NYC Gay Man Brutally Assaulted by Six Teens

Mar 21, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: EDGEftlauderdale.com News Feed

A New York man was so severely beaten by a gang of about six teens that he required $100,000 worth of surgery to repair the damage--a sum well beyond his means to pay, since he is without insurance.

Comments (Page 3)

Showing posts 41 - 58 of58
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Fed up

Warwick, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Science has plenty of explanations for it, most are too esoteric for outlining here. If you're truly interested in educating yourself in physics, astronomy & cosmology, there are plenty of sources you can investigate. I would suggest some background in biology and geology, as well.
I probably know more about the science fiction than you do, the Big Bang, the M Theory (string theory on steroids), matter blinking in and out of existence for no reason, multiverses...

the fact that no one can explain what existed prior to the big bang, why the laws of science break down when you discuss the singularity that existed prior to the big bang... the Big Bang is great... all of the matter in the universe, all of the stars, planets, you, me... everything was squeezed into an area the size of an atom... oh, and that matter that remains in the Universe is only a small fraction... miniscuse actually, compared to what was there originally since most matter was destroyed by an almost equal amount of anti-matter... but for some unexplained reason there was just a small bit more positive matter than anti-matter and that is what makes up the Universe today.

it is funny how people who complain that you can't "prove" the existence of God are so willing to accept that some physicist has imagined a great science fiction story to explain our existence that CANNOT ever be tested... so it also can never be proven. So, you have as much faith in science that can never be proven as I do in God.

The funny thing is that that science can never explain where emotions or the human mind came from. How you go from non-living matter to the human mind is amazing... it just happened huh?

Great, sorry, I need more than to bow down at the altar of science, the new religion.

Oh, and by the way, I never put down atheism, just some atheists. IF you want to believe in nothingness, more power to you.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fed up wrote:
I probably know more about the science fiction than you do,... IF you want to believe in nothingness, more power to you.
Science isn't a "religion" any more than atheism is. Science is simply "study". The study of the world, the study of life, the study of space, etc. Studying these things is the only way to learn about them. Physicists are not simply "imagining" fiction stories to come up with explanations, that's how religions work. Physicists and other scientists only reach their conclusions AFTER studying the world around them. They are not INVENTING stories just to fill in unknown blanks, or even just to annoy Christians. They come to the only conclusions that they CAN, based on what the ACTUAL WORLD is telling them. In studying the world, they follow the evidence to the truth. It seems like a better way to learn things than waiting for talking animals or self-proclaimed "prophets" to tell them.

The expansion of the universe makes it an observable conclusion that it was once packed into a tiny, centralized space. The progression of similarity in the tree of life, the fossil record, and the process of mutation make it an observable conclusion that life evolved from simpler forms to more complex ones, driven by natural selection. These ARE testable and measurable, more than can be said for magic.

Emotions and the human mind are the result of our increasing complexity, but there isn't anything supernatural about them, nor any reason to believe that nature alone couldn't produce them. Even many animals show emotional range, as well as social behaviors like morals and ethics.

Whatever you think of science, it works. You sit there typing on a machine, linked to a vast network of millions more, because of the achievements of science. Science's practices give us reliable predictions about how the universe works, from the stellar scale to the atomic. Science has given us medicine and technology, industry and manufacturing, energy production, the human genome, the periodic table, calculus. The bible says NOTHING about ANY of these. The bible gives us unicorns and giants and ghost stories.

I don't understand putting MORE faith in a book that outlines how to keep slaves and collect virgin survivors after slaughtering your enemies, over the body of knowledge that puts planes in the air and men into space. Science's ability to make predictions about periodic elements or types of stellar bodies, and then FIND THEM based on those predictions, makes it FAR more trustworthy than a document that says leprosy can be cured by smearing yourself with bird's blood.

The process of learning, and more specifically the scientific method, is a meticulous process that doesn't allow for wild speculation. It guides us through specific steps that allow for hypothesis to be tested, and falsified if necessary, so that true facts and knowledge can be gained.

