Adam and Eve had the choice. Follow God or die. Remember, their pain, suffering and laboring didn't start until AFTER both took from the tree of good and evil. They had a choice. Now we suffer because of original sin.
Why should I be punished for what Adam or Eve did? Doesn't YHWH have a choice as well? This creator gave us the capability to suffer and should be blamed for committing that crime.
He died so you could live.
How does that work. I don't understand the mechanics behind that. Why did he have to die to accomplish this feat? Isn't it possible that his propaganda was made to deceive us? Maybe he was jealous of real gods like Zeus. Maybe his followers were just mad. Delusion is far more common than resurrection.
Do you think God punishes you because you cut yourself or bruise your arm or get into a car accident?
If this god who created me could have made me impervious and chose not to, then, yes, I will blame him. I blame the creator for making the influenza virus as well.
I hope you'll re-examine yours and accept Christ as your savior today.
I hope you will re-examine yours and accept Odin as your savior today.
A kind and just god wouldn't punish Jesus in order to exonerate others. If I were omnipotent, I would eradicate pain, suffering, and death unconditionally.
Jesus did not take his own life. He GAVE his life up while we (all of us) crucified Him. There is a difference.
Sure, he didn't pull the trigger or nail himself to a cross. On that same merit I can jump in front of a moving bus and blame the driver for not stopping. The point is that he intentionally let himself die, which qualifies him as suicidal in many people's eyes.
Well if it is a spirit or deity breaking the laws of physics, then I'm going to call it magic. I would add further nuance to your definition by noting that some people consider telekinesis to be paranormal rather than supernatural. In that sense, telekinesis and other psychic powers are sometimes thought to be amenable to the physical universe, but not yet understood by mainstream scientists.
It might not be so easy to kill Hercules. You have to remember how he met his end. He was covered in caustic oil and in such pain that he asked his friends to euthanize him. So they built a funeral pyre and Hercules jumped in. The flames didn't kill him; they only made his suffering worse. The poor chap begged for mercy and his dad took pity on him and turned him into a constellation.
Interesting parallel to Jesus' "father, why hast thou forsaken me" line.
Do you think that Jesus had magical powers (Hint: the church considers magic a black art)
Yes, the church also condemns smiting, but YHWH was purported to have done a fair share of smiting back in the day.
I understood that Jesus' disciples claimed that he could turn water into wine, walk on water, and resurrect Lazarus. If those aren't magical powers, then you and I have a different definition of magic.
Jesus had a father who was a god and a mother who was mortal, just like Hercules did. I think that Jesus should be considered a half-god like Hercules was. Hercules could probably beat Jesus in a fight- I mean, you couldn't kill Hercules just by nailing him to a wooden cross.
That does not necessarily happen between the US and UK. I travel between the two countries several times a year and have never been questioned about the electronics that I've had with me.
Additionally, the left shift key is not as far to the left and one doesn't need to extend as far to the right to reach the enter key. This makes the American keyboard more ergonomic for people with small hands like mine.
I'll never figure out why we'll use a bomb which costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to snipe someone... when a 10 cent bullet would do the trick just fine.
The public is more forgiving of civilian massacres when bombs are used rather than rifles a la No Gun Ri.
Pope Urban II made crossbows illegal in 1097, fearing that the weapon would lead to man's extinction. Pope Innocent II forbade the "deadly and God-detested art of slingers and archers." Of course the Vatican allowed archers to be employed if they were on a crusade.
It may sound like a good idea, but with so many politicians indentured to big media corporations, I have a hard time imagining that this will turn into anything other than ill-conceived pork-barrel spending.
I agree that reproductive freedoms should be protected. However I personally consider people who recklessly spread disease (viral, genetic or otherwise) to be lacking civic virtue.
I do agree with you on the idea that if gene therapy can prevent the transmission of certain problems (such as MD), then go for it. But to deny a life because you can't prevent it? That is criminal in my mind.
