Religion & Morality

[parfait]

We don't have Christian Jihad. Most modern Christian religions are peaceful and harmless. As a matter of fact that is why we make good targets. We are not allowed to fight back. So if a cartoonist does a cartoon about Mohamed, Muslim extremist threaten the cartoonist life. But in movies, cartoons, and artwork people insult the image of God and Jesus all the time, and we don't threaten to kill someone. We just have to tolerate it.

There are as many Christian extremists in the world as extremists of any other group. Don't act like there aren't and don't feign ignorance. Just as there are extremist atheists and non-extremist atheists. There are extremists in ANY group.

And to say you don't fight back - ha! How many abortion clinics have been blown up? How many white supremacy groups are there (and don't tell me these are not hard core Christians)? How many atheists do you see accosting people in their homes pushing the word of God on them? How many atheists send soldiers, I mean missionaries, out into the world to recruit more believers?

Extreme is extreme and each of our groups has them. And don't act like you tolerate it. Your last post was just proof that you don't tolerate it. You despise it. Much like your counterparts on the opposite side of the argument. Your extremists are JUST as bad as Muslim extremists. The only difference is we have better laws here and controls here to keep our extremists in line. That's it. Otherwise, bombs would be going off everywhere and atheists would be hunted and killed here because that's what Christians have done historically...

If those people lived by the tenets of Jesus they would not attack anyone. Nuts can attack in the name of anything. There was a guy who killed in the name of his dog, because his dog told him to. Do you get rid of all dogs?

As for my not tolerating it, there is a difference between voicing an opinion, which is my right to have, and my calling people childish names and insulting their intelligence, like many have here. That is far from making me an extremist. Most people of Christian faith are peaceable. Name the droves of people in the U.S. that have marched in Crusades today to make you a Christian.

Seriously, an extremist is an extremist, and only a minority of so called Christians, but I would have to say they were not Christian at all when Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek........to live by the sword is to die by the sword. Sounds like dangerous teachings to me.

I believe it is wrong to kill abortionist, I don't force religion on anyone, I just want to have my rights left in tact.

I did not say there were no nut jobs. I just was pointing out that the majority of Christians are peaceable, and don't want to hurt anyone.

I sort of got some respect for the extremist/fundamentalists or whatever you want to call them - because they're simply following their God as it is written in their holy book. This counts more for the muslims though - they don't interpret the quaran. Those crazy motherfuckers just follow it as it's written. Most Christians today just use the bible as some sort of pick'n mix. The found fathers were deists, but secularists above all else. It wasn't until the last couple of centuries that the US have become increasingly more religious. One nation under God? Added in the 20th century.

Easter and christmas are pagan holidays. Many pagan religions had Gods that appeared to die, then to be resurrected; signifying the change to spring. Christmas is based off a scandinavian pagan celebration called yule. I don't see how suppressing stem cell research, autonomy (regarding abortion) or gay rights is not hurting anyone - it clearly is.

And all this dribble you write about evolution hasn't been proven and just being a theory - I mean, come on. Seriously? Here's a question I'd like all you to answer: Do you believe in vaccines? Why do you think that you need to take new version of the same vaccine every year? Please state your reasoning.

[Rip Rokken]

If those people lived by the tenets of Jesus they would not attack anyone. Nuts can attack in the name of anything. There was a guy who killed in the name of his dog, because his dog told him to. Do you get rid of all dogs?

If God is real, then it's his choice not to impose any form of quality control in his believers to protect the integrity of his testimony whatsoever. It's perfectly fair then to judge God by the worst of them. It's his direct responsibility when faith promises so much but delivers so little, and arguments of "free will" or "man's will" are ridiculous. Consider any pharmaceutical medication on the market... find one who has been proven to drive even a minute percentage of the people taking it to suicide, and I say the same... it's perfectly fair to hold those results against the manufacturer.

Seriously, an extremist is an extremist, and only a minority of so called Christians, but I would have to say they were not Christian at all when Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek........to live by the sword is to die by the sword. And note I said Most Modern day Christians, not all people who claim to have Christian faith.

Reminded me immediately of a video I saw just yesterday on FoxNews.com. Surprised they even posted it.

Bloody Truth About the Bible - Fox News Video - Fox News
http://video.foxnews.com/v/130684766100 ... t_id=87485

I believe it is wrong to kill abortionist, I don't force religion on anyone, I just want to have my rights left in tact.

This is because you are a GOOD person. And nobody is challenging your rights or trying to take them away. We are mainly trying to protect our rights, and pushing back is expected.

I did not say there were no nut jobs. I just was pointing out that the majority of Christians are peaceable, and don't want to hurt anyone.

Even if they are a minority, there are plenty of nut jobs out there. And it can't be denied that the crazier someone is, the more intense or extreme their religious views tend to be. I would argue that the crazies believe even harder than the sane ones - but it doesn't pay off. God doesn't heal their mental illness, and allows them to go around doing whatever they want in his name.

By the way, I don't have a problem with anyone being an atheist, I am mainly having a problem with people calling people of religion stupid because they don't believe in what they do. I also have a problem with anyone wanting to remove my religious rights to freedom of expression of religion.

There are atheists who think religious people are stupid, and want to take away their rights. None of them are anywhere close to leadership in the freethought community, and their approach is discouraged.

[artist4perry]

We don't have Christian Jihad. Most modern Christian religions are peaceful and harmless. As a matter of fact that is why we make good targets. We are not allowed to fight back. So if a cartoonist does a cartoon about Mohamed, Muslim extremist threaten the cartoonist life. But in movies, cartoons, and artwork people insult the image of God and Jesus all the time, and we don't threaten to kill someone. We just have to tolerate it.

There are as many Christian extremists in the world as extremists of any other group. Don't act like there aren't and don't feign ignorance. Just as there are extremist atheists and non-extremist atheists. There are extremists in ANY group.

And to say you don't fight back - ha! How many abortion clinics have been blown up? How many white supremacy groups are there (and don't tell me these are not hard core Christians)? How many atheists do you see accosting people in their homes pushing the word of God on them? How many atheists send soldiers, I mean missionaries, out into the world to recruit more believers?

Extreme is extreme and each of our groups has them. And don't act like you tolerate it. Your last post was just proof that you don't tolerate it. You despise it. Much like your counterparts on the opposite side of the argument. Your extremists are JUST as bad as Muslim extremists. The only difference is we have better laws here and controls here to keep our extremists in line. That's it. Otherwise, bombs would be going off everywhere and atheists would be hunted and killed here because that's what Christians have done historically...

If those people lived by the tenets of Jesus they would not attack anyone. Nuts can attack in the name of anything. There was a guy who killed in the name of his dog, because his dog told him to. Do you get rid of all dogs?

As for my not tolerating it, there is a difference between voicing an opinion, which is my right to have, and my calling people childish names and insulting their intelligence, like many have here. That is far from making me an extremist. Most people of Christian faith are peaceable. Name the droves of people in the U.S. that have marched in Crusades today to make you a Christian.

Seriously, an extremist is an extremist, and only a minority of so called Christians, but I would have to say they were not Christian at all when Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek........to live by the sword is to die by the sword. Sounds like dangerous teachings to me.

I believe it is wrong to kill abortionist, I don't force religion on anyone, I just want to have my rights left in tact.

I did not say there were no nut jobs. I just was pointing out that the majority of Christians are peaceable, and don't want to hurt anyone.

I sort of got some respect for the extremist/fundamentalists or whatever you want to call them - because they're simply following their God as it is written in their holy book. This counts more for the muslims though - they don't interpret the quaran. Those crazy motherfuckers just follow it as it's written. Most Christians today just use the bible as some sort of pick'n mix. The found fathers were deists, but secularists above all else. It wasn't until the last couple of centuries that the US have become increasingly more religious. One nation under God? Added in the 20th century.

Easter and christmas are pagan holidays. Many pagan religions had Gods that appeared to die, then to be resurrected; signifying the change to spring. Christmas is based off a scandinavian pagan celebration called yule. I don't see how suppressing stem cell research, autonomy (regarding abortion) or gay rights is not hurting anyone - it clearly is.

