Talked to Thornberg

[cyphire]

Interesting points 4Runner. But wouldn’t you agree that while these items were put into religious practice because religious practice was the standard for society? And now with a global perspective – each of the religions grate on each other?

While from a historical perspective you might be right, shouldn’t these arbitrary restrictions be removed? What is the reason for these social codes to remain in today’s more modern world?

Divorce is legal in this country. Aren’t the rules against it in some religions just keeping their power structure alive? Is it in societies best interest to not allow divorce?

Just picking on the Catholic church for a second, weren’t their rules (like all religion) just created to give power to a group of people (priests)? It seems to me that throughout the history of that institution, there has been more hypocracy than in most other religions. It is a religion that feeds off of the hungry and uneducated, and creates arbitrary rules of behavior which enslave its population. I always think of how Latin being required (because the locals didn’t speak of it) and they finally capitulated. And of course the humility and poverty (but not for the higher ups – after all some pigs are more equal than others!) The priest was the final judge, the rod he kept was eternal damnation. Judaism encourages scholarship in all of its people (male historically though!), as the Amish do in their meetings and others. Catholicism keeps the people at a different level then their priests.

Most appalling is that the morality rules aren’t very moral at all (example letting a woman die during childbirth instead of the child), no abortions even in case of horrific birth defects or rape, and the long list of other things which most people in most societies would view as outrageous by normal codes of ethics. Especially in these modern times.

I wish more people (ahh the apathy of most Americans!!!) would rise up against the intolerance and would also try to change our government from engaging in the same behaviour overseas with poorer nations.

[4runner]

Cyphire,

Like I said, I suspect that which is economically efficient was presented as “the word of god” in most major religions because enforcement is so inexpensive. Like I said, it is a heck of a lot cheaper to tell someone that they will burn for eternity at the hand of an all-knowing deity for wrongdoing than it is to catch them in the same wrongdoing.

As for the different religions grating on each other– I think most religions are amazingly coherent. The basic family structure is largely the same. The respect for human life is largely the same. The belief that there is a common good is largely the same. The belief in fundamental respect for the rights of others is largely the same. The belief in the rule of law is largely the same. There might be some discrepancies around the fringes (e.g., Islam and polygamy), but all major religions have more in common than not.

As for restrictions on divorce being “arbitrary,” society has every right to forbid uneconomical practices. We can’t buy some recreational drugs, but we can buy others. Fourteen year olds can’t drive. Teenagers can’t buy alcohol. Face it– every regulation is in some sense “arbitrary.” Some of them make a lot of sense, some of them don’t. But every law is “arbitrary” at some level.

In the case of divorce, it costs a heck of a lot more money to raise kids in two separate households. That is money that could be spent elsewhere. It is legitimate for society to restrict that which costs an excessive amount of money.

As for rising up, we elect officials who make the judgment calls as to what the arbitrary rules should be. There really is no one to blame but ourselves.

[4runner]

Cyphire,

Like I said, I suspect that which is economically efficient was presented as “the word of god” in most major religions because enforcement is so inexpensive. Like I said, it is a heck of a lot cheaper to tell someone that they will burn for eternity at the hand of an all-knowing deity for wrongdoing than it is to catch them in the same wrongdoing.

As for the different religions grating on each other– I think most religions are amazingly coherent. The basic family structure is largely the same. The respect for human life is largely the same. The belief that there is a common good is largely the same. The belief in fundamental respect for the rights of others is largely the same. The belief in the rule of law is largely the same. There might be some discrepancies around the fringes (e.g., Islam and polygamy), but all major religions have more in common than not.

As for restrictions on divorce being “arbitrary,” society has every right to forbid uneconomical practices. We can’t buy some recreational drugs, but we can buy others. Fourteen year olds can’t drive. Teenagers can’t buy alcohol. Face it– every regulation is in some sense “arbitrary.” Some of them make a lot of sense, some of them don’t. But every law is “arbitrary” at some level.

In the case of divorce, it costs a heck of a lot more money to raise kids in two separate households. That is money that could be spent elsewhere. It is legitimate for society to restrict that which costs an excessive amount of money.

As for rising up, we elect officials who make the judgment calls as to what the arbitrary rules should be. There really is no one to blame but ourselves.

[Anonymous]

Neat points, 4r-.

In C.S. Lewis’, “Mere Christianity,” what I found to be his most compelling proof for God was that, as you said, most peoples and societies do value, and abhor, the same things. There ARE universal mores, it seems to me.

cyphire, there are numerous studies that show that children raised in unloving, but non-violent, households do better than kids raised by divorced parents. Great book: “The Case for Marriage.” Nice highlights here: http://www.marriagesavers.org/public/the_case_for_marriage.htm
(another Univ. of Chicago-derived study for you to pooh-pooh).

