Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Kami

Pages: [1]
does god dictate morality?


is god dictated by morality?

and other religious morality discussion

/dev/random / behold
« on: March 08, 2011, 10:34:23 AM »

that quadz guy, he does alot of drugs and owns this doom 3 community called toastyspleen.  yeah he's pretty cool, always quoting pop culture movies like american pie

religion has derived from our need to understand, and yea long ago we reached a big stumble when we started inventing not deities, but unquestionable deities.  and as painful as it is, i agree with carl sagan that we must break away from the unquestionable so that we can begin to understand the universe around us and our effects on said universe, whether its as miniscule as our own home town or our planet.  at this stage of human growth, it might as well be our universe.  for now.

where carl sagan and i differ is that carl sagan writes much about his wishes of religion and science to co-exist.  but having read everything i can about him, i have to wonder that he wrote about such things not of his own accord but to ensure that he not alienate possibly his biggest audience at the times he wrote them:  late 20th century North Americans.

i submit that science must not co-exist with a religion of the unquestionable.  that if you'd like to believe in your own salvation, may it have nothing to do with explaining (and this, either inhibiting or confusing) a new breakthrough (such as stem cells).

in the same way, i have to wonder if religion then becomes a big mechanism for social evolution.  can we pass it or be doomed to stagnation because of the unquestionable?  can we achieve a population who refuse to accept something as unquestionable when such ideology exists?  i really hope so.  i feel likeminded with sagan's, and many others' such as einstein's belief in the (and excuse me if i don't know the proper term for it)  Physicist's God.  the idea that god is in the elegance of the configuration of our universe.  also written about is the idea that there is always something to discover to satiate the human palette of discovery.

you people may continue to have your own personal salvations and afterlives.  you can have your God, your Jesus, Satan, your Allah, Yahweh, Thor, Zeus.  whatever pleases you.  but so long as it infringes on human development, you infringe not only on the idea that a scientific breakthrough is being halted, you infringe on every single person on the planet's room for growth.  you are saying that we are not allowed to do things that are beneficial for ourselves because of a non-existent plea bargain with an ancient deity your forefathers dreamt up a long ass time ago.  i am not bound by that agreement, nor is anyone not of your own religion. 

so i end the thread on this note:

religion:  please stop telling me what to do, and i'll stop trying to enlighten you with reality.

social evolution will dictate who's right anyways.  atleast i hope for the sake of our species.

/dev/random / hey quadz
« on: July 18, 2010, 10:50:10 PM »
your avatar is spelled wrong on console

just thought you should know

6 / nigga
« on: February 11, 2009, 09:13:05 PM »
for some unknown reason the word 'nigga' is a bannable offense on the irc channel; yet going through the many tastyspleen servers people say it all the time and jokingly.  i've personally never seen anyone get offended about it on the servers, but i can't understand why a game being rated m with likewise m-rated rules pertaining to it would have the ops in the chatroom pertaining to the servers get up in arms about a simple word that isn't even close in meaning to its racist counterpart.

i want to do three things with this topic.  i want to discuss this issue surrounding the word, i want to discuss the issue behind  censoring mild profanity, and with the poll i would like to get an idea of how many people may actually be offended by the word. 

perhaps if its found that no one is offended by it, the rule should be overturned on account of a pointless rule.

Pages: [1]