And all this dribble you write about evolution hasn't been proven and just being a theory - I mean, come on. Seriously? Here's a question I'd like all you to answer: Do you believe in vaccines? Why do you think that you need to take new version of the same vaccine every year? Please state your reasoning.

First off I don't celebrate Easter an Christmas as religious holidays. My faith is under the belief that since we don't know the exact day Christ was born or Crucified, we celebrate his life as a whole everyday. But I can respect the Catholics and other religious groups rights to celebrate them as a religious holiday because they believe in it as such. I would not erect billboards or insist all images be torn down.

As for abortion, the same can be said on the opposing side. Murder of a child is murder. Plain and simple. I do not want to attack homosexuals in any way and have not. I disagree with their lifestyle, but I would not be mean to them, keep them from owning a house next to me, keep them from a job.........etc. I think it is wrong to hurt them for any reason. And I don't sit and tell them they are wrong and going to hell. Never have, never will.

Vaccines and Evolution are not one and the same and it is a stupid argument. As I said, most scientists today if they are being truthful, will state they are still seeking the origins of life. They have not proven anything and are still researching.

Seriously Parfait, I don't have a problem with you as an atheist, but why do you have a problem with peaceful Christians?

[artist4perry]

If those people lived by the tenets of Jesus they would not attack anyone. Nuts can attack in the name of anything. There was a guy who killed in the name of his dog, because his dog told him to. Do you get rid of all dogs?

If God is real, then it's his choice not to impose any form of quality control in his believers to protect the integrity of his testimony whatsoever. It's perfectly fair then to judge God by the worst of them. It's his direct responsibility when faith promises so much but delivers so little, and arguments of "free will" or "man's will" are ridiculous. Consider any pharmaceutical medication on the market... find one who has been proven to drive even a minute percentage of the people taking it to suicide, and I say the same... it's perfectly fair to hold those results against the manufacturer.

Seriously, an extremist is an extremist, and only a minority of so called Christians, but I would have to say they were not Christian at all when Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek........to live by the sword is to die by the sword. And note I said Most Modern day Christians, not all people who claim to have Christian faith.

Reminded me immediately of a video I saw just yesterday on FoxNews.com. Surprised they even posted it.

Bloody Truth About the Bible - Fox News Video - Fox News
http://video.foxnews.com/v/130684766100 ... t_id=87485

I believe it is wrong to kill abortionist, I don't force religion on anyone, I just want to have my rights left in tact.

This is because you are a GOOD person. And nobody is challenging your rights or trying to take them away. We are mainly trying to protect our rights, and pushing back is expected.

I did not say there were no nut jobs. I just was pointing out that the majority of Christians are peaceable, and don't want to hurt anyone.

Even if they are a minority, there are plenty of nut jobs out there. And it can't be denied that the crazier someone is, the more intense or extreme their religious views tend to be. I would argue that the crazies believe even harder than the sane ones - but it doesn't pay off. God doesn't heal their mental illness, and allows them to go around doing whatever they want in his name.

By the way, I don't have a problem with anyone being an atheist, I am mainly having a problem with people calling people of religion stupid because they don't believe in what they do. I also have a problem with anyone wanting to remove my religious rights to freedom of expression of religion.

There are atheists who think religious people are stupid, and want to take away their rights. None of them are anywhere close to leadership in the freethought community, and their approach is discouraged.

I think you and I can live side by side in harmony. Because we can respect one another's rights and live and let live for the most part. As for removing an atheists rights, I would not do so. I think though a little tolerance on both sides is needed. I think we should respect that some, and not even myself included, believe in Christmas as a religious holiday. To say their faith is a myth as some billboards are saying this year is an attack. It is not right and it is ugly. I think any billboards attacking atheism is equally offensive. I have no problem with a peaceful atheist "Community" as you have proposed. But just as there are those who are militant atheists, there are militant theists, both are just mean people who need a hobby in my opinion.

[parfait]

We don't have Christian Jihad. Most modern Christian religions are peaceful and harmless. As a matter of fact that is why we make good targets. We are not allowed to fight back. So if a cartoonist does a cartoon about Mohamed, Muslim extremist threaten the cartoonist life. But in movies, cartoons, and artwork people insult the image of God and Jesus all the time, and we don't threaten to kill someone. We just have to tolerate it.

There are as many Christian extremists in the world as extremists of any other group. Don't act like there aren't and don't feign ignorance. Just as there are extremist atheists and non-extremist atheists. There are extremists in ANY group.

And to say you don't fight back - ha! How many abortion clinics have been blown up? How many white supremacy groups are there (and don't tell me these are not hard core Christians)? How many atheists do you see accosting people in their homes pushing the word of God on them? How many atheists send soldiers, I mean missionaries, out into the world to recruit more believers?

Extreme is extreme and each of our groups has them. And don't act like you tolerate it. Your last post was just proof that you don't tolerate it. You despise it. Much like your counterparts on the opposite side of the argument. Your extremists are JUST as bad as Muslim extremists. The only difference is we have better laws here and controls here to keep our extremists in line. That's it. Otherwise, bombs would be going off everywhere and atheists would be hunted and killed here because that's what Christians have done historically...

If those people lived by the tenets of Jesus they would not attack anyone. Nuts can attack in the name of anything. There was a guy who killed in the name of his dog, because his dog told him to. Do you get rid of all dogs?

As for my not tolerating it, there is a difference between voicing an opinion, which is my right to have, and my calling people childish names and insulting their intelligence, like many have here. That is far from making me an extremist. Most people of Christian faith are peaceable. Name the droves of people in the U.S. that have marched in Crusades today to make you a Christian.

Seriously, an extremist is an extremist, and only a minority of so called Christians, but I would have to say they were not Christian at all when Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek........to live by the sword is to die by the sword. Sounds like dangerous teachings to me.

I believe it is wrong to kill abortionist, I don't force religion on anyone, I just want to have my rights left in tact.

I did not say there were no nut jobs. I just was pointing out that the majority of Christians are peaceable, and don't want to hurt anyone.

I sort of got some respect for the extremist/fundamentalists or whatever you want to call them - because they're simply following their God as it is written in their holy book. This counts more for the muslims though - they don't interpret the quaran. Those crazy motherfuckers just follow it as it's written. Most Christians today just use the bible as some sort of pick'n mix. The found fathers were deists, but secularists above all else. It wasn't until the last couple of centuries that the US have become increasingly more religious. One nation under God? Added in the 20th century.

Easter and christmas are pagan holidays. Many pagan religions had Gods that appeared to die, then to be resurrected; signifying the change to spring. Christmas is based off a scandinavian pagan celebration called yule. I don't see how suppressing stem cell research, autonomy (regarding abortion) or gay rights is not hurting anyone - it clearly is.

And all this dribble you write about evolution hasn't been proven and just being a theory - I mean, come on. Seriously? Here's a question I'd like all you to answer: Do you believe in vaccines? Why do you think that you need to take new version of the same vaccine every year? Please state your reasoning.

First off I don't celebrate Easter an Christmas as religious holidays. My faith is under the belief that since we don't know the exact day Christ was born or Crucified, we celebrate his life as a whole everyday. But I can respect the Catholics and other religious groups rights to celebrate them as a religious holiday because they believe in it as such. I would not erect billboards or insist all images be torn down.

As for abortion, the same can be said on the opposing side. Murder of a child is murder. Plain and simple. I do not want to attack homosexuals in any way and have not. I disagree with their lifestyle, but I would not be mean to them, keep them from owning a house next to me, keep them from a job.........etc. I think it is wrong to hurt them for any reason. And I don't sit and tell them they are wrong and going to hell. Never have, never will.

Vaccines and Evolution are not one and the same and it is a stupid argument. As I said, most scientists today if they are being truthful, will state they are still seeking the origins of life. They have not proven anything and are still researching.

Seriously Parfait, I don't have a problem with you as an atheist, but why do you have a problem with peaceful Christians?