There was and is benefit, to society, to sticking around and raising the kids.

Your religious friends are fallible humans, cyphire. The real question is, how much worse would they be without their faith? I know that my faith, and its dictates, put bounds on me that I would not otherwise have. And, trust me, my wife and kids are in a better position with bounds and limits put upon me.

[Anonymous]

Neat points, 4r-.

In C.S. Lewis’, “Mere Christianity,” what I found to be his most compelling proof for God was that, as you said, most peoples and societies do value, and abhor, the same things. There ARE universal mores, it seems to me.

cyphire, there are numerous studies that show that children raised in unloving, but non-violent, households do better than kids raised by divorced parents. Great book: “The Case for Marriage.” Nice highlights here: http://www.marriagesavers.org/public/the_case_for_marriage.htm
(another Univ. of Chicago-derived study for you to pooh-pooh).

There was and is benefit, to society, to sticking around and raising the kids.

Your religious friends are fallible humans, cyphire. The real question is, how much worse would they be without their faith? I know that my faith, and its dictates, put bounds on me that I would not otherwise have. And, trust me, my wife and kids are in a better position with bounds and limits put upon me.

[NotCranky]

I am reading the posts by the two of you,cy and 4runner.
I get the feeling that you aren’t really adressing cyphires points, 4 runner but adding your own take on a few things related.

In any case I like those points. I think you are saying that the rules of religion are based on economic effeciency and the dogma is designed to enforce that. I have always believed this to be true. Also I would imagine that health practices were a big part or it. When there is no medicine for venereal diseases or other reasonable controls agains epidemics, very strict sexual codes would be a must. The shame of having a child out of wedlock another preemptive tax relief for the society where resources per capita and per bread winner would be sparse.
I think the orgiginal churches as a form of goverment did the best they could with what they had,although one might justifiable opine that they could have left well enough alone. I personally believe european power decided it needed to move large masses of people in response to the fact that conflict was rising with regions that had already put organization and control of the masses in place. Maybe that is why to this day presidents always invoke GOD to be on our side when they go to War of any kind. This real practice of moving ignorant armies and the public opinion to unjust wars to me is the worst evil of all related to religion and probably the main reason that political seperation of church and state do not exist as it should. It is the tendency to allow organizations that are still clinging to these archaic societal measures and the myths behind them that seem to be bane of modern society in CY’s eyes . I am not as vigilant and have solved the religious problem for myself decades ago. But on the societal level maybe we should all be more concerned. I think human nature is the real culprit myself but religion doesn’t seem to be helping address that as well in the new world as it might have in the old.There I am giving religion credit for being at least as good as a half way decent government, at some point historically. Why do we need Religion to bind society or interfere in any way with its rules when the founders of this country laid out a good new plan which has been to a large degree ignored? I am not talking about abolishing freedom of religion I am talking about illegalizing any religion as a quazi branch of government. If any other group intervened politically or socially, or attempted to, to the degree that religious groups do in our system, they would be labeled seditious and put down is a second.Look what we did to black people who wanted civil rights, Think about the Kent State for instance. Or the “red scare” attack propaganda against the media. Just because the religious cult is large and has roots in the old world doesn’t justify the meddling allowed to it IMO.

[NotCranky]

I am reading the posts by the two of you,cy and 4runner.
I get the feeling that you aren’t really adressing cyphires points, 4 runner but adding your own take on a few things related.

In any case I like those points. I think you are saying that the rules of religion are based on economic effeciency and the dogma is designed to enforce that. I have always believed this to be true. Also I would imagine that health practices were a big part or it. When there is no medicine for venereal diseases or other reasonable controls agains epidemics, very strict sexual codes would be a must. The shame of having a child out of wedlock another preemptive tax relief for the society where resources per capita and per bread winner would be sparse.
I think the orgiginal churches as a form of goverment did the best they could with what they had,although one might justifiable opine that they could have left well enough alone. I personally believe european power decided it needed to move large masses of people in response to the fact that conflict was rising with regions that had already put organization and control of the masses in place. Maybe that is why to this day presidents always invoke GOD to be on our side when they go to War of any kind. This real practice of moving ignorant armies and the public opinion to unjust wars to me is the worst evil of all related to religion and probably the main reason that political seperation of church and state do not exist as it should. It is the tendency to allow organizations that are still clinging to these archaic societal measures and the myths behind them that seem to be bane of modern society in CY’s eyes . I am not as vigilant and have solved the religious problem for myself decades ago. But on the societal level maybe we should all be more concerned. I think human nature is the real culprit myself but religion doesn’t seem to be helping address that as well in the new world as it might have in the old.There I am giving religion credit for being at least as good as a half way decent government, at some point historically. Why do we need Religion to bind society or interfere in any way with its rules when the founders of this country laid out a good new plan which has been to a large degree ignored? I am not talking about abolishing freedom of religion I am talking about illegalizing any religion as a quazi branch of government. If any other group intervened politically or socially, or attempted to, to the degree that religious groups do in our system, they would be labeled seditious and put down is a second.Look what we did to black people who wanted civil rights, Think about the Kent State for instance. Or the “red scare” attack propaganda against the media. Just because the religious cult is large and has roots in the old world doesn’t justify the meddling allowed to it IMO.

