Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Technological religion

RogerC
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 7:22:08 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions
I think a number of alleged advancements won't happen not because of moral questions, but simply because we will not have the ability to carry them out.

An example would be time travel in the most directive sense.

Ironically, time travel does seem to hold to a moral question not related to religion. The idea of traveling into the past for instance, and causing history to change holds questions of morality.

Do you think it would be moral to try and change history?
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,299
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 2:46:39 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

There are people who want to do just that and they are advisers to the President -elect of our nation. They don't want it to be free, they want their idea of God in charge.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,299
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 2:51:38 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

My religion would say you are already immortal. If you want to become immortal in a mortal world, you will be missing out on what it is like to return back to a world far superior than this world. Do not get played. Do not believe the hype. Science cannot explain even the basic creations of God, yet you wish to remain absent from the greatest world God has created for you. This is not that world. Do you really want to remain in a world that cannot explain even the simplest of Gods creations?

http://www.cracked.com...
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,299
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 3:00:58 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/10/2016 2:46:39 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

There are people who want to do just that and they are advisers to the President -elect of our nation. They don't want it to be free, they want their idea of God in charge.

Donald Trump is hardly a religious man. He is certainly not a Christian. He will be the perfect president to be used as an escapegoat to usher in the Third World War. If only there were a Christian president to take office, the world would become more peaceful. Oh wait...JFK...oh wait...yep....we killed him. CIA don't want no peace.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 3:37:31 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/10/2016 3:00:58 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:46:39 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

There are people who want to do just that and they are advisers to the President -elect of our nation. They don't want it to be free, they want their idea of God in charge.

Donald Trump is hardly a religious man. He is certainly not a Christian. He will be the perfect president to be used as an escapegoat to usher in the Third World War. If only there were a Christian president to take office, the world would become more peaceful. Oh wait...JFK...oh wait...yep....we killed him. CIA don't want no peace.

I think you will find that every one of the Presidents of the USA has claimed to be a goddist of some kind. That includes the president elect.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,299
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 5:32:51 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/10/2016 3:37:31 PM, desmac wrote:
At 11/10/2016 3:00:58 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:46:39 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

There are people who want to do just that and they are advisers to the President -elect of our nation. They don't want it to be free, they want their idea of God in charge.

Donald Trump is hardly a religious man. He is certainly not a Christian. He will be the perfect president to be used as an escapegoat to usher in the Third World War. If only there were a Christian president to take office, the world would become more peaceful. Oh wait...JFK...oh wait...yep....we killed him. CIA don't want no peace.

I think you will find that every one of the Presidents of the USA has claimed to be a goddist of some kind. That includes the president elect.

some people have to pretend to be religious to give religion a bad name. You won't find these people teaching the truth to the ways of Jesus. You won't find these people talking about the pure love the Holy Spirit. You will find these people are not religious. These people serve one god only. They serve the god of the almighty dollar. They even put this god on the dollar. On the dollar it say, In God We Trust. You can trust that if I were president, I would not be waging wars all over the world. I would peacefully negotiate an existence in which no military is required. I would provide free energy for the world, instead of exasperating all our energy to keep the ultra rich in high fashion. I would fashion an existence of all states to culture that becomes independent of an necessity for a monetary system. The monetary system the very system of our control. Our talents do not need control. Our expertise do not need to be rewarded when the greatest reward comes from helping other, helping the poor, helping the starving nations, the nations shackled by the nations of superior military might. Yeah, I just might run for president.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2016 11:59:31 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical,

No designer babies are not ethical. Life is a gift, and by creating designer babies you are owning life. Interfering with the natural gift of life. There is nothing wrong with correcting abnormalities, but to make life in the image you want is to assume the role of God.

Interference in the process of natural conception is never moral.

should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal,

Won't happen. However, who would really want to? The finiteness of life is what motivates and inspires.

what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics.

When it is capable of rational thought and moral reasoning. Personally I don't believe this will ever be true.

Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

Done!
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

Come on now, I said nor intended anything of the sort.

Religion does force people to believe in it.

