frenchbabyface: Definitely...religion can be useful, but it also is another way people are divided. Divided people with opposing views - or even without opposing views, but some other conflict of interest - can be very dangerous to one another. Maybe love really exists in religion, but when you see the way some people are treated when they do not live up to the ideals or expectations of their faith, well...you can only wonder.
formerout: Hm, well I had noticed some people saying things about my shortage of years? Perhaps you should read their replies again. I don't care if people are here to piss me off and tell me I am wrong - I wish they would tell me that, and provide sufficient argument why so I could improve my own views. Perhaps you misinterpret the tone of my writing as anger and hatred, when in fact I have a very calm and neutral mood most of the time. I am not venting. Many people make the mistake of assigning an emotional disposition to the author of what they are reading without knowing well enough what is really going on. I read the first portion of that post already, and I don't see how that relates to this discussion at all. Not everyone went through the same thing that man did, and not everyone should be looking to having their opinions stroked and rewarded, misguided or not. Subjectively, some opinions are better than others. The series of replies you have been making to me indicate you are still putting too much emotion and sensitivity into a simple thread, so I think it would be best if you stopped reading this one. I am not trying to say anything insulting by this, it just sounds like you don't understand that my intent is not to be offensive, nor am I angry, lashing out or venting at anyone. I haven't taken any offense from this thread or any at all, ever. I am sorry that you are unable to read my posts with an objective, clear mind.
Narkissos: I see what you are getting at now. In that manner, yes, you are right - however, it really depends on where you draw the line at where that addition is being made, and where the functional rationalization begins. If I am inspired by a beautiful painting, I could think that the function of the painting was to inspire people, for instance (even if that was not the intent of the painter). Is that painting "useless", or "useful"? Can a practical purpose be simply one of giving enjoyment? Perhaps you are right about desire, so long as we do not generalize to all people...some people may not want completely new and unique experiences. But to tie this back to believing things with faith, does this desire we have necessarily mean we must yearn for things that do not exist? For it could be said that desiring things in this world that you do not have, or, are not a part of, is one thing, but desiring things that are not in this world is quite another. Is it possible to make a choice? I feel as though I have. The point of doing so would be that the ones you can desire in this world are attainable (or at least visible), whereas it seems the latter are not. Since our time in this life is finite, should we not strive for the things we can get in the span of our lives, rather than reaching for the invisible and hoping everything will turn out all right? It seems sometimes, when I watch, to some...mysticism is a dream waiting to come true.
frankiespeakin: I am not sure what you mean by that...
formerout: Please stop taking offense to me. You are not contributing to the discussion.
LittleToe: What does it seem I am not listening to? I have replied to everyone's comments. Dansk should be thanking his own body, and perhaps medical technology (I don't know the specifics), for being alive today. Getting together to pray and sending healing energy is ok, but I only see that as getting together to spend some warm moments with fellow people who know what it is like to be in that situation. Despite the weight of such things to Dansk and others with cancer, I do not hold them with any more weight than another unfounded superstitious practice or belief. My condolences to Dansk if any harm was derived from my replies. If "delusional" seems too strong a word, maybe it is the sensitivity of the issue that begs your reply rather than actually thinking about the situation. Judging from the replies I am receiving from certain individuals however, perhaps my words for "condemning" people should be toned down. I'm not sure - should I change, or should some of you? Avoidance is another option...my uneducated, youthful and inexperienced words should be a trifle to you veterans anyway. ;)