If you see a gap in knowledge where we haven't learned something yet, you can't simply say "Science doesn't know, ergo, the bible!" This teaches you nothing. You've taken no steps to prove if the bible is factual, you've just assumed that it is. There is no process for falsifying the information in the bible, the bible doesn't allow for it. It claims infallibility (despite also claiming that bats are birds). Science is NOT infallible and doesn't CLAIM to be. This allows it to be a growing body of more and more knowledge. Scripture, and by extension religion, is a stagnant refusal of change, a denial of new knowledge, a useless collection of superstitions, mismatched to the real world.
Fed up

Warwick, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Science works?

Really? No, ideas like string theory, etc. are the expanded thoughts of physicists that cannot be proven or unproven. It is science fiction until it can be tested using the scientific method, and the ones that come up with these ideas are the first ones to tell you that you can never test the theories.

So if you can't test it, then you have to make the leap to it being a belief, just like any other religion.

But ok, everything squeezed into the space of an atom. Yep, that makes sense... can't be proven, can't test it... but it is more believable than intelligent design.

Enjoy your new religion.
Community Disorganizer

Florham Park, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know him personally? If not, who are you to judge?
Are you saying the facts printed in the story are false?

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fed up wrote:
Science works?
Really? No, ideas like string theory, etc. are the expanded thoughts of physicists that cannot be proven or unproven. It is science fiction until it can be tested using the scientific method, and the ones that come up with these ideas are the first ones to tell you that you can never test the theories.
So if you can't test it, then you have to make the leap to it being a belief, just like any other religion.
But ok, everything squeezed into the space of an atom. Yep, that makes sense... can't be proven, can't test it... but it is more believable than intelligent design.
Enjoy your new religion.
"Intelligent design" asks us to believe that the greatest mind in the universe created us with so much common tubing between our esophagus and trachea that we can actually DIE from the simple and necessary acts of eating and breathing. An intelligent designer, if one exists, chose to include cancer, Downs syndrome, multiple sclerosis, cleft palates, E. coli, schizophrenia, Alzheimers, and whole HOSTS of lovely bonuses into its design. This intelligent designer created a universe 15 billion light years across, all for the SOLE inhabitants of ONE tiny planet. The intelligent designer created BILLIONS of animal species for the express purpose of going extinct.

None of this exhibits much in the way of "intelligence". It's inefficient, wasteful, and often dangerous. It's exactly what you'd expect to find if NATURE were running things, but not gods. With magic at their disposal, gods should have made a MUCH more efficient and perfect world. I can't imagine what use an intelligent designer thought we would have for smallpox, but I hope he's not too upset that we eradicated it.

Proponents of ID like to cite complexity as proof of their various gods, but it seems to me that complexity is just another sign of nature's handiwork. Gods, being magical, can do ANYTHING without it being complex at all. Simplicity would be their signature, not complexity. The bible says we were formed from dust. If so, we should be just animated dust, operating so simply that there IS no explanation, just awe-inspiring magic that inescapably proves its source. The bible says the heavens are a firmament, and in a universe created by magic this could be true. The lights of the stars could hang from a solid dome above us all, and if we investigated it, we would find no reason that such a thing SHOULD function at all, PROVING its supernaturalism. But this is not the case. Time and again we find NATURAL explanations for elements of our world, and supernaturalism is relegated again and again to the ancients, who had no better way of understanding their universe.

Science is not a religion. It is a process for learning, a step-by-step method for separating facts from speculation. It does not advocate worship, it does not resist new information, and it does not permit assertions without evidence.

