More of the same old, same old, you can't knock down my arguments so you engage in petty attacks on me. Just more proof that people who believe the bible are not capable of constructing a logical argument, because they're too used to taking everything of faith.
Petty attack? I question your authority to decide if the Bible is consistent or not.
So you are claiming that God allowed slavery to prevent people from sining. That's a very weak God, when he can't find a better solution.
Well, as you say the CREATOR OF ALL THINGS made a stupid decision. I guess I should believe you. Your lack of knowledge on how a Jewish slave-owner treats his slave is the reason why you can't see how good of a ruling it was.
In the morning, the slave and his master wake up and both want breakfast. Who makes the food? The master. Who eats the food made by the master? The slave. Who makes the coffee? The master. Who drinks the coffee? The slave.
One pillow in the whole house to sleep with, who gets it? The slave, rather than the master.
Not only that, but a slave owner only gets to keep a slave until the Shmita year (happens in 7-year cycles), at which point the slave owner is obliged to send the former slave with many gifts. Of course, the slave can choose to stay with his master, but even then he can only stay until the Jubilee year (50-year cycles).
It sounds pretty good to be a slave of a Jew.
Again, this is just people using God as a reason to kill off people with different beliefs. How is this less of a crime against humanity than what went on in Bosnia, or in Hitller's Germany?
That is, assuming God doesn't exist and therefore doesn't own all of his creations.
These weren't defensive actions. They were attacks. There is no justification for attacking and slaughtering people because their beliefs are different. If there were, I'd have to worry about you attacking me physically, and vice versa.
They were idolators. That is, the worshiped gods other than the only true God. When you don't even acknowledge the One who made you, what rights do you have before Him? Again, this assumes God doesn't exist and therefore didn't give the command to attack.
Here you go - old and new testament quotes:
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Leviticus 20:13.
and
"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:32.
That doesn't give me any impression that I should hate homosexuals. Just because I kill a person doesn't mean I hate them.
Just do a google for "god hates fags" and see the garbage that pops up, complete with bible references, about how gays and lesbians are supposedly committing abominations against god, put up by people who call themselves believers in god.
Well, of course those people have a distorted view of things. What they believe doesn't apply to me, however.
The bible doesn't equate stealing with homosexuality. Stealing is a sin, but the bible reserves the much severer term of "abomination" for homosexuality and lesbianism.
Whoopideedoo? It is man's free will that allows him to decide to be a thief or homosexual (despite ANY environmental forces at work). That was my point, which you seemingly missed.
At least gays and lesbians are more charitable than the god-fearing. They would agree that if someone stole from you, or prevented you from marrying the person of your choice, that they were doing wrong. Why can't you show them the same respect?
What they say doesn't affect my view that the lifestyle they've chosen is wrong.
Cat got your tongue? I was able to come up with several examples of the Bible being a book filled with
Again, MY point was that the Bible is not self-consistent, so, since it is flawed, it should not be exempt from regulation by the FCC.
You say this with what authoritative knowledge? Because you read the Bible 20 times as well as in Greek? You have no idea what is said in the Bible, so how can you say it is not self-consistent?
I stated in this thread that the bible promoted genocide. I gave examples. Did you refute them? No. Instead you attacked me, without success.
You mention the killing and enslavement of people promoted by God, yes. Of course, in contemporary Judaism it is understood that God doesn't like slavery. If he was to forbid such a prevalent practice as slavery (which was the normal thing for all winning nations in those times) then he'd be causing people to sin.
You also forget to mention the responsibilities of a Jewish slave-owner as told in the Bible. The responsibilities that need to be fulfilled are understood by contemporary Judaism as a measure to slowly faze out slavery over time.
Also, the 7 nations which were to be kicked out of Canaan were given warnings to leave and not be harmed. Some even took the Israelites up on the offer. And since God made everything, he owns everything, and therefore He has full rights to take land away from one nation and give it to another.
Killing and death come with war, it's part of the territory.