[NotCranky]

“And, trust me, my wife and kids are in a better position with bounds and limits put upon me.”

Thanks for admitting this JG. Not all of us need religion to do this .Someof us have love on our side. Some of us know and trust ourselves a little more than that too. Now as to having religious people intervening with politics to have the same restraints dictated, that keep you a reasonable father and spouse. Well you just admitted that if you had other tools besides your religion, you wouldn’t need it. Except maybe to get to disneyland..I mean heaven, and make this country great, I mean rich.
Best wishes

[NotCranky]

“And, trust me, my wife and kids are in a better position with bounds and limits put upon me.”

Thanks for admitting this JG. Not all of us need religion to do this .Someof us have love on our side. Some of us know and trust ourselves a little more than that too. Now as to having religious people intervening with politics to have the same restraints dictated, that keep you a reasonable father and spouse. Well you just admitted that if you had other tools besides your religion, you wouldn’t need it. Except maybe to get to disneyland..I mean heaven, and make this country great, I mean rich.
Best wishes

[cyphire]

Well said Rustico – both posts. That is also what angers me – the mixing of church and state, especially in our current state where religion is a bandaid on the incompetence and terrible moral values of the administration.

Like you, I don’t need religion to put boundaries on me. I have my own code of ethics and my wife is my best friend. We have mucho love, same with my kids. This is a much stronger value system and boundary system – because it’s self imposed. I don’t add the complexity of a flawed system into my life we stand on our own two feet!

[cyphire]

Well said Rustico – both posts. That is also what angers me – the mixing of church and state, especially in our current state where religion is a bandaid on the incompetence and terrible moral values of the administration.

Like you, I don’t need religion to put boundaries on me. I have my own code of ethics and my wife is my best friend. We have mucho love, same with my kids. This is a much stronger value system and boundary system – because it’s self imposed. I don’t add the complexity of a flawed system into my life we stand on our own two feet!

[NotCranky]

My direct comment to JG was too harsh and I apoligize.I am sure you are not deficient in love for your family,sorry.

About the “Study” I blew off. If you want to say that enlistees are better off than the non-college bound individuals they leave behind when they join the military, from the areas they are coming from, that might be possible. In my post where I said that enlisted people come from mostly broken families and impoverished areas I could have explained better. I mean as compared to officers and the nation as a whole including hte college bound. Sure if an area is blighted the non-college bound with some get up and go might leave the less ambitious at home and join the military. I am not crazy about a million studies because too many have bias. Often times when a study or amazing story comes to me from a christian it is being regurgitated from some phoney paid circuit speaker in the church.Like your story of the two boys who were raised equally but one becomes a murderer proving that evil people are born that way.Generally these stories are flimsy on educated review. I don’t trust polls,from almost any source,that say the enlisted military is doing great, are all the cream of the crop ect. I think they are designed to whitewash the fact that so many underpriveleged men get slaughtered compared to those from better situations. Anyone who gives a shit knows what is happening.Your report admitted that in eras of war the branches of the military had to make “lower standards” to get volunteers. That tells the story right there.

Have a good day and know that Rustico wishes the best for you and your family.That goes for all you “LIBS” too.:).

Oh well, one more parting shot.

“what I found to be his most compelling proof for God was that, as you said, most peoples and societies do value, and abhor, the same things. There ARE universal mores, it seems to me.”