Why is it a stupid argument? Please explain. I'd like to hear your reasoning. The origin of life has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. This is another common misconception. Just because science can't explain everything today, doesn't mean you should fill in the gaps by a supernatural force - that is utterly illogical. Science don't know what the force of gravity is either: does that make it reasonable to say that it's pink fairies that control gravity by cooking candy floss pasta? No.

If you can provide proper evidence that the scientific community are unsure if the theory of evolution really is correct (natural selection, mutations, adaptions etc), then please do so and your experience with "most scientists" that makes you able to say something like that.

[Rip Rokken]

I can agree on the first, and I will remove it. But there are many more and you and I know it.

Here is the story behind the 2nd billboard, and it turns out David Silverman was directly behind it:

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/ ... billboard/

An excerpt which answers some of your questions:

"Mr. Silverman said the billboard served two purposes. The first was to get the many people who do not actually believe in God but practice religious rituals to “come out,” in his words.

He said the billboard’s location was especially effective because commuters “drive by this sign very slowly every day for a month, right in the Christmas season.”

“And when they go into New York to go shopping,” he said, “they’re going to see it.”

The billboard also stands up to what Mr. Silverman described as a reactionary assault on atheists driven mainly by the religious right.

“Every year, atheists get blamed for having a war on Christmas, even if we don’t do anything,” he said. “This year, we decided to give the religious right a taste of what war on Christmas looks like.”


And the 3rd - sounds like there is some controversy (and possible deception) about how it was even erected:

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/business- ... ial/nFCCc/

Please tell me the purpose of such billboards. I am just curious as to why they feel the need to erect them at all.

To counter the fear and potential emotional/psychological damage caused by billboards like this one on I-30, just 17 miles from my house. (That sign has been there for eons, btw...)

If atheist just believe there is no supernatural beings, then why do they go on attack like this?

Personally I have no problem with you or anyone here not believing in God. I just don't get the need to remove others rights to believe in God, or the need to make fun of or belittle others who do believe in God.

Then Christians and other religious folk need to leave everyone else alone, and not try to legislate morality or condemn other to Hell simply for not believing the same things they do. And they should do everything possible to quash extremists, since God chooses not to.

I am all for removing dangerous extremists of all kinds. Anyone killing in the name of God, dogs, frogs, or anything else are evil and should be stopped. But most Christian religions are peaceable. And some here take a few wacko extremist views and say all religion is dangerous? Seriously?

You have met me Rip, do you find me dangerous? Boring I can concede, but dangerous? There are some here who would tout that because I believe in God and a few nut jobs killed in the name of God, I am of the same mindset.

You're neither boring, nor dangerous. If Christianity was filled with Christians like you and Dan, Ginger, I'd have nothing negative at all to say about Christianity. Actually, I'm pretty sure I'd still be a Christian, because I'd have no reason to doubt any of it. But like I said, for whatever reason, God chooses to "challenge" the rest of us by allowing people to do anything and everything in his name, with the lame excuse that he'll make everything right in the end. Why have a justice system at all, then? Let every serial killer kill away, let every child molester do their thing unchecked, with the comforting knowledge that God will heap upon him tenfold what he did unto others, and hang a great millstone around his neck and cast him into the sea. And Hell. All that stuff.

God can't expect to hold anyone's respect unless he dispenses a little justice in this age, and especially protect his own testimony for crying out loud. All I do is look with my own two eyes, and I can tell faith doesn't add up anymore in my life. There is absolutely no way anyone could convince me that God desires for all people to come to knowledge of him when he stacks the deck so heavily against belief.

[artist4perry]

We don't have Christian Jihad. Most modern Christian religions are peaceful and harmless. As a matter of fact that is why we make good targets. We are not allowed to fight back. So if a cartoonist does a cartoon about Mohamed, Muslim extremist threaten the cartoonist life. But in movies, cartoons, and artwork people insult the image of God and Jesus all the time, and we don't threaten to kill someone. We just have to tolerate it.

There are as many Christian extremists in the world as extremists of any other group. Don't act like there aren't and don't feign ignorance. Just as there are extremist atheists and non-extremist atheists. There are extremists in ANY group.

And to say you don't fight back - ha! How many abortion clinics have been blown up? How many white supremacy groups are there (and don't tell me these are not hard core Christians)? How many atheists do you see accosting people in their homes pushing the word of God on them? How many atheists send soldiers, I mean missionaries, out into the world to recruit more believers?

Extreme is extreme and each of our groups has them. And don't act like you tolerate it. Your last post was just proof that you don't tolerate it. You despise it. Much like your counterparts on the opposite side of the argument. Your extremists are JUST as bad as Muslim extremists. The only difference is we have better laws here and controls here to keep our extremists in line. That's it. Otherwise, bombs would be going off everywhere and atheists would be hunted and killed here because that's what Christians have done historically...

If those people lived by the tenets of Jesus they would not attack anyone. Nuts can attack in the name of anything. There was a guy who killed in the name of his dog, because his dog told him to. Do you get rid of all dogs?

As for my not tolerating it, there is a difference between voicing an opinion, which is my right to have, and my calling people childish names and insulting their intelligence, like many have here. That is far from making me an extremist. Most people of Christian faith are peaceable. Name the droves of people in the U.S. that have marched in Crusades today to make you a Christian.

Seriously, an extremist is an extremist, and only a minority of so called Christians, but I would have to say they were not Christian at all when Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek........to live by the sword is to die by the sword. Sounds like dangerous teachings to me.

I believe it is wrong to kill abortionist, I don't force religion on anyone, I just want to have my rights left in tact.

I did not say there were no nut jobs. I just was pointing out that the majority of Christians are peaceable, and don't want to hurt anyone.

I sort of got some respect for the extremist/fundamentalists or whatever you want to call them - because they're simply following their God as it is written in their holy book. This counts more for the muslims though - they don't interpret the quaran. Those crazy motherfuckers just follow it as it's written. Most Christians today just use the bible as some sort of pick'n mix. The found fathers were deists, but secularists above all else. It wasn't until the last couple of centuries that the US have become increasingly more religious. One nation under God? Added in the 20th century.

Easter and christmas are pagan holidays. Many pagan religions had Gods that appeared to die, then to be resurrected; signifying the change to spring. Christmas is based off a scandinavian pagan celebration called yule. I don't see how suppressing stem cell research, autonomy (regarding abortion) or gay rights is not hurting anyone - it clearly is.

And all this dribble you write about evolution hasn't been proven and just being a theory - I mean, come on. Seriously? Here's a question I'd like all you to answer: Do you believe in vaccines? Why do you think that you need to take new version of the same vaccine every year? Please state your reasoning.

First off I don't celebrate Easter an Christmas as religious holidays. My faith is under the belief that since we don't know the exact day Christ was born or Crucified, we celebrate his life as a whole everyday. But I can respect the Catholics and other religious groups rights to celebrate them as a religious holiday because they believe in it as such. I would not erect billboards or insist all images be torn down.

As for abortion, the same can be said on the opposing side. Murder of a child is murder. Plain and simple. I do not want to attack homosexuals in any way and have not. I disagree with their lifestyle, but I would not be mean to them, keep them from owning a house next to me, keep them from a job.........etc. I think it is wrong to hurt them for any reason. And I don't sit and tell them they are wrong and going to hell. Never have, never will.

Vaccines and Evolution are not one and the same and it is a stupid argument. As I said, most scientists today if they are being truthful, will state they are still seeking the origins of life. They have not proven anything and are still researching.

Seriously Parfait, I don't have a problem with you as an atheist, but why do you have a problem with peaceful Christians?

Why is it a stupid argument? Please explain. I'd like to hear your reasoning. The origin of life has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. This is another common misconception. Just because science can't explain everything today, doesn't mean you should fill in the gaps by a supernatural force - that is utterly illogical. Science don't know what the force of gravity is either: does that make it reasonable to say that it's pink fairies that control gravity by cooking candy floss pasta? No.