If you believe that the bible is more reliable than what science has to tell us, do you believe that leprosy can be cured by rubbing oneself with the blood of birds and lambs, as described in Leviticus 14? And do you believe that menstruating women should be quarantined outside of town for a week, as instructed in Leviticus 15? When the bible says that eating shellfish and rabbits are forbidden, do you trust this advice? Do you OBEY it? Do you REALLY believe that the bible is infallible, and that NOTHING in it was crafted by primitive minds? Is there NO room for DOUBT in your analysis of the bible? Is there NO part of it which, when assessed with critical thinking, leaves you saying "That doesn't fit with what I know about the real world"? Because from MY point of view, it is FULL of things like that.
Fed up

Warwick, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The science fiction you keep bringing up can never be proved... so it does not subscribe to the definition of science. It is a belief, same as Christianity, Islam or Judaism.

It requires a leap of faith.

It sure sounds like religion to me. It can't be proved, but a group of people seem to be bowing at the altar.

Go find some dark matter, will you... then find the 6th, 7th or 8th dimensions and then get back to me.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fed up wrote:
The science fiction you keep bringing up can never be proved... so it does not subscribe to the definition of science. It is a belief, same as Christianity, Islam or Judaism.
It requires a leap of faith.
It sure sounds like religion to me. It can't be proved, but a group of people seem to be bowing at the altar.
Go find some dark matter, will you... then find the 6th, 7th or 8th dimensions and then get back to me.
So you just shrug off all attempts to investigate the real world, in favor of an ancient book which tells you how many sheckels you should be getting when you sell your daughter. You scoff at the very process that has ELIMINATED the scourge of many diseases, instead clinging to stories about a designer who purposely SUPPLIED those diseases. You happily swallow, WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE, proclamations about bats being birds, snakes and donkeys that talk, boats that fit 2 of every animal on Earth, towers that can reach the heavens, goats that produce striped offspring because of nearby striped sticks... and wonder why some people call it mythology.

If scientists predict that certain periodic elements SHOULD exist, and then FINDS them exactly as predicted, it doesn't take any "faith" to expect that they might be able to do it again.

If scientists predict the existence of certain stellar bodies like pulsars and quasars, and then FINDS them, no "faith" is needed to see that they probably know what they're talking about.

If scientists predict the behavior of matter and energy under certain conditions, and are then able to detonate a nuclear explosion BASED ENTIRELY on their scientific predictions, science has FAR surpassed any expectations of "faith". Science can be trusted because of a long, proven, reliable track record of being RIGHT. No "leap" is required.

You make a very sweeping statement when you say "It sure sounds like religion to me. It can't be proved, but a group of people seem to be bowing at the altar."

Are you rejecting ALL science when you say "It can't be proved"? Because although there are a handful of things that remain hypothetical, such as dark matter, PLENTY of things HAVE been proven true through science. Do you refuse to brush your teeth, because science is an "unproven religion", and might be wrong about the chemicals in your toothpaste? Do you refuse to take medicine when you are sick, afraid of the witch-doctor cures of this "unproven religion"? Do you avoid telephone conversations, worried that the connecting technologies developed by this "unproven religion" might instead be tapping into demonic realms?

I think that you ALSO "worship at the altar" of science, fully enjoying its benefits, only rejecting it (and pretending to reject ALL of it) when it comes into conflict with the impossible fairy tales of the bible. The reason that anyone puts ANY trust in science is because it has been proven right time after time after time. Its theories are borne out over and over again. The bible tells us that someone with a faith no larger than a mustard seed can move a mountain, and yet I've NEVER seen that happen.

But I don't know if you believe that either. I've asked if you believe the bible when it prescribes bird's blood to cure lepers. I've asked if you think that quarantining menstruating women is necessary. I've asked if you think that people must avoid eating shellfish and rabbit just because the bible says so. But you haven't answered. You've dissed on science (ironically doing so via keyboard & internet), but you've given nothing in the way of defense for biblical beliefs. ARE they defensible? Do they stand up to the rigorous standards that we hold science to? Which part of the bible DOES make sense?
Fed up

Warwick, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Obviously I don't shrug it off, since I apparently know more about it than you do. I in fact like science, you know, the type that stands up to the scientific method, you know, like finding a quasar or a black hole. It was a theory that stood up to testing. But comparing a Quasar to string theory is like comparing a gnat to an elephant. A Quasar is a flek of dust compared to string theory or the Big Bang.

