati he praises 1 : one of two magistrates of early Rome acting as census takers, assessors, and inspectors of morals and conduct 2 : one who supervises conduct and morals: as a : an official who examines materials (as publications or films) for objectionable matter
Censoring a movie would be an accurate description if the MPAA actually edited the movie. They rate the movie which allows consumers to make an educated decision about seeing the movie.
They rate the movie "NC17: No one will ever see it", and they then tell the producer which part to edit out to get it to "R: All the teenagers will come".
They have the freedom to choose between finincial ruin or obeying their decree. Which isn't much a freedom if their endeavour is part of a corporation which is bound by law to do everything it can to increase shareholder value. Choosing financial ruin would lead to lawsuits from their investors.
Slashdot Mirror
I know personally there are many CDs which I have not bought, because I could download them.
And I never bought as many CDs as I did during the Napster days.
"Hey, these tunes are pretty good... I'll grab the set."
We've worked hard over the past few centuries to cut, burn and concrete everything. Mother Nature IS going to bite us in the ass in return.
Allergies, asthma, mad cows, falling sperm counts, and mutant flu superstrains of doom: Nature's bitch-slaps.
God works in mysterious ways. He is inscrutable.
Your definition of random seems to fit as a definition of god.
There are prominent examples of *non-theists* who are proponents of ID
Such as the atheist UFO-cult of the Raëlians.
That still a religious belief, however.
I read the sticker that the Kansas school board wanted to attach to the textbooks and didn't think it was all that offensive
It was carefully worded that way. The problem, however, is not the wording, it's the intent. It singles out one scientific theory with a warning label!
Like with most things, some slashdotters like me are being *extra* nerdy and insisting that mere theological theories don't get touted as fact. Evolution, having replaced "God did it" with "Random Chance did it" is particularily bad at this; as is the claim that ID is not science because of some incredibly arbitrary and subjective rules about who is a scientist and what a science is. Thus the argument every time it shows up.
BTW, it has nothing at all to do with creationism-
Oh, you are so wrong it hurts.
First of all, "design" and "create" are synonyms. It has everything to do with creationism, it's just cleverly worded to avoid any direct mention of the specific religion that it is meant to support, in order to attempt to sneak it into public schools despite a constitutional ban of such shenanigans. Hence the ruling to that effect.
ID is not science by the very definition of science! "the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding", ID is based on ignorance and misunderstanding, it's the entire basis of the argument: "There's bit we don't know or understand yet, so a magical, invisible hand did it!"
Just because it's a lie supporting something you agree with doesn't make it true.
Most celebrated scientists and great thinkers (Einstein, DiVinci, Archimedes, etc) believed in God.
DaVinci would have been tortured to death if he had dared hint that he didn't believe in the Church, wether or not he actually believed in a god is unkowable, because he was smart enough to fake it thouroughly, and motivated by a survival instinct to do so. However, he provided the basis of the scientific method, and logically proved that ghosts aren't a concern to anyone. I find it unlikely that he believed in invisible angels inseminating virgins in the night.
And you think Archimedes believed in "God", singular? As in a monotheistic judeo-christian god? That's quite a feat for a pre-christian greek from a polytheistic society.
First off: A septembre release is not an effort, that's the friday 8pm timeslot all over again.
Secondly, what the hell is up with that poster? Who is that? Is that supposed to be River? Hard to tell.
And finally, relying on viral marketig whilst at the same time bumming out all the fans by killing off one of the characters in a very powerfull movie moment. Seriously, depressed fanboys are not a good marketing move.
Offtopic? Let's see, fuzzy coordinates through cell phone, comment about coordinate precision... hmmm...
Ordinary people will be fed the fuzzy location, based on real data: To a few meters of precision.
I'm so glad big brother is watching me! It's douple-plus good that I'm being watched!
Hmmm, I'm not convinced the sole purpose of the post was to insult and enrage, but you have a point.
from an atheistic standpoint without morality
There it is again.
I'm not the one who tried to move it to religion.
See, this is why you made the foe list: You turn to religious arguments, then say you didn't. Saw that coming... and for the record, I'm not atheist, I'm agnostic. I'm waiting for proof either way.
Anyway, let's pretend you didn't for a sec there...
So no, violence and sex aren't the same thing, and should not be rated the same.