If you can provide proper evidence that the scientific community are unsure if the theory of evolution really is correct (natural selection, mutations, adaptions etc), then please do so and your experience with "most scientists" that makes you able to say something like that.

Your constantly going on about how you have the truth about the origin of life. You have the proof. Scientists themselves don't have the proof. I was referring to your statement of the origins of life. As for evolution, not all of it is indisputable. I do believe in adaptation. But not the changing of one species to another.

[artist4perry]

I can agree on the first, and I will remove it. But there are many more and you and I know it.

Here is the story behind the 2nd billboard, and it turns out David Silverman was directly behind it:

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/ ... billboard/

An excerpt which answers some of your questions:

"Mr. Silverman said the billboard served two purposes. The first was to get the many people who do not actually believe in God but practice religious rituals to “come out,” in his words.

He said the billboard’s location was especially effective because commuters “drive by this sign very slowly every day for a month, right in the Christmas season.”

“And when they go into New York to go shopping,” he said, “they’re going to see it.”

The billboard also stands up to what Mr. Silverman described as a reactionary assault on atheists driven mainly by the religious right.

“Every year, atheists get blamed for having a war on Christmas, even if we don’t do anything,” he said. “This year, we decided to give the religious right a taste of what war on Christmas looks like.”


And the 3rd - sounds like there is some controversy (and possible deception) about how it was even erected:

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/business- ... ial/nFCCc/

Please tell me the purpose of such billboards. I am just curious as to why they feel the need to erect them at all.

To counter the fear and potential emotional/psychological damage caused by billboards like this one on I-30, just 17 miles from my house. (That sign has been there for eons, btw...)

If atheist just believe there is no supernatural beings, then why do they go on attack like this?

Personally I have no problem with you or anyone here not believing in God. I just don't get the need to remove others rights to believe in God, or the need to make fun of or belittle others who do believe in God.

Then Christians and other religious folk need to leave everyone else alone, and not try to legislate morality or condemn other to Hell simply for not believing the same things they do. And they should do everything possible to quash extremists, since God chooses not to.

I am all for removing dangerous extremists of all kinds. Anyone killing in the name of God, dogs, frogs, or anything else are evil and should be stopped. But most Christian religions are peaceable. And some here take a few wacko extremist views and say all religion is dangerous? Seriously?

You have met me Rip, do you find me dangerous? Boring I can concede, but dangerous? There are some here who would tout that because I believe in God and a few nut jobs killed in the name of God, I am of the same mindset.

You're neither boring, nor dangerous. If Christianity was filled with Christians like you and Dan, Ginger, I'd have nothing negative at all to say about Christianity. Actually, I'm pretty sure I'd still be a Christian, because I'd have no reason to doubt any of it. But like I said, for whatever reason, God chooses to "challenge" the rest of us by allowing people to do anything and everything in his name, with the lame excuse that he'll make everything right in the end. Why have a justice system at all, then? Let every serial killer kill away, let every child molester do their thing unchecked, with the comforting knowledge that God will heap upon him tenfold what he did unto others, and hang a great millstone around his neck and cast him into the sea. And Hell. All that stuff.

God can't expect to hold anyone's respect unless he dispenses a little justice in this age, and especially protect his own testimony for crying out loud. All I do is look with my own two eyes, and I can tell faith doesn't add up anymore in my life. There is absolutely no way anyone could convince me that God desires for all people to come to knowledge of him when he stacks the deck so heavily against belief.

Two wrongs don't make a right, neither the militant atheist nor the militant theist should put things up attacking the other.

As for legislation of morality.........don't we legislate morality when we say killing is a crime? I feel killing babies in the womb is a crime........but instead of outlawing abortion I just think it should not be funded by the U.S. government. We have people dying of cancer who cannot get medical care, but some girl who goes out and has unprotected sex should have me pay for her decision to risk making a baby she doesn't want? So we pay for her to scramble a baby in her womb and cut it to pieces. I say I don't want to pay for it. I think that is reasonable. Now can you have fundraisers to pay for such things out of the pockets of those who support it? Sure can. But then it is not my money sanctioning things I deem as murder.

The billboards are a direct attack on both the atheist and theists part. The attacks are wrong I think we can both agree on this.

I am sorry you lost your faith, but your view of God is not my view of God. Sometimes I think you want God on your terms not his. We will only know what is true once we die. Death holds the truths.

[artist4perry]

Sorry, I just read you said Silverman said the billboards were to let people who don't believe in God but practice religious rituals to know they can "Come out". O.K. in other words trying to get others who are weak Christians to convert to atheism all together? Does that not seem to you like it is like a religion to him? We must convert those who are borderline? Personally if he wants to put up his signs he is welcome to by law.

Christmas religious symbols have been under attack for quite a few years now. Long before those billboards. So much so many people are caving to call them "Holiday Trees" instead of Christmas trees. People are afraid to say Merry Christmas in stores but say Happy Holidays instead. The goofiest thing is quite a few atheist celebrate Christmas. It can be either religious or secular depending on your view of it. So making people afraid to say Merry Christmas is a bit ridiculous. I hate the PC police.


If he were honest, he would have to say he hates the whole Christmas religious theme and is quite intolerant of seeing religious symbols. But having them at Christmas time is quite within the rights of freedom of expression of religion.

[parfait]

We don't have Christian Jihad. Most modern Christian religions are peaceful and harmless. As a matter of fact that is why we make good targets. We are not allowed to fight back. So if a cartoonist does a cartoon about Mohamed, Muslim extremist threaten the cartoonist life. But in movies, cartoons, and artwork people insult the image of God and Jesus all the time, and we don't threaten to kill someone. We just have to tolerate it.

There are as many Christian extremists in the world as extremists of any other group. Don't act like there aren't and don't feign ignorance. Just as there are extremist atheists and non-extremist atheists. There are extremists in ANY group.

And to say you don't fight back - ha! How many abortion clinics have been blown up? How many white supremacy groups are there (and don't tell me these are not hard core Christians)? How many atheists do you see accosting people in their homes pushing the word of God on them? How many atheists send soldiers, I mean missionaries, out into the world to recruit more believers?

Extreme is extreme and each of our groups has them. And don't act like you tolerate it. Your last post was just proof that you don't tolerate it. You despise it. Much like your counterparts on the opposite side of the argument. Your extremists are JUST as bad as Muslim extremists. The only difference is we have better laws here and controls here to keep our extremists in line. That's it. Otherwise, bombs would be going off everywhere and atheists would be hunted and killed here because that's what Christians have done historically...

If those people lived by the tenets of Jesus they would not attack anyone. Nuts can attack in the name of anything. There was a guy who killed in the name of his dog, because his dog told him to. Do you get rid of all dogs?

As for my not tolerating it, there is a difference between voicing an opinion, which is my right to have, and my calling people childish names and insulting their intelligence, like many have here. That is far from making me an extremist. Most people of Christian faith are peaceable. Name the droves of people in the U.S. that have marched in Crusades today to make you a Christian.

Seriously, an extremist is an extremist, and only a minority of so called Christians, but I would have to say they were not Christian at all when Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek........to live by the sword is to die by the sword. Sounds like dangerous teachings to me.

I believe it is wrong to kill abortionist, I don't force religion on anyone, I just want to have my rights left in tact.

I did not say there were no nut jobs. I just was pointing out that the majority of Christians are peaceable, and don't want to hurt anyone.

I sort of got some respect for the extremist/fundamentalists or whatever you want to call them - because they're simply following their God as it is written in their holy book. This counts more for the muslims though - they don't interpret the quaran. Those crazy motherfuckers just follow it as it's written. Most Christians today just use the bible as some sort of pick'n mix. The found fathers were deists, but secularists above all else. It wasn't until the last couple of centuries that the US have become increasingly more religious. One nation under God? Added in the 20th century.

Easter and christmas are pagan holidays. Many pagan religions had Gods that appeared to die, then to be resurrected; signifying the change to spring. Christmas is based off a scandinavian pagan celebration called yule. I don't see how suppressing stem cell research, autonomy (regarding abortion) or gay rights is not hurting anyone - it clearly is.