In Indonesia, it is against the law not to follow one of the 6 prescribed religions.

In Saudi Arabia you will have your head cut off for not following it's religion.

Christian churches use the tactics of fear and guilt to recruit new members and retain them.

I want to live in a free society, free of abhorrent institutions who think that they are above the law and preach hatred and vitriol to its naive and gullible followers.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

Come on now, I said nor intended anything of the sort.

Religion does force people to believe in it.

In Indonesia, it is against the law not to follow one of the 6 prescribed religions.

In Saudi Arabia you will have your head cut off for not following it's religion.

Christian churches use the tactics of fear and guilt to recruit new members and retain them.

I want to live in a free society, free of abhorrent institutions who think that they are above the law and preach hatred and vitriol to its naive and gullible followers.
You claim you want to live in a free society, but you don't. You want a dictatorship.

A couple of interesting things about this thread.

1. It's one of those hit and run threads started by an OP who either left, or stands by and reads his responses without further participation (at least so far).

2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

3. It (the thread) has already regressed into the alleged evils of religion.

There are a number of you here at this forum, that although would claim to desire a pluralistic society, want nothing of the sort. The party in question (without getting into names) have been avoiding certain questions that have revealed what exactly you/they want. What you/they do not want is free thought. You yourself use certain buzz words like institutions, as if removing institutions would solve some problem.

I can ask these particular questions in mind again, but you're probably going to dance around them.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2016 2:45:23 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

Come on now, I said nor intended anything of the sort.

Religion does force people to believe in it.

In Indonesia, it is against the law not to follow one of the 6 prescribed religions.

In Saudi Arabia you will have your head cut off for not following it's religion.

Christian churches use the tactics of fear and guilt to recruit new members and retain them.

I want to live in a free society, free of abhorrent institutions who think that they are above the law and preach hatred and vitriol to its naive and gullible followers.
You claim you want to live in a free society, but you don't. You want a dictatorship.

Uh, no. There's no desire among the non-believers I know for any kind of dictatorship. Personally, I just want a nation that values personal liberty, inclusive policy, factual evidence, and rational thought to repressive, primitive, irrelevant myth.

A couple of interesting things about this thread.

1. It's one of those hit and run threads started by an OP who either left, or stands by and reads his responses without further participation (at least so far).

2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish).

Bull. They don't want anything to conflicts with what they want to believe, and science has done that with each new discovery about the universe. It's been a function of religion for centuries to suppress rational inquiry.

" They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression.

See above. Religion is never in favor of real progress.

Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

Abortion isn't a 'technological advance', it's a well understood medical procedure. This is just a dog-whistle to get support instead of an actual argument.

3. It (the thread) has already regressed into the alleged evils of religion.

They're historical fact.

There are a number of you here at this forum, that although would claim to desire a pluralistic society, want nothing of the sort. The party in question (without getting into names) have been avoiding certain questions that have revealed what exactly you/they want.

If you won't name names and cite specifics you're just proving that you either don't really have them or you're just afraid you'll be called on your junk. Show us the courage of your convictions, if you have any.

What you/they do not want is free thought. You yourself use certain buzz words like institutions, as if removing institutions would solve some problem.

Again, specifics or it's a meaningless assertion.

I can ask these particular questions in mind again, but you're probably going to dance around them.

Ask away, I'll be happy to answer.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2016 6:24:21 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I think science is not held back by minor things like morality, which is a pity really...

Just because we can do something it does not mean we should...
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2016 7:55:40 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:


2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

All religious groups are notorious for their hatred and skepticism of technology, the very tool that has proven their faith to be fictitious.

The Christian view on abortion is very much behind the times. It is just not good enough in this day and age to denounce abortion solely on the grounds that "it is written".
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2016 5:52:25 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/11/2016 2:45:23 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:
I want to live in a free society, free of abhorrent institutions who think that they are above the law and preach hatred and vitriol to its naive and gullible followers.
You claim you want to live in a free society, but you don't. You want a dictatorship.