What do you mean when you say: "deny a life"? Is a woman who refuses to become pregnant denying her potential children their right to live?
If people really want to have a larval human to boss around, can't they just adopt? I don't advocate forced sterilization, but I still think that people should be aware of how their decisions can adversely affect the lives of others.
You're aware that some of the greatest minds propably wouldn't have been born if genetic manipulation and selective breating had been involved?
Yes, and if my parents didn't have sex on a Saturday, I would have never been born. Outlawing genetic engineering would be no more useful in increasing the genius population, than outlawing weekday sex would.
Your argument doesn't take into account the number of geniuses who are perfectly healthy. You also fail to mention those who suffer from a genetic disease, but are average in all other respects.
I agree that many good things have come about by accident. However, it is not logical to assume that we will yield any benefit from promoting accidents. Just as letting ALS fester, will not create more physicists. It also doesn't follow that curtailing accidents will end novel development. We couldn't put an end to all defects and mistakes even if we wanted to, so the point is moot.
It's not sure that Hawkins would have been so smart if he had a fully functional body. Maybe he is so smart because he does not?
Regardless of what ALS did for Hawkings, it is not right to transmit this disease to others even if we find that the illness helps them focus on writing.
Besides the nature have proven to be a good system until now
Nature? The same nature that created cancer and spina bifida and cystic fibrosis and hemophilia and hundreds of other genetic diseases? I don't trust nature at all.
Theoretically, cloning on a mass scale could lead to a lack of genetic diversity in a population.
It would be hard enough for an average couple to agree who the ideal clone should be made from. Do you honestly believe that there is a substantial risk that the majority of people would choose the same person to clone?
Slashdot Mirror
Adam and Eve had the choice. Follow God or die. Remember, their pain, suffering and laboring didn't start until AFTER both took from the tree of good and evil. They had a choice. Now we suffer because of original sin.
Why should I be punished for what Adam or Eve did? Doesn't YHWH have a choice as well? This creator gave us the capability to suffer and should be blamed for committing that crime.
He died so you could live.
How does that work. I don't understand the mechanics behind that. Why did he have to die to accomplish this feat? Isn't it possible that his propaganda was made to deceive us? Maybe he was jealous of real gods like Zeus. Maybe his followers were just mad. Delusion is far more common than resurrection.
Do you think God punishes you because you cut yourself or bruise your arm or get into a car accident?
If this god who created me could have made me impervious and chose not to, then, yes, I will blame him. I blame the creator for making the influenza virus as well.
I hope you'll re-examine yours and accept Christ as your savior today.
I hope you will re-examine yours and accept Odin as your savior today.
Click here to read about Cory Doctorow's problems the iTunes DRM.
A kind and just god wouldn't punish Jesus in order to exonerate others. If I were omnipotent, I would eradicate pain, suffering, and death unconditionally.
Are you now claiming that Jesus did not intend to die?
You should do a google search on self immolation to discover that those who commit suicide do not always take the quickest and most painless route.
Jesus did not take his own life. He GAVE his life up while we (all of us) crucified Him. There is a difference.
Sure, he didn't pull the trigger or nail himself to a cross. On that same merit I can jump in front of a moving bus and blame the driver for not stopping. The point is that he intentionally let himself die, which qualifies him as suicidal in many people's eyes.
Well if it is a spirit or deity breaking the laws of physics, then I'm going to call it magic. I would add further nuance to your definition by noting that some people consider telekinesis to be paranormal rather than supernatural. In that sense, telekinesis and other psychic powers are sometimes thought to be amenable to the physical universe, but not yet understood by mainstream scientists.
It might not be so easy to kill Hercules. You have to remember how he met his end. He was covered in caustic oil and in such pain that he asked his friends to euthanize him. So they built a funeral pyre and Hercules jumped in. The flames didn't kill him; they only made his suffering worse. The poor chap begged for mercy and his dad took pity on him and turned him into a constellation.
