Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 06:13 pm
Then there was Captain Cook, he sailed halfway round the world to civilise the Hawaiians but ended up in their cookpot!

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/capt-cook-death_zpsa0f580ff.jpg~original
hingehead
 
  3  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 06:37 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
More gibberish.

Bringing civilization to Hawaiians wasn't Cook's goal, claiming land for England was (although you might like to dress it up as exploration) the funding came for the trips because of perceived profit and national prestige (Cook's third voyage was chiefly about finding trade routes through the northwest passage), he first two trips were commissioned by the Royal Society (first the transit of venus, second to find the 'real' terra australis - thought to be south of the discoveries he made on the first voyage.

And your statement suggests that Hawaiians didn't already have a civilization - crass myopia at best. Polynesians worked their way from Formosa across the biggest ocean on the planet, leaving self-sustaining colonies on tiny sparse land masses while your ancestors were being colonised by the Normans.

And to top it off, you ignorant thickhead, Cook was not eaten - the hawaiians were not cannibals. He was killed trying to take the Hawaiian king hostage to get a stolen boat back - they prepared his body in a sacred funerary way that involved cooking the meat off his bones (they thought he was the embodiment of the god Lono) much like your fellow christians prepared and preserved saints.

Do you ever tire of just being wrong about everything?

The halo effect is causing me be even more atheistic - you're so wrong about so much it seems fair to assume you're wrong about god too.
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 06:40 pm
Then of course the Brits had to go and civilise the Zulus..Smile

"At 100 yards, bust their asses, FIRE!"
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/zulu3_zpsf3e3c5b6.jpg~original
neologist
 
  2  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 06:45 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
I offer my sincere apology to my fellow a2kers for anything I may have said or done to encourage Romeo's continued presence on our board.
Mea culpa
Mea maxima culpa
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 06:49 pm
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:
. . . The halo effect is causing me be even more atheistic - you're so wrong about so much it seems fair to assume you're wrong about god too.
Yeah, well, he is wrong about God.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 07:08 pm
And dang me there were also 26 Brits at the Alamo..Smile
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/alamo1_zpsec7df5b8.jpg~original
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Alamo_defenders
hingehead
 
  1  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 07:14 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Let's not forget that Britain has declared war on all but 22 countries on the planet.

Do you even remember what your point is?
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -2  
Mon 25 Nov, 2013 07:20 pm
Quote:
Neologist said: I offer my sincere apology to my fellow a2kers for anything I may have said or done to encourage Romeo's continued presence on our board....he is wrong about God.

THAT'S THE SPIRIT MATE!
And there I was thinking you Jehovah's Witnesses didn't like fights and arguments! After all, you and your JW chums have refused to fight in every war there's ever been, and you refuse to salute the American flag!
But at least you've got guts to say in other threads-
"I can say truly that JWs are most certainly not perfect...I'm no genius..One of my main reasons for posting here is to sharpen my understanding"

So just you stick with your Uncle Romeo and i'll make a soldier of you and we'll take the pearlies by storm..Smile
Jesus said:-"From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it" (Matt 11:12)

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/way-madmaxRomeo_zps01ae368c.gif~original

0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Wed 27 Nov, 2013 05:07 pm
@hingehead,
Quote:
More gibberish.

Like shooting fish in a barrel mate.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  4  
Wed 27 Nov, 2013 05:13 pm
Back in the goodle USA.
A message for the Tea Party and its White Anglo Saxon Protestant supporters
http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/panzade/christian_zps92c49667.jpg
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Wed 27 Nov, 2013 05:21 pm
@hingehead,
Kind of hard to send someone out to civilize people you don't even know to be there.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Wed 27 Nov, 2013 05:25 pm
@hingehead,
What is this need to feed on this aimed at being quiet thread?

You all like the excitement of wildly disagreeing with nitwits?

I think that's true, and ordinary conversation among atheists and agnostics are apparently too mild, unless Frank the inveterate shows up.

You like ******* with Romeo. So, start a new thread,
hingehead
 
  1  
Wed 27 Nov, 2013 05:50 pm
@ossobuco,
Hi Osso,

Because I was taught not to let is slide - all that it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

A tad grandiose - but saying nothing is tacit agreement, and I can't abide it.
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 27 Nov, 2013 05:51 pm
@ossobuco,
If by Frank you mean Apisa he is so mild that he might fall down a crack in the sidewalk and nobody would notice.
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  2  
Thu 5 Dec, 2013 06:35 pm


The alternative Ten Commandments

After penning the open letter to the Rev. Fred Nile, "That doesn't sound very Christian to me", in support of same-sex marriage, I received hundreds of emails from readers. The majority supported the sentiments expressed, some were apologetic for the extremist mores of fellow Christians, while others were outright hostile.

One charming email trail from a gentleman named Phillip began with profanity and, when I chided him for his lack of Christian values, proceeded to outright obscenity and threats.

"I'm not one of those pathetic turn-the-other-cheek Christians, arsehole. I'm more into an eye for an eye," said Phil, oblivious to his dissing the most famed turn-the-other-cheek Christian, Jesus Christ.

He then claimed the 'Son of God' would actually be proud of his robust defence because, y'know, an all-powerful, all-knowing super-being needs all the help he can get from keyboard tough guys.

(I particularly enjoyed the fact Phil threatened me on a Sunday, the Sabbath).

Other emails predictably descended into theological bickering, quoting scripture and arguing that without God's word to follow on issues like who we can shag in the privacy of our own homes, the world would surrender to chaos and catamites because we'd have no moral compass to guide us.