Uh, no. There's no desire among the non-believers I know for any kind of dictatorship. Personally, I just want a nation that values personal liberty, inclusive policy, factual evidence, and rational thought to repressive, primitive, irrelevant myth.

I was addressing one particular non-believer directly. Not only is it tough to veer away from the idea that I'm generalizing atheists when I've made clear I was only addressing a small minority (atheist activists), it seems now I can't evenveer away from this idea even when addressing one particular person.

I'm sure Willows doesn't want a Stalin, Tung, Pot, Mussolini, Hitler, Castro type of dictator any more than you do. Of course, most people don't want their personal rights violated. But yes, he does want a sort of dictatorship. He won't come out and say it, but he wants religion removed from society. In other words, he wants Christians/theists to be on the one's on the receiving end of a dictatorship, which wouldn't interfere with his personal freedom. I guess maybe a more mild way to put it would be, he doesn't want a pluralistic society.

As far as what you want, I don't think you really know what you want. You live in one of the freest nations in the world. The problem with what you proclaim to want is merely an idealistic society that accommodates dhardage. You cannot have that without a dictatorship.

What you think you want is in principle a pluralistic society where people can hold to personal religious beliefs, but keep it to themselves. You want something similar to a designated smoking area for theists where no one else has to hear their views. It sort of goes with the idea of "no one said you had to like it", where this theme doesn't demand one change their opinion, but are demanded to follow the rules (since we can't enforce a thought police). One of the big problems there is that non-believers look for churches, attend church services, and become believers. It's a fantasy to think that theists only see conversions by going out and proselytize. And another problem is of course just plain violation of freedom of speech.

2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish).

Bull. They don't want anything to conflicts with what they want to believe, and science has done that with each new discovery about the universe. It's been a function of religion for centuries to suppress rational inquiry.

Try telling that to Galileo, George Washington Carver, and the many other Christian scientists. The suppression of the day is coming from evolutionists.

Christians are not against technological advancement. We're obviously not opposed to the internet, as you can see.
" They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression.

See above. Religion is never in favor of real progress.

The comment doesn't make sense. Religion is not a personality, therefore cannot favor or oppose anything.
Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

Abortion isn't a 'technological advance', it's a well understood medical procedure. This is just a dog-whistle to get support instead of an actual argument.

I understand, but to oppose abortion is considered a non-progressive primitive view. This is what Christians address. Pseudo progressive views like abortion that are not progressive at all. The fact that it's a medical procedure is not the issue. It's the barbarism involved with the abortion institution. Are you aware how barbaric the practice of abortion often is?
3. It (the thread) has already regressed into the alleged evils of religion.

They're historical fact.

There are evil acts committed within religious institutions just like there are within atheist institutions. Within major sports organizations there are evil practices. I hope you don't watch sports, because if you do, you're supporting an evil institution. I'm of coursing joking, but I think you see my point.

And even if it was true that religion is evil (which would have to mean believing in God is evil), is that a good excuse to veer off topic?
There are a number of you here at this forum, that although would claim to desire a pluralistic society, want nothing of the sort. The party in question (without getting into names) have been avoiding certain questions that have revealed what exactly you/they want.

If you won't name names and cite specifics you're just proving that you either don't really have them or you're just afraid you'll be called on your junk. Show us the courage of your convictions, if you have any.

I just addressed one. Willows would be the quintessential example. I think there's probably enough comments of his I could point out in this thread alone. Do you really want to get into a conversation about Willows? Or others? What is it you want?

Generally, I've confronted each individual directly on various occasions. I haven't held anything back.
What you/they do not want is free thought. You yourself use certain buzz words like institutions, as if removing institutions would solve some problem.

Again, specifics or it's a meaningless assertion.

Well, again, this is addressed to a specific person who can answer for himself. Just to let you know, that person (Willows) snipped most of my post to him out so that he can continue his blanket statements.
I can ask these particular questions in mind again, but you're probably going to dance around them.

Ask away, I'll be happy to answer.
This was to Willows.

But okay.

You yourself seemed to suggest that religion proposes a particular danger to society. A threat to your freedom (or someone's freedom). What do you think should be done about religion?