I stated, again, in this thread, that the Bible promotes hatred of gays and lesbians. Again, I gave examples. Again, you are unable to do anything but attack the bearer of the bad news:-(
Examples? You gave examples of common Christian dogma. You didn't give book, chapter, and verse examples of the Bible promoting hatred of homosexuals.
I stated, again, in this thread, and in several entries in my journal, the biological basis for accepting gays, lesbians, and transexuals as part of the normal human mosaic, and that people who use religion to attack members of these groups, or marginalize them, are promoting hatred. The FCC is in charge of the public airwaves, and wants to regulate swear words. I think that regulating people promoting religions that instill prejudice and hatred to minorities in the name of God is more important than a "fuck" or "shit" or "tit" that didn't get bleeped out. Again, instead of providing an argument as to why I'm wrong, you just spout off against me.
Normal has nothing to do with it. Whether or not a person is born with homosexual tendencies doesn't change the fact that it is immoral and a sin. Of course, environmental conditions that someone is in affect the decision to live a homosexual life.
Homosexuality as a sin is akin to theft or lying. People are born with certain tendencies to lie or steal, but no matter how much you wanna take that pack of bubblegum without paying for it, it is still WRONG and against the law to do so.
If we take you as an example, we'd have to conclude that an inability to think logically is a prerequisite for believing in God.
Instead of attacking me, attack my arguments. Prove that God even exists. I've already provided proofs, both here and in my journal, that the God of the Bible doesn't. Refute them.
I didn't see that as a prerequisite to debunk you arguments that the Bible was a hate-mongering and inconsistent piece of literature. An argument on the existence of God is a lengthy one (I know, being involved in 3 seperate arguments in the past) and certainly not suitable for this argument.
Prove that gays and lesbians are doing something wrong. I've already proven, both here and in my journal, that they are normal.
AIDS, lack of reproduction, lack of the proper "equipment" to get the job done (as compared to heterosexual sex in which both parties have the absolute perfect equipment to get the job done), all give an argument that homosexuality is certainly not proper behavior for human bein
My point? Your arguments are worthless until you have actual knowledge to back them up.
And quit spouting how many times you've read the Bible and in the different laguages you've read it in to make you're arguments see somewhat authoritative. You might catch people who don't have a clue, but you don't fool the half-knowledgable.
The "Christian" Bible includes such Jewish authorities as Jesus, Paul, John, etc. I am quite aware of the contents of both the Torah and New Testament, and also am at least fluent enough in Jewish law to be termed a beginner. Your arguments lack logic as well as knowledge of the scriptures that you've wasted 20 reads on. What's scary is the amount of time you've already spent to debunk the Bible and yet clearly have no knowledge of what is actually being said, yet feel knowledgable enough to make such inflammatory arguments. You are a victim of the same mentality that "bible thumpers" are victims of - That the entire Bible can be taken completely literally. Then add to that lack of historical knowledge of the times and you've made up a totally different book than I read.
You seem to believe you're an authority on the bible simply because you've read it in multiple languages. Yet you seem to believe that the Christian interpretation of the Bible as the only worthy view to counter (or perhaps believe it to be the only interpretation available). Of course it's easy to counter, but I'm sure if you tried you're arguments with any educated Orthodox Jew you'd find your arguments to break down rather easily.
At first I was tempted to say that I'd much rather have the USA be more of an atheist country than religious (Christian), but when I see things like this I see that the religious aspect needs to be held to keep ignorant people like you from going to far in your descrimination.
This is slightly off topic, but I felt compelled to speak my piece.
I say different versions use different species of penguin. Check this out. Tons of species with rather business-friendly names. King, Emperor (doesn't the middle one make you think "Godfather"?), as well as penguins with that corpate-ish look, like the Rockhopper, Erect-crested, Snares, and Fiordland. My personal vote is for the Rockhopper, or perhaps a more true-to-form (fatter, taller, and smaller head) Emperor penguin.
Of course, there is also the Jackass penguin, but I'm not sure anybody will go for that.
It seems that both the GPL and BSD licenses have their place in the world.
I tend more to agree with the GPL because it does give what I believe to be necessary restrictions. Anything, including freedom, taken to its extreme is incredibly dangerous.
