I have to ask; do you genuinely believe that or is this a trojan horse of an argument? Not that you'd tel me if it was, but your reply would be illuminating never-the-less.
Abaddon
JoinedPosts by Abaddon
-
30
Why This Atheist Respects the Jehovah's Witnesses-And why other Atheists should too!
by RaustBD ini'm an atheist, and i'd like to take some time to talk about why i hold a great deal of respect for the jehovah's witnesses, and some words of encouragement that may put an end to the ridicule and disrespect you seem to get from, well, all sorts of people.. .
i never gave this kind of criticism a second thought: i knew nothing about you, and i figured you were just another fringe group of christianity.
i now feel terrible about this, and i wish to apologize for my (admittedly never spoken) disrespect.
-
-
-
13
Why we laugh at the Christian Right.
by whereami inyou just want to slap her silly.
the end will come if these people get there man in the white house.. .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v17wgtvphgg.
-
-
Abaddon
Christian right is an oxymoron with added morons
-
125
The Hobbit and Evolution: So What's Up With That?
by AGuest inmay you all have peace!.
hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.
fascinating stuff.
-
-
Abaddon
Believing in evolution with the exception of human evolution is like believing in the internal combustion engine with the exception of the Chevy V8.
You seem to be profoundly unaware of how science works.
Since people made up various religious texts, others have been produced denying the veracity of those that proceeded them. However, none of them can prove themselves to be true or others to be untrue.
Scientific theories arise because of a burden of evidence supporting them. Sometimes new evidence causes refinement, revision. Please note I use 'theory' in the sense of 'gravity', not 'string'; the later is more if a hypothesis.
When new evidence appears, it can take a while and oft times some argument - not always dignified - until there is a consensus of what it means and how it impacts the understanding of whatever field of science it falls under.
I could go into detail about the decade-long bitchfest that is the 'out of Africa' and 'multi-regionalism' debate about our origins. For a long time the Afria lobby held the winning cards, but now new genetic methods are finding traces of H. neanderthalis and H. denisovius (sp?) ancestry in H. sap (us) X chromosomes, which kind of hints H. erectus evolved into the above regionalised humans before a further wave of H. erectus descendants (in this case H. sapiens) rolled out of Africa and displaced them with some admixture.
H. florensis is a sideshow, albeit an interesting one.
It in no way, shape or form puts into doubt that around 5 million years ago there were primates who were the ancestors of us AND chimpanzees.
There is proof of this in our bones, in our genes, and in the ground (i.e. fossils).
Feel free to question things though; however, given your level of education about evolution and you desire to believe in things not supported by evidence, you will be liable to error and rushing off to conclusions that fit your prexisting desire to not believe in human evolution.
If you really wanted, you could study the subject.
Anyway, I didn't make the thread to start an argument, truly. I only wanted to show that even "science" doesn't always agree... or know. Even when they say they do.
-
15
Goodness gracious me...
by Abaddon inhi people,.
well, i kicked the jwd habit a few years back, but idle curiosity and a long daily commute got me sniffing around the other day, and after trying every possible password i have ever used i get back in.... it's been long time everyone... cannot believe that, give or take a tiny bit, everything (and everyone) is the same.
some new names, some missing... has anything major happened in dubbieland or xdubbieland?
-
-
Abaddon
AH debates with theists, those were the days... kinda like smoking too much weed... fun in its own way but doesn't really get much accomplished.
Mind you, I used to be an atheist... but now, I know I am god...
I definatey remember you Mouthy, and FlyingHighNow... weren't you in a film Keyser?
Saw a Louis Theroux documentary when he went (for the second time) to see the nutbags at Wetboro Baptist... he met up with two young women who have left since his first visit
.
One looked like she was doing Cult Decompresion 1.01 (kinda cool rock chick thing going on, mmmhmm), but had it by the numbers; it was all about the ego of the members, no sign of guilt, called it a cult. The other was still obviously mourning the loss of contact with her family, poor dear, and is still in shadows I think.
