| calyman |
27-06-2010 11:55 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shasown
(Post 3407512)
1. Except Pauline Christianity had become the majority religion in Europe.
2. No disagreement at all.
3. Dont we get that in real life and its not always religious leaders. As for section 28 and its repeal, thats a full debate in itself.
4. Those 27 people dont really hold that much influence, they are meant to represent the views of all adherents to any faith(amusing that isnt it, yet no mullahs presently sit in the upper house, how long before that is changed. A senate type thing would be nice but the British Public aint as perverse as the US in voting.
5. Aint tried to score points off you, I dont do try. But calling someone superstitious because they hold to a faith is not exactly respectful. Has any religious person shown disrespect to you on this site? You dont need to demand intepretation either the person understands, or they dont and you have to explain, if you want to.
As for evidence, you would have to address an aderent of a particular religion to see what evidence they could supply. But even if they couldnt supply satisfactory evidence isnt that what they call faith? Yeah I know I hate that argument as well.
Thing is Dave hasnt been hypocritical,unlike a majority of the housemates. He has stood by the tenets of his faith.
Incidentally he isnt a Catholic, thats just a general note not addressed to you in particular.
|
Just as I said before, the Rome based version of christianity became the dominant one.
Regarding the influence of few individuals; it only took 5 Republican judges to give Bush the US Presidency in 2000.
Whether you still consider me as disrespectful for calling faith believers superstitious, does not detract from the statement. An unsubstantiated belief, with no foundation in fact or science, is still superstition. Believers in superstition for instance, insist on refering to the "theory" of evolution, when it quite clearly is a fact. What is theoretical is the mechanism of evolution. Faith believers have many names for others; Heathen, Gentile, Goyum, damned, Heretic, Blasphemer etc. None of those names cause me any lack of sleep, I've even had a christian accuse me of being the spawn of the devil, before collapsing on the floor and speaking in tongues (true). On that basis, I think using "superstition" is not offensive, disrespectful or intended to hurt, it's just what I think.
In general, I am always ready to discuss matters of superstition v science, but the minimum I expect from any person is mutual respect. I don't buy into mumbo jumbo and don't expect anyone to acknowledge that which I cannot defend by rational and scientific insight.
edit: Not that I directly accuse the person of being a believer in mumbo jumbo, just that they have superstitious beliefs. |