Imagine that there are no restrictions to which side of the road you can drive on, what you can do with someone elses property (can't steal or "borrow without permission"), etc. True freedom requires limits or it becomes dangerous; restrictions taken to the extreme are equally dangerous.
No thanks, I'll pass. I'll just wait until the president starts hiring mercinaries in the place of army personnel to protect our vast empire before I abandon ship.
Yes, something will replace ham radio if it dies, but that doesn't make it OK to kill ham radio. If humans die, a new dominate speciese will probably appear after a few million years, does that mean we should kill all humans? After all, only a few species want/depend on humans. For many others, humans are "in the way" of their "progress". Same logic, just a rediculous example.
This is probably the lamest example to defend HAMS that I have ever seen. Stop being so melodramatic. It's not the end of the world if the HAM dies. You'll find a new hobby, I promise.
Ham radio does more than just FEMA stuff. Hams help with parades, marathons, races, triathalons, storm chasing, teaching electronic and radio theory to new people, providing a new and interesting way to communicate, all sorts of research, etc. Ham radio fosters good will with other countries. You can talk to other countries, meet interesting people, etc. In some remote areas (like in some island chains) ham radio can be a major source of interisland communication.
Well great, all of those terribly important examples of HAM use really hit hard. But I can do all of that AND MORE with say, cell phones and internet access. "Parades, marathons, races, triathalons, storm chasing, teaching electronic..." All can be done with cells. The only one I have any doubt with is storm chasing as I don't know what sort of interference an electrically charged cloud has on cell phones.
There are even better and truly new ways to communicate other than with Ham. How about VoIP? Maybe a little instant messaging with video on the side?
The internet is also a great olive branch to the world. And I'm sure you can find someone from the Christmas Islands to talk to on the internet.
How would you like it if ATVs were banned from being used and sold because of their environmental impact? Why make the environment suffer for your little hobby. You could still ride bikes, you could switch to that. Quit holding back environmental progress by clining to some pointless hobby that doesn't even serve the community (like ham radio does)?
As has been pointed out, there are some different motor vehicles that are being banned. Tough luck, right?
Don't drag down my hobby just because you don't care, please.
Please don't retard progress for the sake of your hobby, please.
PS: All of this is ignoring that fact that my ham radio frequencies are protected BY LAW and that the power companys CAN NOT interfer with them. We're not just some group saying "don't kill our hobby", our hobby is legally protected.
We'll see what legal wrangling will be done with this situation.
Although you make some valid points, your attempt to sensationalize them only took away from the arguments you posed. The only legs you have to stand on are the laws protecting Ham communication and that "teaching radio theory" argument. All the others are just fluffy filler to make your arguments seem more important.
They should have been nominated for best foreign film. I mean, there were at least 3 different languages besides English that they spoke in it! I'm sure there is a country out their who's population speaks Elvish or whatever it is people from Mordor speak!
Executives have said for some time that there was no major release of Windows planned before Longhorn. At the Windows Hardware Engineering Conference in May, Senior Vice President Will Poole said: "Don't expect an interim release."
Poole said at that time that Longhorn would ship in 2005. Microsoft later backed away from that date, saying only that it would ship
when it is ready. However, until now, Microsoft has reiterated that no new versions of Windows were planned before Longhorn.
Longhorn = Vaporware.
What would be the funniest thing is if one day I were to mod a Phantom to become a nice (possible cheap) computer and play a bit of DNF on it as well. I'm sure that would be a/. article!
Man, to think Mr. Gates has to spend company money to secure his OS, whereas Linux users (in the U.S.) just need to pay their taxes to get an extra secure system.
And at least for me, knowing that the NSA is using Fedora Core 2 as a development platform makes me more likely to use it than other distros (although admittedly I already had a liking for Fedora Core for the get go). Perhaps it's stupid to let a thing like that sway me, but it definitely adds to a conversation...
Friend: Linux? Huh?
Me: Ya, it's an OS that even has the NSA making security patches for it too.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe this is related to this event http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/13/232229 &mode=thread&tid=109&tid=187 ?