And all this dribble you write about evolution hasn't been proven and just being a theory - I mean, come on. Seriously? Here's a question I'd like all you to answer: Do you believe in vaccines? Why do you think that you need to take new version of the same vaccine every year? Please state your reasoning.

First off I don't celebrate Easter an Christmas as religious holidays. My faith is under the belief that since we don't know the exact day Christ was born or Crucified, we celebrate his life as a whole everyday. But I can respect the Catholics and other religious groups rights to celebrate them as a religious holiday because they believe in it as such. I would not erect billboards or insist all images be torn down.

As for abortion, the same can be said on the opposing side. Murder of a child is murder. Plain and simple. I do not want to attack homosexuals in any way and have not. I disagree with their lifestyle, but I would not be mean to them, keep them from owning a house next to me, keep them from a job.........etc. I think it is wrong to hurt them for any reason. And I don't sit and tell them they are wrong and going to hell. Never have, never will.

Vaccines and Evolution are not one and the same and it is a stupid argument. As I said, most scientists today if they are being truthful, will state they are still seeking the origins of life. They have not proven anything and are still researching.

Seriously Parfait, I don't have a problem with you as an atheist, but why do you have a problem with peaceful Christians?

Why is it a stupid argument? Please explain. I'd like to hear your reasoning. The origin of life has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. This is another common misconception. Just because science can't explain everything today, doesn't mean you should fill in the gaps by a supernatural force - that is utterly illogical. Science don't know what the force of gravity is either: does that make it reasonable to say that it's pink fairies that control gravity by cooking candy floss pasta? No.

If you can provide proper evidence that the scientific community are unsure if the theory of evolution really is correct (natural selection, mutations, adaptions etc), then please do so and your experience with "most scientists" that makes you able to say something like that.

Your constantly going on about how you have the truth about the origin of life. You have the proof. Scientists themselves don't have the proof. I was referring to your statement of the origins of life. As for evolution, not all of it is indisputable. I do believe in adaptation. But not the changing of one species to another.

I never said that. Again: Origin of life and theory of evolution are two separate things altogether. Please provide the stuff that you say is disputable about evolution and your reasoning behind it. Hey, if you want to act like someone who knows what is right and wrong concerning evolution for example, then provide the proof! You didn't answer my question concerning gravity though.

Mutations and natural selective leads to new species - this however takes thousands of years. Though, there have been numerous examples just in the last century that have shown new species emerging. You also avoided to answer my question regarding vaccines.

[artist4perry]

First off Parfait, I don't get where the lack of buying into all of evolutions teachings equate not believing in medicine. I am not doubting all science and I for the most part like science. But science is not perfect. Science does not hold all the answers as you would have it. It is not the gospel of life. They make mistakes all the time and they cannot show species changing, not adapting to environment, changing from one species to another. As many dinosaur bones as there are we should have these changing beasts all over the place. It should not be fragments of bones found scattered on a hill put together. We should have some whole or mostly whole skeletons of some sort.

Personally if you want to believe science makes no mistakes, and cannot be questioned your welcome to it. But many people realize it is a study that is not perfect, and so just because science has one idea today, does not mean it will not be disproved tomorrow. If something is a scientific theory one can argue that it is still in study, and can be questioned. I question some of the theories of science. Some of evolutions ideas I question. Many people do. To make fun of them because you take a theory as fact is showing your not seeing scientific theory as something that is still under study and not proven at all.

I think this is beating our heads against the wall. I am fine with your view of evolution to be your right to view.

I have the same right to view the origins of life the way I view it and either you can be tolerant or not.

[parfait]

First off Parfait, I don't get where the lack of buying into all of evolutions teachings equate not believing in medicine. I am not doubting all science and I for the most part like science. But science is not perfect. Science does not hold all the answers as you would have it. It is not the gospel of life. They make mistakes all the time and they cannot show species changing, not adapting to environment, changing from one species to another. As many dinosaur bones as there are we should have these changing beasts all over the place. It should not be fragments of bones found scattered on a hill put together. We should have some whole or mostly whole skeletons of some sort.

Personally if you want to believe science makes no mistakes, and cannot be questioned your welcome to it. But many people realize it is a study that is not perfect, and so just because science has one idea today, does not mean it will not be disproved tomorrow. If something is a scientific theory one can argue that it is still in study, and can be questioned. I question some of the theories of science. Some of evolutions ideas I question. Many people do. To make fun of them because you take a theory as fact is showing your not seeing scientific theory as something that is still under study and not proven at all.

I think this is beating our heads against the wall. I am fine with your view of evolution to be your right to view.

I have the same right to view the origins of life the way I view it and either you can be tolerant or not.

I never said science is perfect - it's not a religion. It's a way of observing and exploring the world; finding answers. You still avoided to answer my questions or providing any sort of proof of your statements.

As I've said: speciation usually takes thousand of years, even millions. Through modern genetics, have geneticists managed to trace our DNA to a common ancestor, which we share with other primates, specifically chimpanzees. Modern genetics will in the future solve most hereditary diseases, through DNA tracing and experimenting. This is indisputable. Bones completely dissolve into the soil after a couple of decades. One can easily see how we have evolved from a common ancestor with primates, since we share almost all our genetic material. Our coccyx (tailbone) is the remnant of a vestigial tail for example.

Please don't make me explain to you again what the difference is between the colloquial use of the word theory and the scientific use of it. It is not an idea or an hypothesis. A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers, so it both contains laws, observations and evidence.

There are several examples of fast speciation when several species are contained on a small area. Mosquitoes, which moved down to the London Underground evolved into a new species in just around a century, and today they can't interbreed with their landliving cousins. The dachshund, rather the mini-dachshund is another example. Rapid speciation of the Faeroe Island house mouse, which occurred in less than 250 years after man brought the creature to the island is a third example. Italian wall lizards introduced to the Croatian coast have just in a few decades involved intonew species, with completely different gut structure, body size and bite strength. Another one is the African cichlid fish which quickly speciated after the water in the lake became increasingly murky. So, species don't differentiate or adapt to their environment, huh? Again: believe what you want about your God, but don't go around throwing uneducated opinions around you like they are facts, when you're obviously wrong.

[donnaplease]

Ginger, dear... you're beating your head against a brick wall with this argument. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, unless they contradict a certain population who claim to have 'science' on their side. I have NO answers that will sway the non-believers if they aren't open to believing, that's what faith is all about - either you have it or you don't. I do appreciate this thread in one sense, though. It has led me to read my bible more and has ultimately strengthened my faith. God does indeed work in mysterious ways.

[donnaplease]

Here's a question I'd like all you to answer: Do you believe in vaccines? Why do you think that you need to take new version of the same vaccine every year? Please state your reasoning.

I believe in vaccines, although the only one that I'm aware of that you need to take a 'new' version of every year is the flu vaccine. My understanding of the reason for that is that there are several strains of influenza and the physicians/scientists try to determine which strain would be prevalent in each particular year, thus changing the makeup of the vaccine to cover that strain. However, this year the vaccine in our area is the same as last year, since they didn't foresee a different strain hitting us this winter.

Conversely, generally one dose (or only a few doses, depending on the vaccine itself) of most vaccines will allow lifetime immunity to those diseases. And certain diseases have effectively been eradicated because of vaccines. Kinda flies in the face of your argument, doesn't it?

[parfait]

Here's a question I'd like all you to answer: Do you believe in vaccines? Why do you think that you need to take new version of the same vaccine every year? Please state your reasoning.

I believe in vaccines, although the only one that I'm aware of that you need to take a 'new' version of every year is the flu vaccine. My understanding of the reason for that is that there are several strains of influenza and the physicians/scientists try to determine which strain would be prevalent in each particular year, thus changing the makeup of the vaccine to cover that strain. However, this year the vaccine in our area is the same as last year, since they didn't foresee a different strain hitting us this winter.