Reason I mention it is, that if you think about it, the JWs started off on a similar track with Rutherford, very confrontational... their coniving utilisation and subjegation of women, their compacent self-satisfaction and conviction of rectitude, their utter drabness... even the freaking KH's look like Westboro's church...
-
15
Goodness gracious me...
by Abaddon inhi people,.
well, i kicked the jwd habit a few years back, but idle curiosity and a long daily commute got me sniffing around the other day, and after trying every possible password i have ever used i get back in.... it's been long time everyone... cannot believe that, give or take a tiny bit, everything (and everyone) is the same.
some new names, some missing... has anything major happened in dubbieland or xdubbieland?
-
-
Abaddon
Hi people,
Well, I kicked the JWD habit a few years back, but idle curiosity and a LONG daily commute got me sniffing around the other day, and after trying every possible password I have ever used I get back in...
It's been LONG time everyone... cannot believe that, give or take a tiny bit, everything (and everyone) is the same. Some new names, some missing... has anything major happened in Dubbieland or xDubbieland? What do you mean Armagedon came already? Shit, was I asleep or something?
Don't get me wrong, JWD (and Tash's place before, Hi RedHorseWoman, I think we're the only one's left from off there) helped me lots back in the day...
... but I gotta say, continual reinforcement of identifying myself as an xJW is something I was glad to get out of the habit of doing. I miss it as much as I miss being a pothead. But then some of you oldies probably have a more balanced approach to life and don't turn it up all the way and rip the knobs off, LOL.
Simon; iOS access to the Board; sort it out mate or Steve Jobs will smite you, yay, verily.
-
23
Dating a Disfellowshipped Chick
by SonoftheTrinity ini'm this orthodox christian dating a disfellowshipped jw chick.
my priest says there's hope because she's been disfellowshipped and to give it 6 months.
one minute says she wants to become a citizen, the next minute i tell her that if she does that as an american i would expect her to salute the flag and especially vote if she naturalizes, and then she talks about going back to her own country!!.
-
-
Abaddon
SonoftheTrinity
Respect to you for taking advice as it's intended
I'm not meaning to be controlling but shouldn't a new citizen give at least the minimum, their vote, JW or not?
You might think so, but she needn't agree. Nor is it actually that important at this stage in her recovery.
You hit the money where you say you're used to debate and she isn't; what to you might be cheerful debate might to her be you telling her there's only one way. I debate like a propeller and know sometimes I can come across like 'this is right and nothing else is' even if I don't actually really think that.
I was brought up to believe that the people that didn't vote were what was wrong with this country, especially if they were naturalized and didn't vote. Being nice and respecting the laws isn't enough, getting your hands dirty by voting and marching in protests for whatever you believe in is how you keep your country free. I know people who come from other countries often have an even more cynical view of politics.
And you're perfectly free to have that opinion. She will not be as free to have that opinion for a while as she's been in a mind controlling cult where black pudding and voting were both BAD. Just because she's now out doesn't mean she can over come that programming easily or quickly
I try to engage her about these things and she won't debate me! Why don't JWs debate, without debate, there would be no civilization!!!
Her opinons in some area were never based on facts or reason.
An opinion that is not based on fact or reason is very hard to overcome with facts or reason.
without debate, there would be no civilization!!!
That statement gets me as close to kissing a practising male Orthodox Christian as I ever am likely to. I hear you brother!
(nothing against males or practising Orthodox Christians, just I don't normally agree with them so much I want to kiss them!
-
23
Dating a Disfellowshipped Chick
by SonoftheTrinity ini'm this orthodox christian dating a disfellowshipped jw chick.
my priest says there's hope because she's been disfellowshipped and to give it 6 months.
one minute says she wants to become a citizen, the next minute i tell her that if she does that as an american i would expect her to salute the flag and especially vote if she naturalizes, and then she talks about going back to her own country!!.