Now I asked that question to Russe (see, I'm not avoiding names), and he treated the question like I was seeking personal advice. So, before you go the route of making pat answers like "quit taking your book so seriously", etc., what I mean by my question is what should our legal system do about religion?
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2016 5:56:00 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/12/2016 7:55:40 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:


2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

All religious groups are notorious for their hatred and skepticism of technology, the very tool that has proven their faith to be fictitious.

The Christian view on abortion is very much behind the times. It is just not good enough in this day and age to denounce abortion solely on the grounds that "it is written".
In this day and age.

To oppose human sacrifice at one time was considered behind the times (probably resulting in one's own human sacrifice).

And where is it "written" concerning abortion? "What is written?"
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2016 11:40:22 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/13/2016 5:56:00 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/12/2016 7:55:40 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:


2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

All religious groups are notorious for their hatred and skepticism of technology, the very tool that has proven their faith to be fictitious.

The Christian view on abortion is very much behind the times. It is just not good enough in this day and age to denounce abortion solely on the grounds that "it is written".
In this day and age.

To oppose human sacrifice at one time was considered behind the times (probably resulting in one's own human sacrifice).

And where is it "written" concerning abortion? "What is written?"

My point exactly, yet Christians cite the bible as their reason for opposing abortion.
Escobar
Posts: 83
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2016 2:27:00 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions : :

You can't get anymore technologically advanced then the Creator who spoke us into existence using technology that we can't possibly see.

Psalm 33
8: Let all the earth fear the LORD, let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him!
9: For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood forth.

The Beast that the Creator created taught man how to build voice recognition software that is similar to the voice he created in his simulation program.

11: Then I saw another beast which rose out of the earth; it had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon.
12: It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed.
13: It works great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in the sight of men;
14: and by the signs which it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast, it deceives those who dwell on earth, bidding them make an image for the beast which was wounded by the sword and yet lived;
15: and it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak, and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2016 3:18:47 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/14/2016 11:40:22 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/13/2016 5:56:00 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/12/2016 7:55:40 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:


2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

All religious groups are notorious for their hatred and skepticism of technology, the very tool that has proven their faith to be fictitious.

The Christian view on abortion is very much behind the times. It is just not good enough in this day and age to denounce abortion solely on the grounds that "it is written".
In this day and age.

To oppose human sacrifice at one time was considered behind the times (probably resulting in one's own human sacrifice).

And where is it "written" concerning abortion? "What is written?"

My point exactly, yet Christians cite the bible as their reason for opposing abortion.
Most Christians oppose abortion because it's barbaric. Do you have any idea how barbaric the industry is? Yes, they may cite some verses, but it's generally done in a Christian environment. But it's not like you make it sound out to be.

Honestly, I think many people support abortion because they see it as an opposition to Christianity. If it wasn't a religious issue, I think there would be a lot more opposition based on the barbarism alone.
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2016 8:17:45 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/16/2016 3:18:47 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/14/2016 11:40:22 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/13/2016 5:56:00 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/12/2016 7:55:40 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:


2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

All religious groups are notorious for their hatred and skepticism of technology, the very tool that has proven their faith to be fictitious.

The Christian view on abortion is very much behind the times. It is just not good enough in this day and age to denounce abortion solely on the grounds that "it is written".
In this day and age.

To oppose human sacrifice at one time was considered behind the times (probably resulting in one's own human sacrifice).

And where is it "written" concerning abortion? "What is written?"

My point exactly, yet Christians cite the bible as their reason for opposing abortion.
Most Christians oppose abortion because it's barbaric. Do you have any idea how barbaric the industry is? Yes, they may cite some verses, but it's generally done in a Christian environment. But it's not like you make it sound out to be.

Honestly, I think many people support abortion because they see it as an opposition to Christianity. If it wasn't a religious issue, I think there would be a lot more opposition based on the barbarism alone.

Come on...Christians oppose abortion solely because the bible says so...I have encountered enough of them who tell me such in no uncertain terms.