Conversely, generally one dose (or only a few doses, depending on the vaccine itself) of most vaccines will allow lifetime immunity to those diseases. And certain diseases have effectively been eradicated because of vaccines. Kinda flies in the face of your argument, doesn't it?

Influenza strains evolve through reassortment. Determining of a common ancestor proved that the virus was initially spread from pigs around 150 years ago, which then have continuously evolved becoming increasingly stable. A study in 2006 showed, by examining the genome of 413 strains, that there distinct strains circulating within a season, proving adaptive evolution. The reason for the yearly vaccine is the progressive antigenic drift of influenza A and B viruses due to the mutability of the RNA genome. Basically it means that a RNA genome (which is different from DNA) are mutating on a grand scale. Virus' in general are extremely adaptive, so one seasons strain are not similar to the last seasons trend etc. So you're wrong.

[S2M]

One of my biggest gripes with religion is the fact that the followers embrace the part of children. Tenets assuming a Because I said so message. Like a parent not explaining why a rule is a rule, or why a phenomenon is what it is.

The believers just relinguish all responsibility of critical thinking, letting faith take centerstage to answer any and all questions/mysteries. Religion doesn't allow for falsification, having an answer for everything. I wonder if Freud was religious?

The reason I've continued to say the devout are less intelligent than their scientific counterparts is for the mere fact that 'faith' seems to take the work out of discovering the why. The lazy way out, if you will. Like diagnosing every energetic kid as having ADHD, without really investigating further. That warm and fuzzy blanket excuse....

The bible isn't a book of facts that once you've studied it - you are known as an expert on the material. It's not like studying mathematics, or elctricity. It would be like me studying Great Expectations, and then claiming I was an expert on theivery and pickpocketing.

[donnaplease]

Influenza strains evolve through reassortment. Determining of a common ancestor proved that the virus was initially spread from pigs around 150 years ago, which then have continuously evolved becoming increasingly stable. A study in 2006 showed, by examining the genome of 413 strains, that there distinct strains circulating within a season, proving adaptive evolution. The reason for the yearly vaccine is the progressive antigenic drift of influenza A and B viruses due to the mutability of the RNA genome. Basically it means that a RNA genome (which is different from DNA) are mutating on a grand scale. Virus' in general are extremely adaptive, so one seasons strain are not similar to the last seasons trend etc. So you're wrong.

Of course I am.


http://www.cdc.gov/flu/flu_vaccine_updates.htm

2011-2012 Flu Vaccine Formulation

What viruses do flu vaccines protect against?

Flu vaccines are designed to protect against the three influenza viruses that experts predict will be the most common during the upcoming season. Each season, this includes an influenza B virus, an influenza A (H1N1) virus and an influenza A (H3N2) virus. (These are the three virus subtypes that are circulating most commonly among people today.) More information about influenza vaccines is available at Preventing Seasonal Flu With Vaccination.

What viruses will the 2011-2012 vaccine protect against?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended that the United State's 2011-2012 seasonal influenza vaccine contain the following three vaccine viruses:
•an A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)-like virus;
•an A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2)-like virus; and
•a B/Brisbane/60/2008-like virus.

The 2011-12 influenza vaccine can protect you from getting sick from these three viruses, or it can make your illness milder if you get a related but different influenza virus strain. (For more information about how the viruses in the vaccine are selected, visit Selecting the Viruses in the Seasonal Influenza (Flu) Vaccine.)

The viruses in this season’s vaccine are the same viruses that were selected for the 2010-2011 influenza vaccine for the United States. More information about the vaccine virus selection process is available at Vaccine Selection for the 2011-2012 Season.

Why did the vaccine composition remain the same?

The viruses selected for the vaccine remained the same because they continued to be the main viruses causing human illness worldwide. More information about the vaccine virus selection process is available at Vaccine Selection for the 2011-2012 Season.

Top

Annual Vaccination When Vaccine Viruses Remain Unchanged

Why do I need a flu vaccine every year?

CDC recommends an influenza (flu) vaccine every year as the first and best way to protect against getting the flu. By 2 weeks after vaccination, the body develops antibodies to protect against the viruses in the vaccine. Those antibodies help protect us from influenza viruses if we come in contact with them later. However multiple studies conducted over different seasons and across vaccine types and influenza virus subtypes have shown that the body’s immunity to influenza viruses (acquired either through natural infection or vaccination) declines over time. The decline in antibodies is influenced by several factors, including a person’s age, the antigen used in the vaccine, and the person's general health (for example, certain chronic health conditions may have an impact on immunity). While specific data on the duration of immunity from the 2010-2011 influenza vaccine is not available, CDC experts believe that immunity from vaccination (or infection) last season will have decreased by now in most people. It is not possible to say whether this reduced immunity would still be sufficient to prevent infection in 2011-2012 and therefore it is recommended that everyone 6 months of age and older get vaccinated this season, regardless of whether they were vaccinated last season.

If I got a vaccine in 2010-2011, why do I need to get another one this season if the vaccine formulation didn’t change?

Your body’s level of immunity from a vaccine received last season is expected to have declined. You may not have enough immunity to be protected from getting sick this season. You should be vaccinated again to raise your immune levels against the three viruses that research indicates are likely to circulate again this season.

How often are the viruses in the influenza vaccine changed?

Most seasons, viruses in the influenza vaccine are changed to keep up with the influenza viruses as they evolve. It’s uncommon that the same three vaccine virus strains are the same from one season to the next, but this has happened before. Since 1969, the viruses selected for inclusion in the influenza vaccine have remained the same eight times (including the 2011-2012 season). Each time, CDC has stressed the importance of getting vaccinated each season.

Has CDC always recommended vaccination each year, regardless of vaccine virus strain changes?

Yes. CDC recommends an annual influenza vaccine as the first and best way to protect against influenza. This recommendation is (and has been) the same even during years when the vaccine composition (the viruses the vaccine protects against) remains unchanged from the previous season.

Sorry, but I'll take the CDC's word for it over yours.

[parfait]

Influenza strains evolve through reassortment. Determining of a common ancestor proved that the virus was initially spread from pigs around 150 years ago, which then have continuously evolved becoming increasingly stable. A study in 2006 showed, by examining the genome of 413 strains, that there distinct strains circulating within a season, proving adaptive evolution. The reason for the yearly vaccine is the progressive antigenic drift of influenza A and B viruses due to the mutability of the RNA genome. Basically it means that a RNA genome (which is different from DNA) are mutating on a grand scale. Virus' in general are extremely adaptive, so one seasons strain are not similar to the last seasons trend etc. So you're wrong.

Of course I am.


http://www.cdc.gov/flu/flu_vaccine_updates.htm

2011-2012 Flu Vaccine Formulation

What viruses do flu vaccines protect against?

Flu vaccines are designed to protect against the three influenza viruses that experts predict will be the most common during the upcoming season. Each season, this includes an influenza B virus, an influenza A (H1N1) virus and an influenza A (H3N2) virus. (These are the three virus subtypes that are circulating most commonly among people today.) More information about influenza vaccines is available at Preventing Seasonal Flu With Vaccination.

What viruses will the 2011-2012 vaccine protect against?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended that the United State's 2011-2012 seasonal influenza vaccine contain the following three vaccine viruses:
•an A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)-like virus;
•an A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2)-like virus; and
•a B/Brisbane/60/2008-like virus.

The 2011-12 influenza vaccine can protect you from getting sick from these three viruses, or it can make your illness milder if you get a related but different influenza virus strain. (For more information about how the viruses in the vaccine are selected, visit Selecting the Viruses in the Seasonal Influenza (Flu) Vaccine.)

The viruses in this season’s vaccine are the same viruses that were selected for the 2010-2011 influenza vaccine for the United States. More information about the vaccine virus selection process is available at Vaccine Selection for the 2011-2012 Season.

Why did the vaccine composition remain the same?

The viruses selected for the vaccine remained the same because they continued to be the main viruses causing human illness worldwide. More information about the vaccine virus selection process is available at Vaccine Selection for the 2011-2012 Season.