Yes, the U.S. has the sentence "sex and violence" ingrained in i's collective conciousness to the point where it seems impossible to discuss this matter beyond the scope of that conditioning, as this thread depressigly demonstrate, but that doesn't make it natural in the sense of "congenital", but natural in the sense of "habitual".
There's the futility of discussing subjects when the whole argument is split on different meanings of a word being debated.
So, yes, there is such a thing as sex and violence in movies: Rape scenes. You have both, or rough sex, but that's somewhat different. And as far as real sex VS simulated violence, that is a non-argument, as it only demonstrate how wrong you are to lump sex and violence together. There is real violence shown on TV, on the news, on sports broadcasts.
Hell, here's the ultimate demonstration of the insanity I'm decrying: The "wardrobe malfunction" incident. One split second of a niple: MAJOR outcry. Repeated violence and injuries: Good clean fun.
Football is violence, 100% wholesome American fun. Show one nipple, and it's been defiled! Lawsuits, fortunes in fines, outrage!
I was originally modd'd down for flamebait - I apoligize
Any criticism of the Republican Party, or United State policy in general, is moderated as flamebait. They don't want it heard.
It astonishes me the blind naiviety of these Republicans who insist they aren't convinced that Global warming is happening.
It astonishes me that you don't realise that they are evil and lying, not naive and blind.
They know they're fucking up the environment: They don't care, as long as their profits keep rising along with the temperature.
Black with white (dense) hollow hair, that acts similar to millions of small fiber optic pieces to channel light down to the black skin, where it is more efficiently used.
:-S
So, more accurately think of an old black man with white hair. I know a few of those, and they are pretty cool!
Cool? But... But... But you said it was to warm them!
I'm all confused now
Or do you expect for me to be ashamed that I have a religious belief? Please. You're not dealing with a 12 year old looking for acceptance from his peers.
No, I'm just realising that your belief that sex and violence are the same comes from some religion, apparently you aren't pretending to be christian, whichever it is, I've had conversation about morality with people before who like you say "the atheist point of view", they usually mean that morality is god-given, and that infidels are immoral.
The example above was to illustrate how immoral religious views can be. Name me your organised belief, I will tell you an example of immoral teaching it has, if you want. There's always plenty to choose from.
Uh, this is a discussion about the ratings of film based on sex and or violence. This entire conversation is about the perception of sex and violence in popular media.
This specific sub-thread was about the origins of that perception. Nature VS nurture.
you're not getting the point or you're being a troll.
I lost interest and became flippant when you moved from "nature VS nurture" to supernatural origins of morality. Please, please, if you think I'm troling you, stop replying, by all means: Don't feed the trolls.
the cemetery became lost to the trees and such. Nowadays, teenagers use it for god-knows-what
;- )
Drinking beer.
There, one mystery solved
I have seen them, and they are not headlights from cars. That is pretty obvious. You are most likely to see them in times of high humidity, and very late at night.
When cars headlights are on high, and the atmosphere is ripe to reflect them. Brilliant deduction, Sherlock!
And if we're going to go back to the atheist way of looking at things
Ah, bible thumper.
Remember: You must not suffer a witch to live! I won't keep you, I'm sure you have a few bonfires to start.
violence and murder are just as valid an action as is sex.
I'll never trust someone who lumps "sex" and "violence" in the same category... Their girlfriends do tend to "walk into doors" and "fall down stairs" a whole lot.
designed the suit with that in mind, and added padding to deal with it.
In the 70's, the crooners put rolled up socks down their pants.
Behold the 21st century! Now teams of costume designers labour for a month on a cod piece, and then "leak" information about how noticeable it is.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Censoring a movie would be an accurate description if the MPAA actually edited the movie. They rate the movie which allows consumers to make an educated decision about seeing the movie.
They rate the movie "NC17: No one will ever see it", and they then tell the producer which part to edit out to get it to "R: All the teenagers will come".
They have the freedom to choose between finincial ruin or obeying their decree. Which isn't much a freedom if their endeavour is part of a corporation which is bound by law to do everything it can to increase shareholder value. Choosing financial ruin would lead to lawsuits from their investors.
You can't honestly tell me that you don't think sex is more taboo in society compared to violence?
I'm saying that has nothing to do with nature. It's a learned taboo.
I know (sadly) plenty of people who leave their home page to the browser default. For IE this is MSN.
And Hotmail takes you there when you logoff.
Google's numbers are 2-3 times lower!
So that tells us you need two to three less pages to find what you want at google. Which is why I google, and I don't yahoo.