Pseudo science is fun to read about, you know, like a George Lucas movie, but that is all it is.

If you bothered to understand the bible, and Christians, you would know that most of the stories of Genesis, like Creation and Noah, are not believed by most to not be actual history but used to teach a lesson. Heck, the creation story itself seems to fit the idea of the Big Bang theory pretty well... "Let there be light...". The bible stories are just meant as allegory.

You see, someone like me doesn't need to believe that there is a reason why science and religion cannot co-exist, in fact, I think it makes perfect sense that the 2 are not mutually exclusive.

But it seems I have more of an open mind than you do. You seem to like to jump to great conclusions about me and my beliefs and want to pigeon hole believers into someone you can feel intellectually superior to. Sad.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Mar 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Community Disorganizer wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you saying the facts printed in the story are false?
Not at all.

But if you go out to the corner bar to have a beer, are you living a reckless lifestyle?

As for insurance, this country as well as the rest of the first world provide it to their citizens. Your backwards country does not and and large chunk of your citizenry cannot afford it.

“Watch out for that tree”

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Mar 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry if it's "extremist" of me to want to protect my partner and the life we've built together. I'd hate to be too "radical" in demanding that I be treated the same as any other citizen.
Seems like the Christians & others are trying to do the same thing - protect their lives & what they have. Asking them to change is like them asking you to stop being gay or you asking them to show you the magical man in the sky. It's kinda personal and neither side will change. You'll all burn yourselves out before either side changes. It's comical.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Mar 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Peter Pine wrote:
Seems like the Christians & others are trying to do the same thing - protect their lives & what they have.
Except they're under the false impression that we're trying to take something AWAY from them, which is ridiculous. They already HAVE these protections, no one is seeking to change that. We just want the SAME protections. There isn't any reason for them to go to EXTRA efforts to PREVENT us from doing so.
Peter Pine wrote:
Asking them to change is like them asking you to stop being gay or you asking them to show you the magical man in the sky. It's kinda personal and neither side will change.
No one is asking them to change. They won't need to do a single thing. They can stay exactly as they are, forever. We're asking them to stop impeding justice, to stop blocking our path to equality. If they don't like us, fine. But they don't need to make it against the LAW to like us. No one needs to be legally compelled to share their hatred.
Peter Pine wrote:
You'll all burn yourselves out before either side changes. It's comical.
Keep watching. I seriously doubt you're going to see us burn out before this is over. Black people didn't burn out fighting for their civil rights, women didn't burn out fighting for suffrage and equality. It's our turn now, and we'll see it through.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Mar 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fed up wrote:
Obviously I don't shrug it off, since I apparently know more about it than you do. I in fact like science, you know, the type that stands up to the scientific method, you know, like finding a quasar or a black hole.
If you like science, then I don't understand your earlier question:
Fed up wrote:
So, if God isn't a good explanation for the existence of the Universe, the Earth and all it's beauty and the human mind, where did all of this come from?
Can you see that it ISN'T "science" to jump to the conclusion that a god MUST have done it? We can say that we don't KNOW where the universe comes from, but "not knowing" is NOT justification for just ASSERTING any other answer. This claim about god isn't testable or measurable, how could we know it? How do we confirm it? How do we falsify it?