Atheists can and do argue for and against abortion but either way, without the constraint of an illogical belief tainting their choice.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2016 4:39:35 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/17/2016 8:17:45 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/16/2016 3:18:47 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/14/2016 11:40:22 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/13/2016 5:56:00 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/12/2016 7:55:40 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:


2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

All religious groups are notorious for their hatred and skepticism of technology, the very tool that has proven their faith to be fictitious.

The Christian view on abortion is very much behind the times. It is just not good enough in this day and age to denounce abortion solely on the grounds that "it is written".
In this day and age.

To oppose human sacrifice at one time was considered behind the times (probably resulting in one's own human sacrifice).

And where is it "written" concerning abortion? "What is written?"

My point exactly, yet Christians cite the bible as their reason for opposing abortion.
Most Christians oppose abortion because it's barbaric. Do you have any idea how barbaric the industry is? Yes, they may cite some verses, but it's generally done in a Christian environment. But it's not like you make it sound out to be.

Honestly, I think many people support abortion because they see it as an opposition to Christianity. If it wasn't a religious issue, I think there would be a lot more opposition based on the barbarism alone.

Come on...Christians oppose abortion solely because the bible says so...I have encountered enough of them who tell me such in no uncertain terms.

We just established that the Bible doesn't specifically address abortion. Now it's time to ask, what scriptures are they quoting to you?

Atheists can and do argue for and against abortion but either way, without the constraint of an illogical belief tainting their choice.
That's interesting you should say that. That's a point I often make about some atheists opposing abortion to stress that anti-abortion is not a religious issue.

But you're now trying to claim that apparently there are atheists who oppose the barbaric nature of abortion, but Christians only oppose it because the Bible says so (I hope you provided a scripture by now).

Well, I can tell you as a Christian myself, I oppose abortion because of the barbaric practice involved with the industry. It's murder. And the irony sticks out like a sore thumb when people try and claim Christians are against technological advancement. We're opposing things like abortion that are extremely primitive.

Again, it's the barbarism of the abortion industry. I can tell you, as a Christian who knows a number of Christians. We point out the barbarism practiced within the industry.

Since you acknowledge that some atheists oppose abortion due to it's barbaric practices (or is there another reason?), why don't you oppose abortion for the same reason(s)?
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2016 6:06:05 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/17/2016 4:39:35 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/17/2016 8:17:45 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/16/2016 3:18:47 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/14/2016 11:40:22 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/13/2016 5:56:00 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/12/2016 7:55:40 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:


2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy. Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example. There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.

All religious groups are notorious for their hatred and skepticism of technology, the very tool that has proven their faith to be fictitious.

The Christian view on abortion is very much behind the times. It is just not good enough in this day and age to denounce abortion solely on the grounds that "it is written".
In this day and age.

To oppose human sacrifice at one time was considered behind the times (probably resulting in one's own human sacrifice).

And where is it "written" concerning abortion? "What is written?"

My point exactly, yet Christians cite the bible as their reason for opposing abortion.
Most Christians oppose abortion because it's barbaric. Do you have any idea how barbaric the industry is? Yes, they may cite some verses, but it's generally done in a Christian environment. But it's not like you make it sound out to be.

Honestly, I think many people support abortion because they see it as an opposition to Christianity. If it wasn't a religious issue, I think there would be a lot more opposition based on the barbarism alone.

Come on...Christians oppose abortion solely because the bible says so...I have encountered enough of them who tell me such in no uncertain terms.

We just established that the Bible doesn't specifically address abortion. Now it's time to ask, what scriptures are they quoting to you?

They don't. They just say that it is the policy of their church and vaguely make reference to their church leaders telling them that it is written.
Since when do the words need to be specifically written for theists to interpret what they want from the bible?:

Atheists can and do argue for and against abortion but either way, without the constraint of an illogical belief tainting their choice.
That's interesting you should say that. That's a point I often make about some atheists opposing abortion to stress that anti-abortion is not a religious issue.