-
-
Abaddon
You need to find someone who agrees with you, not someone who will do what you say.
Last thing she needs coming out of a controlling cult is a controlling life partner; you'd both be miserable.
-
9
How sinister is this? If you thought you knew how bad GM food was...
by Mr Ben inscary, very scary.
http://www.mercola.com/future-of-food.
.
-
-
Abaddon
This guy takes 50% fact and 50% unproven speculation and weaves it into a deceptive mix that is utterly convincing to most people without a science education.
So, yes, that is sinister. He could quite probably persuade people to do something really stupid, but only those who wouldn't realise they were doing something really stupid because they were deceived by his smooth patter; let's not forget that he is also making money out of sick people.
He distrusts vaccination (remind you of the JW's) and advocatesm people who believe in 'healing angels' describing one as a 'master energy therapist of energy psychology'.
I stopped listning to segment one of the video after two major deceptive or contradictory arguments were used in it.
Oh. I personally believe anyone moaning about GM food who owns a dog like a Peke that has been so distorted by 'genetic modification' it isn't fit to survive should be chained to a lampost and laughed at,
-
58
TRAGEDY ; YOUNG JW MOTHER DIES AFTER GIVING BIRTH
by stay young and beautiful inhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/7078455.stm .
a young mother has died after giving birth to twins, following claims that she had refused a blood transfusion because of her faith.
jehovah's witness, emma gough, 22, from telford, shropshire, gave birth on 25 october.
-
-
Abaddon
tijkmo
how is this different from non jws who are prepared to sacrifice their lives for other causes they believe in...like their families or their country
Sometimes those (non-JW) people make an informed choice giving their life up. Because a JW is in a high control group, they cannot be said to have informed choice.
and if we choose to believe evolution then surely someone dying young only serves to reinforce the concept that he/she wasn't fit to survive.
If she were making a free choice then, yes, the level of stupid in the gene pool would decrease. But she was not making a free choice so she is not involved in anyform of selection, natural or otherwise.
Why do we care? Because we have compassion, for her, for the peope in Darfur, for Indian kids working in sweatshops making GAP clothes. We can imagine what it might be like to be in their shoes and wish they weren't either.
i'm still not convinced that blood saves any better than good medicine and blind luck.
Well, it would seem your medical knowledge is at the same level as your knowledge of evolutionary biology, so you not being convinced about it means nothing for a given value of nothing. It's like a carpenter saying he's not convinced about the value of GPS in marine navigation.
You're asking questions that have really obvious ommisions of reasoning or answers. Either you don't realise this or you're building up to making some hopefully clever point by being delibertely obtuse and emotive. If you really think you're not being emotive you need to think about the reaction your pattern of questions will cause; it's an emotive reaction. You see I don't think you're as dumb as you're making out... what's your point?
-
109
Pro-life arguments
by Skimmer ina thoughtful series of twenty six pro-life arguments specifically against abortion can be found at: .
http://www.all.org/article.php?id=10229 .
through (following down the links the left side of each page) .
-
-
Abaddon
BA
Your questions are easily answered:
Actually you didn't answer one of my questions; I even numbered them to make it easy (past experience ). So, if they're easy to answer, why not answer them BA?
As you seem so happy having a conversation with yourself I see no reason why you shouldn't continue, but hell, it's lunch time so having pointed out your failure to answer any of the questions asked I'll react to some of your post.
I stated that this debate is impossible to reach agreement on as it involves two different paradigms, and you prove this nicely.
You seem to suggest that the Bible prohibits abortion. As previously stated this is false. Please prove the Bible prohibts abortion or stop making this false claim.
You also totally fail to prove why your faith-based beliefs should be forced on other people against their will.
You also obviously feel that YOUR interpretation of what god wants is by definiton correct; remember, some people would condemn others for restricting the freedom of spermatozoa! Like I asked (and you ignored), why are you right and they wrong?