Top

Annual Vaccination When Vaccine Viruses Remain Unchanged

Why do I need a flu vaccine every year?

CDC recommends an influenza (flu) vaccine every year as the first and best way to protect against getting the flu. By 2 weeks after vaccination, the body develops antibodies to protect against the viruses in the vaccine. Those antibodies help protect us from influenza viruses if we come in contact with them later. However multiple studies conducted over different seasons and across vaccine types and influenza virus subtypes have shown that the body’s immunity to influenza viruses (acquired either through natural infection or vaccination) declines over time. The decline in antibodies is influenced by several factors, including a person’s age, the antigen used in the vaccine, and the person's general health (for example, certain chronic health conditions may have an impact on immunity). While specific data on the duration of immunity from the 2010-2011 influenza vaccine is not available, CDC experts believe that immunity from vaccination (or infection) last season will have decreased by now in most people. It is not possible to say whether this reduced immunity would still be sufficient to prevent infection in 2011-2012 and therefore it is recommended that everyone 6 months of age and older get vaccinated this season, regardless of whether they were vaccinated last season.

If I got a vaccine in 2010-2011, why do I need to get another one this season if the vaccine formulation didn’t change?

Your body’s level of immunity from a vaccine received last season is expected to have declined. You may not have enough immunity to be protected from getting sick this season. You should be vaccinated again to raise your immune levels against the three viruses that research indicates are likely to circulate again this season.

How often are the viruses in the influenza vaccine changed?

Most seasons, viruses in the influenza vaccine are changed to keep up with the influenza viruses as they evolve. It’s uncommon that the same three vaccine virus strains are the same from one season to the next, but this has happened before. Since 1969, the viruses selected for inclusion in the influenza vaccine have remained the same eight times (including the 2011-2012 season). Each time, CDC has stressed the importance of getting vaccinated each season.

Has CDC always recommended vaccination each year, regardless of vaccine virus strain changes?

Yes. CDC recommends an annual influenza vaccine as the first and best way to protect against influenza. This recommendation is (and has been) the same even during years when the vaccine composition (the viruses the vaccine protects against) remains unchanged from the previous season.

Sorry, but I'll take the CDC's word for it over yours.

You forgot to include a quote from the CDC though:

Why do I need to get vaccinated against the flu every year?

There are two reasons for getting a yearly flu vaccine:
The first reason is that because flu viruses are constantly changing, flu vaccines may be updated from one season to the next to protect against the most recent and most commonly circulating viruses.
The second reason that annual vaccination is recommended is that a person’s immune protection from vaccination declines over time and annual vaccination is needed for optimal protection.

The decline in protection against the flu that occurs after vaccination or after flu infection may be influenced by several factors, including a person’s age, the antigen used in the vaccine, and the person’s health situation (for example, chronic health conditions that weaken the immune system may have an impact).This decline in protection has the potential to leave some people more vulnerable to infection, illness and possibly serious complications from the same influenza viruses a year after being vaccinated. So, for optimal protection against influenza, annual vaccination is recommended regardless of whether the viruses in the vaccine have changed or not since the previous season.

Here's the link: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/fluvaccine.htm Educate yourself properly before trying some silly "comeback" next time.

[Rip Rokken]

As for legislation of morality.........don't we legislate morality when we say killing is a crime?

I'm talking about legislating a religious moral agenda, not general law governing what people can do and can't (killing, stealing, etc.). All those things were outlawed by other cultures long before the law of Moses, btw.

I am sorry you lost your faith, but your view of God is not my view of God. Sometimes I think you want God on your terms not his. We will only know what is true once we die. Death holds the truths.

No, all I ever wanted was to know what God's terms were... that's the rub. Everyone says or teaches something a little bit different, and he's apparently incapable (or unwilling) to make himself clear. He permits people to run rampant believing and doing anything in his name without being checked. That's my point. Sure, I thought I had it right a number of times, thru different approaches, but all ended at a dead end eventually where real and lasting spiritual growth and fulfillment were concerned. After so many years of confusion and disappointment one realizes they are wasting their time talking to walls, clouds, etc. Nobody on the other end of the phone line.

[donnaplease]

One of my biggest gripes with religion is the fact that the followers embrace the part of children. Tenets assuming a Because I said so message. Like a parent not explaining why a rule is a rule, or why a phenomenon is what it is.

The believers just relinguish all responsibility of critical thinking, letting faith take centerstage to answer any and all questions/mysteries. Religion doesn't allow for falsification, having an answer for everything. I wonder if Freud was religious?

The reason I've continued to say the devout are less intelligent than their scientific counterparts is for the mere fact that 'faith' seems to take the work out of discovering the why. The lazy way out, if you will. Like diagnosing every energetic kid as having ADHD, without really investigating further. That warm and fuzzy blanket excuse....

The bible isn't a book of facts that once you've studied it - you are known as an expert on the material. It's not like studying mathematics, or elctricity. It would be like me studying Great Expectations, and then claiming I was an expert on theivery and pickpocketing.

For the most part I agree with you. I am CONSTANTLY questioning things I don't understand though, and unfortunately I don't usually get answers to my questions. I think that by 'not' asking questions, we can't grow in our faith. I don't see it as a 'because I said so' thing. I didn't live at the time of Jesus or the disciples, or any of those who are responsible for the ancient scripts that eventually became the bible. I also didn't live during the time of Christopher Columbus, but here I am living in America. There's a lot I don't understand. A friend who practices the ba'hai faith once told me that when Jesus said "in My Father's house are many mansions" that she understood that to mean room for many different faiths, hers included. Trying to reconcile that has had me stumped for years. But just to say that because some of it doesn't make sense then obviously it's all a bunch of bull isn't the answer either.

Personally, I can't wait to get to heaven, I have LOTS of questions I want to ask... I hope you'll be there with me to hear the answers!

[donnaplease]

You forgot to include a quote from the CDC though:

Why do I need to get vaccinated against the flu every year?

There are two reasons for getting a yearly flu vaccine:
The first reason is that because flu viruses are constantly changing, flu vaccines may be updated from one season to the next to protect against the most recent and most commonly circulating viruses.
The second reason that annual vaccination is recommended is that a person’s immune protection from vaccination declines over time and annual vaccination is needed for optimal protection.

The decline in protection against the flu that occurs after vaccination or after flu infection may be influenced by several factors, including a person’s age, the antigen used in the vaccine, and the person’s health situation (for example, chronic health conditions that weaken the immune system may have an impact).This decline in protection has the potential to leave some people more vulnerable to infection, illness and possibly serious complications from the same influenza viruses a year after being vaccinated. So, for optimal protection against influenza, annual vaccination is recommended regardless of whether the viruses in the vaccine have changed or not since the previous season.

Here's the link: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/fluvaccine.htm Educate yourself properly before trying some silly "comeback" next time.

I'm educated just fine, thank you. Interesting that you failed to acknowlege the "second reason" though, which is why for optimal protection, an annual vaccination is recommended. So, based on your own link, the antigen in the vaccine is only one of many reasons for an annual vaccine.

Now, you said this:

Virus' in general are extremely adaptive, so one seasons strain are not similar to the last seasons trend etc. So you're wrong.

But the CDC said (and I quoted) this:

The viruses in this season’s vaccine are the same viruses that were selected for the 2010-2011 influenza vaccine for the United States.

and...

the viruses selected for the vaccine remained the same because they continued to be the main viruses causing human illness worldwide.

oh, and finally there was this...

Most seasons, viruses in the influenza vaccine are changed to keep up with the influenza viruses as they evolve. It’s uncommon that the same three vaccine virus strains are the same from one season to the next, but this has happened before. Since 1969, the viruses selected for inclusion in the influenza vaccine have remained the same eight times (including the 2011-2012 season). Each time, CDC has stressed the importance of getting vaccinated each season.

While there is truth to your evolution of viruses (and bacteria too, it's the reason that new antibiotics are constantly being needed and things like MRSA and VRE are more and more prevalent), there are other factors at play. If you weren't so arrogant you'd acknowlege that. Get off your fucking high horse and come down and join the rest of us mere mortals.