We CAN'T, so there isn't any point in CLAIMING it in the 1st place. It's just speculation. It may be a nice hypothesis, but there's nowhere to go from there. After forming a hypothesis, a good scientist will begin collecting data to prove or disprove it. But there isn't even any data here to be analyzed.
Fed up wrote:
It was a theory that stood up to testing. But comparing a Quasar to string theory is like comparing a gnat to an elephant. A Quasar is a flek of dust compared to string theory or the Big Bang.
There ARE hypotheses that remain untested, but this doesn't mean that they can be rejected out of hand. Being based on a reliable system like physics, we can at least make predictions that are within the realm of possibility. If they turn out wrong, it will be because we don't have a full understanding of the physics involved, or because of some incorrect calculation. It WON'T be because demons are tricking us, or because scientists are just wildly conjecturing from their imaginations. The big bang is the best theory we have that fits the evidence. If more evidence comes along, the theory can be reworked.
Fed up wrote:
Pseudo science is fun to read about, you know, like a George Lucas movie, but that is all it is.
Pseudo-science is the realm of astrology, alchemy, palmistry, homeopathy, phrenology. It doesn't include physics, even if there are some unproven theories still out there.
Fed up wrote:
If you bothered to understand the bible, and Christians, you would know that most of the stories of Genesis, like Creation and Noah, are not believed by most to not be actual history but used to teach a lesson. Heck, the creation story itself seems to fit the idea of the Big Bang theory pretty well... "Let there be light...". The bible stories are just meant as allegory.
There are TONS of Christians who disagree, and who believe that every word and every story is literally true. Why do ANY 2 Christians ALWAYS give 2 contradicting explanations of their faith? You'll never find truth with such a personally customizable system.
Fed up wrote:
You see, someone like me doesn't need to believe that there is a reason why science and religion cannot co-exist, in fact, I think it makes perfect sense that the 2 are not mutually exclusive.
But it seems I have more of an open mind than you do.
It may be TOO open. I DO see science and religion at odds. The bible says a god created Adam & Eve, but science says humans evolved from lower life forms. Without Adam & Eve, there's no original sin, and no need for salvation, and so the religion crumbles.
Fed up wrote:
You seem to like to jump to great conclusions about me and my beliefs and want to pigeon hole believers into someone you can feel intellectually superior to. Sad.
That's why I ask QUESTIONS like, do you believe menstruating women should be quarantined? Do you believe shellfish and rabbits are unclean? But you haven't answered those. Can you OUTLINE your position, so I can AVOID pigeonholing you? What ARE your beliefs, and are they defensible?
Fed up

Warwick, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
Mar 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Your mind is made up, there is nothing that I can say that you will not find a way to attack, so why bother.

Let's just say that I see science as just explaining what God has created, an insight into all that he has done.

My faith is all that I need for the rest.

And it allows me to have a very open mind, unlike yourself.

Funny, did you know that one of the main architects and proponents of the Big Bang theory was a Belgian Catholic Priest? Monsignor Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%...

Funny how that works.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
Mar 25, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Fed up wrote:
Your mind is made up, there is nothing that I can say that you will not find a way to attack, so why bother.

My mind is NOT made up. I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't hold any beliefs in any gods, but I also don't discount the possibility. I just need to see some evidence before I'll ASSUME that there is a god. I'm eager to discuss the subject, but it would be "scientifically" irresponsible of me to just ACCEPT that ANY scripture is infallibly correct. There are MANY scriptures in the world, and there is every reason to believe that early man just enjoyed creating them.

Mythology runs RAMPANT on this planet. Am I wrong? Are you SURE that yours is not just ANOTHER one? Early people were desperate to explain their frightening world, and very enamored with the new art of writing. These writings included much of the wisdom that humanity had learned, like how to treat one another, but it also included some AWFUL crap about slavery, and selling daughters, and killing babies. If I REALLY respect the scientific method, I MUST consider the possibility that these are just the writings of primitive people, with NO divine inspiration.

If you REALLY seek truth, you need to be objective about your OWN beliefs, so you can spot mythologies in them. If there are magic powers and talking animals, these are strong indicators that these stories have nothing to do with reality. You've already admitted that much of the bible is allegory, not to be literally believed. What more do we need before we can suspect that the bible may be the work of men only, and not of gods? You say that you're "open-minded", but can you consider that this may be true?
Fed up wrote:
Let's just say that I see science as just explaining what God has created, an insight into all that he has done.
This first assumes that there IS a god. I could say that science explains what Odin has created, or what Quetzalcoatl has done, but it would be disingenuous of me not to FIRST show that such beings are ACTUALLY doing it. You can claim that gods created everything, and I can claim that they didn't, but neither claims actually advance scientific inquiry. It's just something that we CANNOT know, so we should not be making claims about it, and neither should we be ASSUMING that any claims are true, without them first being demonstrated.