Only two days after MS fixed the problem. Maybe some hiccups afterwards?
Maybe now out of fear people will upgrade to IE6 or even switch to Firefox? I'll just keep dreaming...
Agreed, slavery was not a good thing.
More of the same old, same old, you can't knock down my arguments so you engage in petty attacks on me. Just more proof that people who believe the bible are not capable of constructing a logical argument, because they're too used to taking everything of faith.
Petty attack? I question your authority to decide if the Bible is consistent or not.
So you are claiming that God allowed slavery to prevent people from sining. That's a very weak God, when he can't find a better solution.
Well, as you say the CREATOR OF ALL THINGS made a stupid decision. I guess I should believe you. Your lack of knowledge on how a Jewish slave-owner treats his slave is the reason why you can't see how good of a ruling it was.
In the morning, the slave and his master wake up and both want breakfast. Who makes the food? The master. Who eats the food made by the master? The slave. Who makes the coffee? The master. Who drinks the coffee? The slave.
One pillow in the whole house to sleep with, who gets it? The slave, rather than the master.
Not only that, but a slave owner only gets to keep a slave until the Shmita year (happens in 7-year cycles), at which point the slave owner is obliged to send the former slave with many gifts. Of course, the slave can choose to stay with his master, but even then he can only stay until the Jubilee year (50-year cycles).
It sounds pretty good to be a slave of a Jew.
Again, this is just people using God as a reason to kill off people with different beliefs. How is this less of a crime against humanity than what went on in Bosnia, or in Hitller's Germany?
That is, assuming God doesn't exist and therefore doesn't own all of his creations.
These weren't defensive actions. They were attacks. There is no justification for attacking and slaughtering people because their beliefs are different. If there were, I'd have to worry about you attacking me physically, and vice versa.
They were idolators. That is, the worshiped gods other than the only true God. When you don't even acknowledge the One who made you, what rights do you have before Him? Again, this assumes God doesn't exist and therefore didn't give the command to attack.
Here you go - old and new testament quotes: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Leviticus 20:13. and "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:32.
That doesn't give me any impression that I should hate homosexuals. Just because I kill a person doesn't mean I hate them.
Just do a google for "god hates fags" and see the garbage that pops up, complete with bible references, about how gays and lesbians are supposedly committing abominations against god, put up by people who call themselves believers in god.
Well, of course those people have a distorted view of things. What they believe doesn't apply to me, however.
The bible doesn't equate stealing with homosexuality. Stealing is a sin, but the bible reserves the much severer term of "abomination" for homosexuality and lesbianism.
Whoopideedoo? It is man's free will that allows him to decide to be a thief or homosexual (despite ANY environmental forces at work). That was my point, which you seemingly missed.
At least gays and lesbians are more charitable than the god-fearing. They would agree that if someone stole from you, or prevented you from marrying the person of your choice, that they were doing wrong. Why can't you show them the same respect?
What they say doesn't affect my view that the lifestyle they've chosen is wrong.
Cat got your tongue? I was able to come up with several examples of the Bible being a book filled with
Again, MY point was that the Bible is not self-consistent, so, since it is flawed, it should not be exempt from regulation by the FCC.
:-(
You say this with what authoritative knowledge? Because you read the Bible 20 times as well as in Greek? You have no idea what is said in the Bible, so how can you say it is not self-consistent?
I stated in this thread that the bible promoted genocide. I gave examples. Did you refute them? No. Instead you attacked me, without success.
You mention the killing and enslavement of people promoted by God, yes. Of course, in contemporary Judaism it is understood that God doesn't like slavery. If he was to forbid such a prevalent practice as slavery (which was the normal thing for all winning nations in those times) then he'd be causing people to sin.
You also forget to mention the responsibilities of a Jewish slave-owner as told in the Bible. The responsibilities that need to be fulfilled are understood by contemporary Judaism as a measure to slowly faze out slavery over time.