Interesting parallel to Jesus' "father, why hast thou forsaken me" line.
Jesus had the power to bring himself down from the cross, but he GAVE his life up out of love for you and me, so that we may all be saved.
Hmm... interesting. So, this must be an early example of suicide by police.
Yes, the church also condemns smiting, but YHWH was purported to have done a fair share of smiting back in the day.
I understood that Jesus' disciples claimed that he could turn water into wine, walk on water, and resurrect Lazarus. If those aren't magical powers, then you and I have a different definition of magic.
Do you think that if Jesus mated with a mortal and had children, their magical powers would be attenuated because they are only 25% god?
Do you think that a person bitten by resurrected Jesus would turn into a brain-eating zombie?
Jesus had a father who was a god and a mother who was mortal, just like Hercules did. I think that Jesus should be considered a half-god like Hercules was. Hercules could probably beat Jesus in a fight- I mean, you couldn't kill Hercules just by nailing him to a wooden cross.
If you like movies about re-animated corpses, you may also like the new version of Dawn of the Dead. Here is a review that compares the two films.
That does not necessarily happen between the US and UK. I travel between the two countries several times a year and have never been questioned about the electronics that I've had with me.
Additionally, the left shift key is not as far to the left and one doesn't need to extend as far to the right to reach the enter key. This makes the American keyboard more ergonomic for people with small hands like mine.
No, you are confusing the post-Soviet Pravda with the old Pravda. It used to be propaganda paper, now it's just a tabloid.
Forgive us for not trusting Fox News since it became the American equivalent of the USSR's Pravda.
I'll never figure out why we'll use a bomb which costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to snipe someone... when a 10 cent bullet would do the trick just fine.
The public is more forgiving of civilian massacres when bombs are used rather than rifles a la No Gun Ri.
Pope Urban II made crossbows illegal in 1097, fearing that the weapon would lead to man's extinction. Pope Innocent II forbade the "deadly and God-detested art of slingers and archers." Of course the Vatican allowed archers to be employed if they were on a crusade.
Google is your friend.
It may sound like a good idea, but with so many politicians indentured to big media corporations, I have a hard time imagining that this will turn into anything other than ill-conceived pork-barrel spending.
What do you mean when you say: "deny a life"? Is a woman who refuses to become pregnant denying her potential children their right to live?
If people really want to have a larval human to boss around, can't they just adopt? I don't advocate forced sterilization, but I still think that people should be aware of how their decisions can adversely affect the lives of others.
Have you ever heard of polio? No one has it any more because it was stamped out through the use of a vaccine.
It was technology that allowed our population to blossom to over six billion, not our chimp-like immune systems.
You're aware that some of the greatest minds propably wouldn't have been born if genetic manipulation and selective breating had been involved?
Yes, and if my parents didn't have sex on a Saturday, I would have never been born. Outlawing genetic engineering would be no more useful in increasing the genius population, than outlawing weekday sex would.
Your argument doesn't take into account the number of geniuses who are perfectly healthy. You also fail to mention those who suffer from a genetic disease, but are average in all other respects.
I agree that many good things have come about by accident. However, it is not logical to assume that we will yield any benefit from promoting accidents. Just as letting ALS fester, will not create more physicists. It also doesn't follow that curtailing accidents will end novel development. We couldn't put an end to all defects and mistakes even if we wanted to, so the point is moot.
It's not sure that Hawkins would have been so smart if he had a fully functional body. Maybe he is so smart because he does not?
Regardless of what ALS did for Hawkings, it is not right to transmit this disease to others even if we find that the illness helps them focus on writing.
Besides the nature have proven to be a good system until now
Nature? The same nature that created cancer and spina bifida and cystic fibrosis and hemophilia and hundreds of other genetic diseases? I don't trust nature at all.
It would be hard enough for an average couple to agree who the ideal clone should be made from. Do you honestly believe that there is a substantial risk that the majority of people would choose the same person to clone?