But you're now trying to claim that apparently there are atheists who oppose the barbaric nature of abortion, but Christians only oppose it because the Bible says so (I hope you provided a scripture by now). That's quite right.

Well, I can tell you as a Christian myself, I oppose abortion because of the barbaric practice involved with the industry. It's murder. And the irony sticks out like a sore thumb when people try and claim Christians are against technological advancement. We're opposing things like abortion that are extremely primitive.

Rubbish....there is nothing at all barbaric about properly conducted abortions and it is not murder. You only believe it to be barbaric and murderous because of your extreme view and your religion tells you so.

Again, it's the barbarism of the abortion industry. I can tell you, as a Christian who knows a number of Christians. We point out the barbarism practiced within the industry.
And wrongly so....it is only from your fixed, pre-determined view dictated from your superiors.

Since you acknowledge that some atheists oppose abortion due to it's barbaric practices (or is there another reason?), why don't you oppose abortion for the same reason(s)?

I did not acknowledge that some atheists oppose abortion due to its barbaric practices.
bulproof
Posts: 25,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2016 6:33:43 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 7:22:08 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions
I think a number of alleged advancements won't happen not because of moral questions, but simply because we will not have the ability to carry them out.

An example would be time travel in the most directive sense.

Ironically, time travel does seem to hold to a moral question not related to religion. The idea of traveling into the past for instance, and causing history to change holds questions of morality.

Do you think it would be moral to try and change history?
Time travel is a fun concept but of course if you change history you will almost certainly prevent time travel by that change and not be able to change history. Religion could actually go back and try to make their fantasies into realities, that would be fun to watch. 400yrs of slavery in Egypt would be fantastic to produce don't you think?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2016 3:18:27 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/18/2016 6:06:05 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/17/2016 4:39:35 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:


We just established that the Bible doesn't specifically address abortion. Now it's time to ask, what scriptures are they quoting to you?

They don't. They just say that it is the policy of their church and vaguely make reference to their church leaders telling them that it is written.
How many Christians have told you this? It appears to me that you're drawing a conclusion based on a natural limitation of personal contact with Christians, and lack of dialogue due to lack of general interest.

Now if you actually ask a number of them to quote scripture, and none of them can do it, that might change the validity of your statement a bit. But I have a hard time believing that they won't/can't provide scripture that supports the pro-life view.
Since when do the words need to be specifically written for theists to interpret what they want from the bible?:

To put it simply, many Christians view abortion as murder. We don't really need scripture to come to that conclusion. After all, it's taking a human life. The Bible does state that murder is against God's law, so that would be a natural correlation.
Atheists can and do argue for and against abortion but either way, without the constraint of an illogical belief tainting their choice.
That's interesting you should say that. That's a point I often make about some atheists opposing abortion to stress that anti-abortion is not a religious issue.

But you're now trying to claim that apparently there are atheists who oppose the barbaric nature of abortion, but Christians only oppose it because the Bible says so (I hope you provided a scripture by now). That's quite right.

Well, I can tell you as a Christian myself, I oppose abortion because of the barbaric practice involved with the industry. It's murder. And the irony sticks out like a sore thumb when people try and claim Christians are against technological advancement. We're opposing things like abortion that are extremely primitive.

Rubbish....there is nothing at all barbaric about properly conducted abortions and it is not murder. You only believe it to be barbaric and murderous because of your extreme view and your religion tells you so.

Google is full of examples of barbarism within the abortion industry.

Wong expected most of the abortions to be for women who were in crisis situations. However, he quickly realized that most of the abortions he was performing were not because of rape or medical necessity. One even aborted because she was planning a trip to Europe.

This was taken from a secular website. There have been a number of former abortionists who worked in clinics who abandoned their pro-abortion views because of what they witnessed.

http://liveactionnews.org...

From a Christian site.

http://www.christianpost.com...

Again, it's the barbarism of the abortion industry. I can tell you, as a Christian who knows a number of Christians. We point out the barbarism practiced within the industry.
And wrongly so....it is only from your fixed, pre-determined view dictated from your superiors.