Also, the 7 nations which were to be kicked out of Canaan were given warnings to leave and not be harmed. Some even took the Israelites up on the offer. And since God made everything, he owns everything, and therefore He has full rights to take land away from one nation and give it to another.
Killing and death come with war, it's part of the territory.
I stated, again, in this thread, that the Bible promotes hatred of gays and lesbians. Again, I gave examples. Again, you are unable to do anything but attack the bearer of the bad news
Examples? You gave examples of common Christian dogma. You didn't give book, chapter, and verse examples of the Bible promoting hatred of homosexuals.
I stated, again, in this thread, and in several entries in my journal, the biological basis for accepting gays, lesbians, and transexuals as part of the normal human mosaic, and that people who use religion to attack members of these groups, or marginalize them, are promoting hatred. The FCC is in charge of the public airwaves, and wants to regulate swear words. I think that regulating people promoting religions that instill prejudice and hatred to minorities in the name of God is more important than a "fuck" or "shit" or "tit" that didn't get bleeped out. Again, instead of providing an argument as to why I'm wrong, you just spout off against me.
Normal has nothing to do with it. Whether or not a person is born with homosexual tendencies doesn't change the fact that it is immoral and a sin. Of course, environmental conditions that someone is in affect the decision to live a homosexual life.
Homosexuality as a sin is akin to theft or lying. People are born with certain tendencies to lie or steal, but no matter how much you wanna take that pack of bubblegum without paying for it, it is still WRONG and against the law to do so.
If we take you as an example, we'd have to conclude that an inability to think logically is a prerequisite for believing in God.
Instead of attacking me, attack my arguments. Prove that God even exists. I've already provided proofs, both here and in my journal, that the God of the Bible doesn't. Refute them.
I didn't see that as a prerequisite to debunk you arguments that the Bible was a hate-mongering and inconsistent piece of literature. An argument on the existence of God is a lengthy one (I know, being involved in 3 seperate arguments in the past) and certainly not suitable for this argument.
Prove that gays and lesbians are doing something wrong. I've already proven, both here and in my journal, that they are normal.
AIDS, lack of reproduction, lack of the proper "equipment" to get the job done (as compared to heterosexual sex in which both parties have the absolute perfect equipment to get the job done), all give an argument that homosexuality is certainly not proper behavior for human bein
My point? Your arguments are worthless until you have actual knowledge to back them up.
And quit spouting how many times you've read the Bible and in the different laguages you've read it in to make you're arguments see somewhat authoritative. You might catch people who don't have a clue, but you don't fool the half-knowledgable.
The "Christian" Bible includes such Jewish authorities as Jesus, Paul, John, etc. I am quite aware of the contents of both the Torah and New Testament, and also am at least fluent enough in Jewish law to be termed a beginner. Your arguments lack logic as well as knowledge of the scriptures that you've wasted 20 reads on. What's scary is the amount of time you've already spent to debunk the Bible and yet clearly have no knowledge of what is actually being said, yet feel knowledgable enough to make such inflammatory arguments. You are a victim of the same mentality that "bible thumpers" are victims of - That the entire Bible can be taken completely literally. Then add to that lack of historical knowledge of the times and you've made up a totally different book than I read.
You seem to believe you're an authority on the bible simply because you've read it in multiple languages. Yet you seem to believe that the Christian interpretation of the Bible as the only worthy view to counter (or perhaps believe it to be the only interpretation available). Of course it's easy to counter, but I'm sure if you tried you're arguments with any educated Orthodox Jew you'd find your arguments to break down rather easily.
At first I was tempted to say that I'd much rather have the USA be more of an atheist country than religious (Christian), but when I see things like this I see that the religious aspect needs to be held to keep ignorant people like you from going to far in your descrimination.
This is slightly off topic, but I felt compelled to speak my piece.
So being able to respond to spam is his God-given right?
I say different versions use different species of penguin. Check this out. Tons of species with rather business-friendly names. King, Emperor (doesn't the middle one make you think "Godfather"?), as well as penguins with that corpate-ish look, like the Rockhopper, Erect-crested, Snares, and Fiordland. My personal vote is for the Rockhopper, or perhaps a more true-to-form (fatter, taller, and smaller head) Emperor penguin.