[RossValoryRocks]

...or condemn other to Hell simply for not believing the same things they do.

Since you don't believe in God or Christ...then obviously you don't believe in Hell...so why do you CARE if some Christian somewhere "condems" you to hell??? In your belief system it would functionally be the same as someone saying that they are condeming you to have to eat 3 meals a day at Waffle House.

[artist4perry]

As for legislation of morality.........don't we legislate morality when we say killing is a crime?

I'm talking about legislating a religious moral agenda, not general law governing what people can do and can't (killing, stealing, etc.). All those things were outlawed by other cultures long before the law of Moses, btw.

I am sorry you lost your faith, but your view of God is not my view of God. Sometimes I think you want God on your terms not his. We will only know what is true once we die. Death holds the truths.

No, all I ever wanted was to know what God's terms were... that's the rub. Everyone says or teaches something a little bit different, and he's apparently incapable (or unwilling) to make himself clear. He permits people to run rampant believing and doing anything in his name without being checked. That's my point. Sure, I thought I had it right a number of times, thru different approaches, but all ended at a dead end eventually where real and lasting spiritual growth and fulfillment were concerned. After so many years of confusion and disappointment one realizes they are wasting their time talking to walls, clouds, etc. Nobody on the other end of the phone line.

Although I think for the most part this whole thread is recycling arguments, I personally am not really bothered by any belief held by anyone here.

I was not trying to put down your feelings towards God, I am just asking you to not confuse doctrine for God himself.

When I spoke of legislative morality that is morality as all see it. We make laws against killing. I say it is killing an unborn child when you abort. But to allow argument sake how hard would it be to say the procedure can be done, but you don't make everyone pay for it? I again would have to say if one cannot get medical care for cancer, why is aborting a child paid for by everyone's tax dollars when clearly everyone does not see it as necessary, and it is questionable if it is murder or not? Those fine folks who demand it can raise the money for the procedures themselves. I am not opposed to that. Then it is on their conscience as to weather it is wrong or not.
If this is the legislative morality that bothers you please tell me why. I am not calling for it to be outlawed.

When did it become the governments job to pay for this procedure over all others?

[verslibre]

I'm educated just fine, thank you. Interesting that you failed to acknowlege the "second reason" though, which is why for optimal protection, an annual vaccination is recommended. So, based on your own link, the antigen in the vaccine is only one of many reasons for an annual vaccine.

Parfum loves to criticize Christians for their dogmatic cherry-picking, so to speak, but I've noticed he plays musical chairs just the same with what he chooses to answer or side-step — as he just did with you.

Get off your fucking high horse and come down and join the rest of us mere mortals.

Steve Perry will return to that one band first.

[artist4perry]

First off Parfait, I don't get where the lack of buying into all of evolutions teachings equate not believing in medicine. I am not doubting all science and I for the most part like science. But science is not perfect. Science does not hold all the answers as you would have it. It is not the gospel of life. They make mistakes all the time and they cannot show species changing, not adapting to environment, changing from one species to another. As many dinosaur bones as there are we should have these changing beasts all over the place. It should not be fragments of bones found scattered on a hill put together. We should have some whole or mostly whole skeletons of some sort.

Personally if you want to believe science makes no mistakes, and cannot be questioned your welcome to it. But many people realize it is a study that is not perfect, and so just because science has one idea today, does not mean it will not be disproved tomorrow. If something is a scientific theory one can argue that it is still in study, and can be questioned. I question some of the theories of science. Some of evolutions ideas I question. Many people do. To make fun of them because you take a theory as fact is showing your not seeing scientific theory as something that is still under study and not proven at all.

I think this is beating our heads against the wall. I am fine with your view of evolution to be your right to view.

I have the same right to view the origins of life the way I view it and either you can be tolerant or not.

I never said science is perfect - it's not a religion. It's a way of observing and exploring the world; finding answers. You still avoided to answer my questions or providing any sort of proof of your statements.

As I've said: speciation usually takes thousand of years, even millions. Through modern genetics, have geneticists managed to trace our DNA to a common ancestor, which we share with other primates, specifically chimpanzees. Modern genetics will in the future solve most hereditary diseases, through DNA tracing and experimenting. This is indisputable. Bones completely dissolve into the soil after a couple of decades. One can easily see how we have evolved from a common ancestor with primates, since we share almost all our genetic material. Our coccyx (tailbone) is the remnant of a vestigial tail for example.

Please don't make me explain to you again what the difference is between the colloquial use of the word theory and the scientific use of it. It is not an idea or an hypothesis. A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers, so it both contains laws, observations and evidence.

There are several examples of fast speciation when several species are contained on a small area. Mosquitoes, which moved down to the London Underground evolved into a new species in just around a century, and today they can't interbreed with their landliving cousins. The dachshund, rather the mini-dachshund is another example. Rapid speciation of the Faeroe Island house mouse, which occurred in less than 250 years after man brought the creature to the island is a third example. Italian wall lizards introduced to the Croatian coast have just in a few decades involved intonew species, with completely different gut structure, body size and bite strength. Another one is the African cichlid fish which quickly speciated after the water in the lake became increasingly murky. So, species don't differentiate or adapt to their environment, huh? Again: believe what you want about your God, but don't go around throwing uneducated opinions around you like they are facts, when you're obviously wrong.

Again Parfait I never said they cannot adapt to environment, for the third time now. :roll: I am saying a monkey did not evolve into a human. A fish cannot become a monkey. You can explain all you want but it is not true that one species can change into another species. Adaptation........yes.

Your not omniscient yourself. why do you end your arguments stating that I am not educated enough to discuss it? I am quite educated thank you. Maybe try to produce the skeletons instead of just insulting my intelligence.

Produce a species that changed from one to another. I mean changed completely. Produce bones showing the evolution of one to the other. Full skeletal references not drawings. I am not referring to a lizard that was still a lizard with differing internal organs. That is not changing from one form to another.

I don't agree with all scientific theories but that does not make me dumb, nor does it mean that I reject science all together. I question those things that even science does not have all the answers to. They have ideas, theories, hypothesis, but not all the answers.

[S2M]

Does it say anything in the bible about dinosaurs? Cro-Magnon? Was Adam a Neanderthal? Was Eve Lucy?

[artist4perry]

Does it say anything in the bible about dinosaurs? Cro-Magnon? Was Adam a Neanderthal? Was Eve Lucy?

Yup......from descriptions of the Leviathan and the behemoth. Though I want to edit this to agree with Dave that the word dinosaur is a modern term.

15 ¶ Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones [are as] strong pieces of brass; his bones [are] like bars of iron.
19 He [is] the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his
sword to approach [unto him].
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him [with] their shadow; the willows of the brook
compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he
can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes: [his] nose pierceth through snares.


Lucy is thought to be a hoax by some. The bones were not found together, and were found at different times at differing locations. Some scientists think it is not humanoid at all. This is all she is.

[conversationpc]

Does it say anything in the bible about dinosaurs? Cro-Magnon? Was Adam a Neanderthal? Was Eve Lucy?

Old translations use the word "dragon". The word "dinosaur" did not even exist until the 1800s.

[majik]

Does it say anything in the bible about dinosaurs? Cro-Magnon? Was Adam a Neanderthal? Was Eve Lucy?

Old translations use the word "dragon". The word "dinosaur" did not even exist until the 1800s.

Words and their meaning evolve, so the true message of ancient scripts are lost today, words point too THAT the unchanging reality. May as well try to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphics. Make any belief you want from either.

Fully sick, today means it was awesome, the complete opposite of what I remember it meant.

Don't believe a word by Thin Lizzy.

[majik]

Parfait said. Again: Origin of life and theory of evolution are two separate things altogether."


Its the reverse.......Life is the origin of the theory of evolution therefore the theory is not a separate "thing".

Life is present, theory is present. Presence is the origin of life and theory. One presence not two.