Slightly modified discussion on CS Lewis obsrvations.
What I found to be his most compelling proof for a divine monkey was that,as you said, most monkeys and monkey societies do value,and abhor, the same things. They are universal mores,it seems to me. I have never met one monkey that didn’t like bananas or who succeded at forming a social group fundamentally different than social groups of monkeys from the same species.
Suggested reading “The Naked Ape” by Desmond Morris

Anyway the point of my sarcasm is not really that we are primates. What you have posited is as weak as any proof I have ever seen JG. Of course from there it is just a small step from there to your personal mythology being HIS word, as if God speaks or something. Why does an otherwise bright man allow his logic to go to the garbage when he is making proofs of God? Could you imagine if we came to blog and used a flimsy proof like that for real estate going up forever.

Kind of funny I have had these conversation with Christians before….never in writing. Amazingly enough it apparently makes no difference. I always thought maybe they weren’t able to grasp what I was saying because I talked too fast or something. But here it is in writing and it has the exact same effect. nada,nil,zilch! Just amazing! I amstartingot experience the talking ot a brick wall syndrome again. The least you could do JG,is from here on out to say…”I believe because I want to, not because I have any proof. My particular mythology helps me and thats as far as it goes.” BTW I am not an atheist. I simply don’t care wether GOD exists or doesn’t because we are not even close to knowing how this all works. Someone smarter than me will bring that knowlege out if it ever happens. Meanwhile I have got us to believe in or not.

[NotCranky]

My direct comment to JG was too harsh and I apoligize.I am sure you are not deficient in love for your family,sorry.

About the “Study” I blew off. If you want to say that enlistees are better off than the non-college bound individuals they leave behind when they join the military, from the areas they are coming from, that might be possible. In my post where I said that enlisted people come from mostly broken families and impoverished areas I could have explained better. I mean as compared to officers and the nation as a whole including hte college bound. Sure if an area is blighted the non-college bound with some get up and go might leave the less ambitious at home and join the military. I am not crazy about a million studies because too many have bias. Often times when a study or amazing story comes to me from a christian it is being regurgitated from some phoney paid circuit speaker in the church.Like your story of the two boys who were raised equally but one becomes a murderer proving that evil people are born that way.Generally these stories are flimsy on educated review. I don’t trust polls,from almost any source,that say the enlisted military is doing great, are all the cream of the crop ect. I think they are designed to whitewash the fact that so many underpriveleged men get slaughtered compared to those from better situations. Anyone who gives a shit knows what is happening.Your report admitted that in eras of war the branches of the military had to make “lower standards” to get volunteers. That tells the story right there.

Have a good day and know that Rustico wishes the best for you and your family.That goes for all you “LIBS” too.:).

Oh well, one more parting shot.

“what I found to be his most compelling proof for God was that, as you said, most peoples and societies do value, and abhor, the same things. There ARE universal mores, it seems to me.”

Slightly modified discussion on CS Lewis obsrvations.
What I found to be his most compelling proof for a divine monkey was that,as you said, most monkeys and monkey societies do value,and abhor, the same things. They are universal mores,it seems to me. I have never met one monkey that didn’t like bananas or who succeded at forming a social group fundamentally different than social groups of monkeys from the same species.
Suggested reading “The Naked Ape” by Desmond Morris

Anyway the point of my sarcasm is not really that we are primates. What you have posited is as weak as any proof I have ever seen JG. Of course from there it is just a small step from there to your personal mythology being HIS word, as if God speaks or something. Why does an otherwise bright man allow his logic to go to the garbage when he is making proofs of God? Could you imagine if we came to blog and used a flimsy proof like that for real estate going up forever.

Kind of funny I have had these conversation with Christians before….never in writing. Amazingly enough it apparently makes no difference. I always thought maybe they weren’t able to grasp what I was saying because I talked too fast or something. But here it is in writing and it has the exact same effect. nada,nil,zilch! Just amazing! I amstartingot experience the talking ot a brick wall syndrome again. The least you could do JG,is from here on out to say…”I believe because I want to, not because I have any proof. My particular mythology helps me and thats as far as it goes.” BTW I am not an atheist. I simply don’t care wether GOD exists or doesn’t because we are not even close to knowing how this all works. Someone smarter than me will bring that knowlege out if it ever happens. Meanwhile I have got us to believe in or not.

[Anonymous]

R-, there is no incontrovertible proof of God that I know of. That’s why it’s called ‘faith.’

cyphire, don’t mix up what is good for you — no bounds — with what is good for society — bounds. For us unwashed masses and hordes, laws and mores keep our society civilized.

‘Locks keep honest men honest.’

[Anonymous]

R-, there is no incontrovertible proof of God that I know of. That’s why it’s called ‘faith.’

cyphire, don’t mix up what is good for you — no bounds — with what is good for society — bounds. For us unwashed masses and hordes, laws and mores keep our society civilized.

‘Locks keep honest men honest.’

[Author]

Posts