Religious totalitarianism as seen in Iran, as behind the Taliban, and as expressed by some people from comparatively civilised countries, wherein they hold their beliefs worthy of imposition on others, is somehing that cannot be tolerated in secular society.
If you want to live in a state where religous totalitarianism guides the legislature I suggest Iran or the Vatican City. At a streach, Kansas
Otherwise embrace the tolerance with which your beliefs are tolerated. No one will EVER force you to have an abortion! Extend others the same tolerance
Abaddon- who thinks signature lines like BA uses are pompous beyond belief
Emy
Emy, do I really have to define personality for you? Or are you just being argumentative? To make it clear (although I believe it is) I am not using personality as in the phrase 'he has no personality' when applied to a dull or uninteresting person. I am using it to mean an intelligent individual.
Remember, I am defending your right to an opinion, I am cherishing your right to express that opinion, and am merely asking that you do the same.
The whole point is that unless you can prove my opinion is based on false facts, I am as entitled to it as you are to yours. We are each entilted to our own opinion, we have to share facts.
Glad you pointed out that "It's a gift" I wouldn't have recognized it otherwise.
Well, yes, take a joke the wrong way, by all means. You use 'baby' to describe something with less brains than a rabbit, so playing with words is very tempting for everyone involved, eh?
BTW, "moral equivalency" is a term used to indicate that there is no right or wrong. They have become interchangable. Convicted killers are deserving of death, unborn babies deserve a chance to live. Right and wrong is clear and it is not interchangable. Gifted semantics is not needed.
To you, something with less neurons that a sparrow is equivalent to a new born baby, because it has human DNA and might (and I am just talking about the high chnces of early term pregnancies not reaching full term) one day be born.
I think new born babies and late term fetuses are worth far more than something with a nervous system smaller than what you get in your tissue when you blow your nose. I have to put it in such graphic terms to deal with the 'babification' of embryos and blastocysts. I see assigning human equivalancy to early term pregnancies is not supported by the facts, in fact believe it is only supportabe by sentimetalism and supersticion, neither of hich are a goodbasis for deciding what is right or wrong.
If potential is so important, what about the lost potential of babies who are actually born in disadvantaged situatuions?
You're prefectly entitled to be inconsistent, and to hold an pinion that I think is invalid, but why should I adopt your opinion when you've not shown the facts mine are based on are false and when yours is inconsistently applied?
Mary
5go and Sixofnine got there first, but you are right, there is such scripture (Exodus 21:22), but that's NOT an abortion, nor is the Hebrew or Aramaic word for 'abortion' used any where in the Bible (although there is one and abortion was practised in antiquity). The law is about compensating a husband for a fight causing his wife to give birth prematurely or punishing the fighters for killing or injuring a wanted child inutero. It's about property.
Abortion WAS known, and there is NO mention of any protection for UNWANTED 'children' inutero.
If there was a law like "And if a woman of the House of Israel falls pregnant but causes her pregnancy to end you are to take life for life, and if her pregnacy is brought to an end by another at the woman's instigation, then both must die." then you could reasonably laim the Bible prohibited abortion.
It doesn't so no on can.
Paralipomenon
You mention black and white;
If they do not wish to get pregnant, there are a host of methods to avoid getting pregnant.
.. and it ISN'T that black or white. Loads of people using the pill or condoms get pregnant every year. Realise that 97% effective is 3% useless, and that even 99.3% effective is still 0.7% useless and that of a thousand couples using a 99.3% effective contraceptive, seven will get pregnant. I was with a girl where both a condom and the morning after pill failed.
Now, should she change her entire life, leave University, because of a pregnancy so early on there is no personality extinguished when it is terminated? If she wouldn't do it for a rabbit, why should she do it for an 8-week embryo?
But for me contraceptive dilegence is not the point (although people who use abortion as a alternative to contraception are uneducated idiots). The point is that claims of equivalancy of an early term fetus to a adult human or new born are not supported by any secular or scientific argument in any meaningful fashion other than gross genetic inheritance.