Of course, there is also the Jackass penguin, but I'm not sure anybody will go for that.
It seems that both the GPL and BSD licenses have their place in the world.
I tend more to agree with the GPL because it does give what I believe to be necessary restrictions. Anything, including freedom, taken to its extreme is incredibly dangerous.
Imagine that there are no restrictions to which side of the road you can drive on, what you can do with someone elses property (can't steal or "borrow without permission"), etc. True freedom requires limits or it becomes dangerous; restrictions taken to the extreme are equally dangerous.
No thanks, I'll pass. I'll just wait until the president starts hiring mercinaries in the place of army personnel to protect our vast empire before I abandon ship.
Yes, something will replace ham radio if it dies, but that doesn't make it OK to kill ham radio. If humans die, a new dominate speciese will probably appear after a few million years, does that mean we should kill all humans? After all, only a few species want/depend on humans. For many others, humans are "in the way" of their "progress". Same logic, just a rediculous example.
This is probably the lamest example to defend HAMS that I have ever seen. Stop being so melodramatic. It's not the end of the world if the HAM dies. You'll find a new hobby, I promise.
Ham radio does more than just FEMA stuff. Hams help with parades, marathons, races, triathalons, storm chasing, teaching electronic and radio theory to new people, providing a new and interesting way to communicate, all sorts of research, etc. Ham radio fosters good will with other countries. You can talk to other countries, meet interesting people, etc. In some remote areas (like in some island chains) ham radio can be a major source of interisland communication.
Well great, all of those terribly important examples of HAM use really hit hard. But I can do all of that AND MORE with say, cell phones and internet access. "Parades, marathons, races, triathalons, storm chasing, teaching electronic..." All can be done with cells. The only one I have any doubt with is storm chasing as I don't know what sort of interference an electrically charged cloud has on cell phones.
There are even better and truly new ways to communicate other than with Ham. How about VoIP? Maybe a little instant messaging with video on the side?
The internet is also a great olive branch to the world. And I'm sure you can find someone from the Christmas Islands to talk to on the internet.
How would you like it if ATVs were banned from being used and sold because of their environmental impact? Why make the environment suffer for your little hobby. You could still ride bikes, you could switch to that. Quit holding back environmental progress by clining to some pointless hobby that doesn't even serve the community (like ham radio does)?
As has been pointed out, there are some different motor vehicles that are being banned. Tough luck, right?
Don't drag down my hobby just because you don't care, please.
Please don't retard progress for the sake of your hobby, please.
PS: All of this is ignoring that fact that my ham radio frequencies are protected BY LAW and that the power companys CAN NOT interfer with them. We're not just some group saying "don't kill our hobby", our hobby is legally protected.
We'll see what legal wrangling will be done with this situation.
Although you make some valid points, your attempt to sensationalize them only took away from the arguments you posed. The only legs you have to stand on are the laws protecting Ham communication and that "teaching radio theory" argument. All the others are just fluffy filler to make your arguments seem more important.
Wonder if we'll just need to use a permanent marker for our mp3's as well...
They should have been nominated for best foreign film. I mean, there were at least 3 different languages besides English that they spoke in it! I'm sure there is a country out their who's population speaks Elvish or whatever it is people from Mordor speak!
Maybe he already had the Tablet PC sitting around the house and didn't want to waste a palm?
Man, to think Mr. Gates has to spend company money to secure his OS, whereas Linux users (in the U.S.) just need to pay their taxes to get an extra secure system.
And at least for me, knowing that the NSA is using Fedora Core 2 as a development platform makes me more likely to use it than other distros (although admittedly I already had a liking for Fedora Core for the get go). Perhaps it's stupid to let a thing like that sway me, but it definitely adds to a conversation...
Friend: Linux? Huh?
Me: Ya, it's an OS that even has the NSA making security patches for it too.
Friend: Nice. But does it play my games?
Me: Doh!
Womandrake? Girldrake maybe? Or perhaps a bit more classy: Ladydrake. Galdrake...