You don't know anything about me. So if there's any predetermining going on, it would appear to be coming from you.

http://liveactionnews.org...

Since you acknowledge that some atheists oppose abortion due to it's barbaric practices (or is there another reason?), why don't you oppose abortion for the same reason(s)?

I did not acknowledge that some atheists oppose abortion due to its barbaric practices.
Something interesting to chew on.

There was a time when the lines seemed clearer and the slogans said everything. Pro-lifers were Jesus-loving Pope-followers with a passion for sticking rosaries on ovaries, and atheists were quick to respond with "Keep your theology off my biology!"

But then lines began to blur. Atheist and civil libertarian journalist Nat Hentoff said that "Being without theology isn"t the slightest hindrance to being pro-life." Atheist philosophy professor Don Marquis declared abortion is "immoral" because it denies developing fetuses "a future like ours." The host of CFI"s Point of Inquiry, Robert M. Price, author of books like Jesus is Dead and The Case Against the Case for Christ, called abortion "second-degree murder" on one of his podcasts.


Second degree murder sounds pretty serious.

Well, at least we still have the "Four Horsemen" safely in our ranks, right?

Insert:

Richard Dawkins - as Death
Christopher Hitchens - as Famine
Sam Harris - as Pestilence
Daniel Dennett - as War

Not quite. Even our beloved Christopher Hitchens considered "the occupant of the womb as a candidate member of society." He also argued that "the unborn entity has a right on its side" and identified himself as involved with the pro-life movement.

(Chuckle)

But by all means, why do some atheists support pro-life/oppose abortion?
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2016 3:21:30 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/18/2016 6:06:05 AM, Willows wrote:


I did not acknowledge that some atheists oppose abortion due to its barbaric practices.
Here's the link:

http://www.patheos.com...
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2016 9:25:43 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/18/2016 3:18:27 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/18/2016 6:06:05 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/17/2016 4:39:35 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:


(Chuckle)

But by all means, why do some atheists support pro-life/oppose abortion?

Usually out of ignorance or uncertainty, or perhaps some religious nuts got to them.
Willows
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2016 9:31:09 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/18/2016 3:18:27 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/18/2016 6:06:05 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/17/2016 4:39:35 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:


We just established that the Bible doesn't specifically address abortion. Now it's time to ask, what scriptures are they quoting to you?

They don't. They just say that it is the policy of their church and vaguely make reference to their church leaders telling them that it is written.
How many Christians have told you this? It appears to me that you're drawing a conclusion based on a natural limitation of personal contact with Christians, and lack of dialogue due to lack of general interest.

Now if you actually ask a number of them to quote scripture, and none of them can do it, that might change the validity of your statement a bit. But I have a hard time believing that they won't/can't provide scripture that supports the pro-life view.
Since when do the words need to be specifically written for theists to interpret what they want from the bible?:

To put it simply, many Christians view abortion as murder. We don't really need scripture to come to that conclusion. After all, it's taking a human life. The Bible does state that murder is against God's law, so that would be a natural correlation.
Atheists can and do argue for and against abortion but either way, without the constraint of an illogical belief tainting their choice.
That's interesting you should say that. That's a point I often make about some atheists opposing abortion to stress that anti-abortion is not a religious issue.

But you're now trying to claim that apparently there are atheists who oppose the barbaric nature of abortion, but Christians only oppose it because the Bible says so (I hope you provided a scripture by now). That's quite right.

Well, I can tell you as a Christian myself, I oppose abortion because of the barbaric practice involved with the industry. It's murder. And the irony sticks out like a sore thumb when people try and claim Christians are against technological advancement. We're opposing things like abortion that are extremely primitive.

Rubbish....there is nothing at all barbaric about properly conducted abortions and it is not murder. You only believe it to be barbaric and murderous because of your extreme view and your religion tells you so.

Google is full of examples of barbarism within the abortion industry.

Wong expected most of the abortions to be for women who were in crisis situations. However, he quickly realized that most of the abortions he was performing were not because of rape or medical necessity. One even aborted because she was planning a trip to Europe.