Phillip no doubt considers himself a moral person because of his (somewhat patchy) adherence to Old Testament ideals, as I'm sure does the very Reverend Fred Nile.

Nile, as outlined in the above-mentioned blog, recently helped block a bill in the Upper House of the NSW Parliament to legalise same-sex marriage, describing the legislation as having originated in the "depths of Hell".

He has also been vocal in his support for James Packer's new casino (featuring indoor smoking for high rollers) at Barangaroo on Sydney Harbour - despite previous public positions condemning the vices of gambling and durries.

However, when the time came to vote on the development dubbed 'Packer's Pecker', Nile reversed his support, leading Sydney Morning Herald state political editor, Sean Nicholls, to suggest Nile's behaviour was "duplicitous".

If nothing else, it shows Nile is quite happy to abandon both principles and/or stated positions for political gain.

He strikes me as a very public manifestation of the religious habit of quoting holy verses to shitcan stuff the pious disagree with, yet when said scripture inconveniently conflicts with the believer's modern needs, it's ignored or "not meant to be taken literally".

As I said in the above post, this is my main beef with the Bible and many Christians (not to mention, Bible-quoting Christian politicians); they pick and choose which parts of their holy book they take seriously.

There are numerous brutal, bizarre pronouncements from God in the Bible which, if taken literally and enacted, would see a person locked up in jail for a very long time.

However, even if we leave aside the deepest Biblical weirdness and go straight to the vaunted Ten Commandments - we still find a pretty limp and irrelevant list of values for modern society to be built upon.

I've got no problem with honouring my parents (Commandment No.5) and refraining from murder (No.6), theft (No.8) and lying about my neighbour (No.9) but the adultery thing (No.7) seems a little statistically unrealistic and, if you live in my neighbourhood, it's tough not coveting (No.10) a whole lot of stuff - You should see my neighbour's wife!

Aside from this, the first four commandments are just plain silly and sound like the instructions of an insecure, scarily-possessive teenage boy to his girlfriend before she goes away to schoolies without him.

Believe in me, alone!

Worship no images!

Don't take my name in vain!

Don't get busy on Sunday!

Many, many people are happy, law-biding, productive, loving citizens without the word of God, the Bible and the Ten Commandments to guide them, yet for billions of Christians these are held up as the blueprint for living a good life.

I'm a massive fan of ancient wisdom, but I reckon if you're looking for a practical guide to living a happy, law-biding, productive, loving life you might want to consult a list written within a millennium of your birthday. Right and wrong should be defined by humans who share an understanding of the world we all live in.

Christopher Hitchen's alternative ten commandments work for me, as does Richard Dawkins' list and A. C Grayling's. I particularly like that Grayling and Hitchens include a commandment suggesting we respect nature - something God seemed to forget all about in his hurry to have us respect Him.

If I was to take a crack at an alternative ten commandments it'd go something like this:

1. Be kind (that takes care of not killing, stealing, lying, etc).
2. Be brave.
3. Be curious. Seek the truth. Question everything.
4. Don't waste.
5. Love as much as you can and never hate.
6. Respect, protect and guide - particularly the very old and young.
7. Respect your body.
8. Respect nature.
9. Be a great shag.
10. Never wear sandals.

See, that last one's yet another thing Jesus and I disagree about.

You've probably got your own set of alternative commandments. Feel free to share.

You can follow Sam on Twitter here. His email address is here.

Please don't take it personally if I do not reply to your email as they come in thick and fast depending on the topic. Please know, I appreciate you taking the time to write and comment and would offer mummy hugs to all.



Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/executive-style/culture/blogs/all-men-are-liars/the-alternative-ten-commandments-20131116-2xn66.html#ixzz2meNklGGR
ossobuco
 
  1  
Thu 5 Dec, 2013 06:38 pm
@hingehead,
good riposte, hard for me to argue.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Fri 6 Dec, 2013 06:36 am
@hingehead,
Quote:
4. Don't waste.


That looks like a particularly limp and irrelevant value for modern society to be built upon.

Quote:
9. Be a great shag.


What? Every single time? Not killing or thieving applies every single time.

Quote:
the world would surrender to chaos and catamites because we'd have no moral compass to guide us.


Is it not doing?
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Sat 7 Dec, 2013 01:36 pm
What's with this antagonism against non-Christians?
It's all about Ka-Ching ain't it?
https://scontent-a-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/1425688_718738284812781_1145059481_n.jpg

https://scontent-b-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/999630_572866236115376_74911674_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Sat 7 Dec, 2013 02:02 pm
@hingehead,
More on the subject -

I'm sorry - I see myself ranting this way fairly often and feel like scoldy-locks.

I agree with responding. I usually give my point of view on lots of matters at least once. It's just on some threads the responding is an eternal cycle (infinite, almost!) with the same people who don't listen, often trolls, or troll-like.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sat 7 Dec, 2013 03:08 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

More on the subject -

I'm sorry - I see myself ranting this way fairly often and feel like scoldy-locks.

I agree with responding. I usually give my point of view on lots of matters at least once. It's just on some threads the responding is an eternal cycle (infinite, almost!) with the same people who don't listen, often trolls, or troll-like.


Instead of coming into as many threads as you do to scold, Ossobuco...why not just stay away?

No one more than you comes into threads to tell people they ought to shut up.

You remind me of people who moan and groan about television programming.

Turn the television off if you do not like what is being aired.

Don't go to the threads where you think people are just trolling.
 

Related Topics

The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Atheism
  3. » Page 381
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 09:18:26