Marty_d Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Ok I'll bite.Which side (of what) is the "grey side" ? You know, in Star Wars you have the "Dark side" of the Force, (so there's presumably a "light" side). I say a pox on both their houses, I'll stick with the greyness somewhere in the middle. (My hair has already gone to the grey side.) This is close to my philosophy:[ATTACH=full]36634[/ATTACH] And it is easy to look at. The outfit is Guantanamo inspired? Damn shame she's a fictional character (from some TV show called "Orange is the new black") - knew she was too good to be true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadpete Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Oh, thanks Marty for explaining. For a while there I thought I was going to have to explain to that 50 shades of grey is NOT a religion. So you're a fence sitter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Switzerland has an interesting version of democracy where the general public are a lot more involved in the law-making process than here. I certainly think we need better representation than the current 2 party system (or protest votes going to minor parties). No point saying "go start your own party if you don't like the others" - we don't all have the time or inclination to be politicians, not to mention things like public speaking skills. But surely with the technology available now there are ways to involve the population more with the governance of our country. Why not start a Recreational Flying Party ...the RFP? After all MAG (Motorists Action Group) got into the Senate without too much trouble. But, as we are too apathetic, no one will be motivated sufficiently to commence the RFP before the next election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Oh, thanks Marty for explaining.For a while there I thought I was going to have to explain to that 50 shades of grey is NOT a religion. So you're a fence sitter? It isn't??? Bugger, hope I can get a refund on my holy handcuffs and the Whip of Destiny. No, not a fence sitter, but I disagree with the view of those who see everything in black and white. Why not start a Recreational Flying Party ...the RFP? After all MAG (Motorists Action Group) got into the Senate without too much trouble. But, as we are too apathetic, no one will be motivated sufficiently to commence the RFP before the next election. Maybe we can combine with the Sex Party and have the Mile High Party? More votes in that I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Good post nomad.What Jesus Christ was teaching, before Saul turned on the PR, was what his Nasoreans believed in, which had none of the power/controlling/demanding aspects of some of the Christian sects. What the Nasoreans had in common with even more ancient religions, including the teachings of the Virachochas in South America was a belief in looking after other people and leaving the world a better place. Yes, Jesus' mission was to "go about doing good". He also told others to do this: "love thy neighbour as thyself". If you think about it that is a pretty high standard and it removes all self-centredness. Unfortunately, much of the current day church hierarchy have lost sight of Jesus' teaching in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 He also told others to do this: "love thy neighbour as thyself" ...but don't covet your neighbour's wife. Bloody inconsistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Well there you go Marty - unable to tell the difference between love and lust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadpete Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Well there you go Marty - unable to tell the difference between love and lust. Do you think that King James meant that 'covert' = 'lust' ? My wife doesn't mind where I get my appetite so long as I always come home for dinner. Anyway, wasn't there a debate about whether 'love thy neighbour' really meant something about 'fellow believers' versus 'non believers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Perhaps this is why I don't have an imaginary friend, don't need any help from naturopaths, do accept that Neil Armstrong walked on Earth's Moon, had my kids vaccinated:[ATTACH]47672._xfImport[/ATTACH] And don't get me started on the Illuminati conspiracy theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kununurra Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 A little old man shuffled slowly into an ice cream parlour, crawled painfully onto a stool, and ordered a banana split. The waitress asked, "crushed nuts?" No he replied, it's just arthritis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 I'd have to say I understand your post much better than the peculiar post before it K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 And don't get me started on the Illuminati conspiracy theory. Why don't you get started, it would be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted July 18, 2015 Author Share Posted July 18, 2015 Well he's against being illuminated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 Some people prefer darkness rather than light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 But what if he's just in the twilight zone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi303 Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 Might need a few stakes for the sparkily bloodsuckers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 Some people prefer darkness rather than light. If you mean that some people prefer the light of reason to the darkness of blind belief, I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 If you mean that some people prefer the light of reason to the darkness of blind belief, I agree. Well that infers you don't have the luxury of belief in anything, which sounds about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 Well that infers you don't have the luxury of belief in anything, which sounds about right. I believe in many things TP, but not blindly, and I'm willing to reassess should one of those beliefs be proved wrong. Religious folks are welcome to that particular "luxury". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 I often state to people when debating or arguing a point that I'm happy to be proven wrong. This isn't strictly true of course. I hate being proven wrong. But it happens and I grudgingly accept it, beat myself over the head a bit for not researching the facts properly before opening my mouth, then get over it and accept the reality of the situation. I have to say I've never observed the phenomenon of accepting error when confronted with evidence (no matter how strong or voluminous the evidence is), in someone arguing from a religious perspective. Had a devoutly religious family member the other day lamenting the immorality of society and explaining that they know of at least one case where a gay man had female sex organs transplanted so they could bear a child. This of course is utter rubbish and no such case exists. I explained that while theoretically possible, it is totally unfeasible to do this for anatomical reasons (they would need brain organs transplanted too, as the female pituitary and hypothalamus control ovulation). I also explained that the cases he was referring to were transgender cases - the men already had female reproductive organs when they were born. It didn't go down well when I said "and therefore I guess we can say they're just using the equipment God gave them"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Well that infers you don't have the luxury of belief in anything, which sounds about right. Well, no, not really. What is means is that some of us like to see evidence, rather than blindly believe what some psychologically suspect people tell us. You like to see real statistics, and real results, you frequently bring these things up, when talking regulating stuff, why shouldn't the same degree of proof be required for something that's supposed to be so important? I read a joke recently, which has a lot of truth to it..... Does anyone see the irony of Christians claiming to abhor gambling, then bet their whole life on there being a god and an afterlife? Not believing in a god, doesn't mean you don't believe in anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 .....which usually leads into the whole "if you don't believe what we do, how can you possibly be as good as us?" argument. A view which I have heard a lot from Christian apologetics and which irritates me to no end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Time you people got off the Christians, and looked at the bigger picture of belief in God; I explained the Christian scam hundreds of posts ago, but some of you just don't seem to be able to get over the last 2,000 years and into the interesting stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Correction to my last: "A view which I have heard a lot from religious apologetics and which irritates me to no end." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Time you people got off the Christians, and looked at the bigger picture of belief in God; I explained the Christian scam hundreds of posts ago, but some of you just don't seem to be able to get over the last 2,000 years and into the interesting stuff. Since science has been able to explain the phenomenons that early religion relied on, most of us have enough information to be able to figure out they're all scams, not just Christianity. So what's your scam? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now