This was taken from a secular website. There have been a number of former abortionists who worked in clinics who abandoned their pro-abortion views because of what they witnessed.

http://liveactionnews.org...

From a Christian site.

http://www.christianpost.com...


Again, it's the barbarism of the abortion industry. I can tell you, as a Christian who knows a number of Christians. We point out the barbarism practiced within the industry.
And wrongly so....it is only from your fixed, pre-determined view dictated from your superiors.

You don't know anything about me. So if there's any predetermining going on, it would appear to be coming from you.

Crap, you have a fixed view that abortion is murder....your words.
Not only is your view incorrect by law but an insult to any pregnant rape victim.
bulproof
Posts: 25,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2016 10:51:10 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/11/2016 2:13:46 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/11/2016 7:15:19 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/10/2016 2:30:26 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/10/2016 9:58:31 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/9/2016 6:56:30 PM, RogerC wrote:
I was just wondering if there is a religion out there that will be able to deal with the advancements in technology in science and our rapid developement that brings about ethical questions any established religion seems to have difficulties of finding answers to like: are designerbabys ethical, should we extend humans lives to the point where we might become A-mortal, what about AI and when should we treat it as a lifeform with it's own rights and there are a lot of other topics. Interested to hear what religion has to say on these new challenging questions

I would be very interested in hearing what religion has to say.
I think the rapid advancements in technology are leaving religion way behind in the dust in terms of morals the betterment of mankind.
Technology only develops if it is relevant and useful for us.
Draconian dogma designed for controlling the masses hundreds of years ago has no place in modern free society.

So what you are essentially saying is you do not want to live in a free society. You want to be told what you can and can't believe in. Religion does not force anyone to believe in it. Nobody is forcing you to attend a church, but you are trying to take away my rights to its attendance. And you call this a free society?

Come on now, I said nor intended anything of the sort.

Religion does force people to believe in it.

In Indonesia, it is against the law not to follow one of the 6 prescribed religions.

In Saudi Arabia you will have your head cut off for not following it's religion.

Christian churches use the tactics of fear and guilt to recruit new members and retain them.

I want to live in a free society, free of abhorrent institutions who think that they are above the law and preach hatred and vitriol to its naive and gullible followers.
You claim you want to live in a free society, but you don't. You want a dictatorship.

A couple of interesting things about this thread.

1. It's one of those hit and run threads started by an OP who either left, or stands by and reads his responses without further participation (at least so far).

2. The theme of the thread is a fantasy.
Ironic coming from a godist.
Christians (and others of religion) don't oppose technological advancement (save fringe groups like the Amish). They've been a part of it for centuries. What Christians oppose are not acts of progression, but if anything, regression. Abortion would be a good example.
Then why does your god perform well in excess of 60% of them and usually against the will of the woman involved?
There's nothing progressive about abortion. It's absolutely barbaric. It's a regression into a primitive mindset.
No, denying a woman's autonomous right to her own body is in fact primitive regression. Allowing women that autonomy is what godists simply can't abide in the indoctrinated misogyny that comprise their beliefs. Women are chattels and will obey, religious doctrine as writ.

3. It (the thread) has already regressed into the alleged evils of religion.
In a religion forum that is not surprising.

There are a number of you here at this forum, that although would claim to desire a pluralistic society, want nothing of the sort. The party in question (without getting into names) have been avoiding certain questions that have revealed what exactly you/they want. What you/they do not want is free thought. You yourself use certain buzz words like institutions, as if removing institutions would solve some problem.
I think it's the indoctrination of bronze age barbarism practiced by said institutions that need removal.

I can ask these particular questions in mind again, but you're probably going to dance around them.
Go ahead.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2016 3:59:12 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/19/2016 9:25:43 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/18/2016 3:18:27 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/18/2016 6:06:05 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/17/2016 4:39:35 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:


(Chuckle)

But by all means, why do some atheists support pro-life/oppose abortion?

Usually out of ignorance or uncertainty, or perhaps some religious nuts got to them.
Are you saying Christopher Hitchens was ignorant, uncertain, or became religious?