The existence of the universe is merely proof of the existence of the universe. It says NOTHING about these characters Jehovah or Jesus. Their manufacturing tag is NOT hanging from the hem of reality.
Fed up wrote:
My faith is all that I need for the rest.
And it allows me to have a very open mind, unlike yourself.
Blind faith is about the LEAST open-minded concept. You are simply PRESUMING that your beliefs are true. Your faith leads you to elevate your religious beliefs above all other religions, but it does not allow you to analyze it objectively, and hold it to the SAME standards that you hold those other religions. Muslims are just as devoted to THEIR faith, and they believe that YOUR beliefs are wrong. Why is your faith more "correct" than anyone else's? How does faith lead you to truth, if you are just ACCEPTING answers, instead of CONFIRMING them?
Fed up wrote:
Funny, did you know that one of the main architects and proponents of the Big Bang theory was a Belgian Catholic Priest? Monsignor Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%...
Funny how that works.
Why is it funny? His math skills don't tell us if his supernatural beliefs are true. Darwin studied to be an Anglican clergyman. Gregor Mendel was an Augustinian monk. People can hold unsubstantiated beliefs but still reach inescapable conclusions about how the natural world works.
Fed up

Warwick, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
Mar 25, 2011
 
My faith is my own, I do not compare it to others nor do I need to feel the need to elevate it above others, it is simply that, my own.

You keep hoisting all of these preconceived notions on me that are just not valid, its amazing how bigoted you are toward anyone with faith. Its amazing how close minded you are about it. Faith is something between myself and God, no one else. I don't believe in the liberal Church's who have this ideal of "collective" salvation. That is exactly the opposite of what I have been taught and what religion is supposed to be about, so why would I care what other INDIVIDUALS think or believe?

It is amazing how close minded those that proclaim to be intellectually superior actually are.

And what is interesting about Georges Lemaitre is that he understood the physics and the math far more than you and I ever will and yet it never shook his faith, in fact, it only made it stronger. What was funny was that all of the atheists in his field hated the idea of the Big Bang because they knew that it could point to the idea that there was a starting point to the Universe and that gave even more credence to the idea that God exists. Their atheistic orthodoxy wanted to believe that the universe always existed and always will exist. They fought the idea that the Universe had a beginning and when the facts couldn't be ignore, they fought the idea that the expansion of the Universe is increasing which would mean it would end one day, and once again have been proved wrong.

Now they are going out of their way to try to find an excuse or theory that might let them believe that the Big Bang was not the beginning of everything, and of course that is where we get the George Lucas style theories we get today. Nothing that can be ever proved.

What we do know is that OUR Universe has a beginning, and it will have an end, just like my Faith said thousands of years ago. Funny how that works.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
Mar 25, 2011
 
How is it "closed-minded" to say that we should not be ASSERTING our beliefs until they are PROVEN? I'm OPEN to the possiblity that I could be wrong about anything, but I won't say that I KNOW something based on FAITH. That is NOT how you acquire knowledge.

You CAN'T say that our universe WILL have an ending, because you can't see the future. You don't KNOW this. You don't even KNOW that it had a "beginning". All we know for SURE is that it is expanding. THAT'S ALL. This SUGGESTS that at one point it was much smaller. We DON'T know what was BEFORE the expansion. We DON'T know what caused it to expand. We DON'T know what will happen 15 billion years in the future. WE JUST DON'T. How is it closed-minded to embrace the fact that WE DON'T KNOW? It would only be closed-minded to assert that we DO.

You don't know what caused the universe, or how it will end, or even IF it will end. You don't know if a god caused it, or if it happened naturally. I don't know this information. Your pastor doesn't know this. The president doesn't know. Stephen Hawking doesn't know. Miss Cleo doesn't know. The Pope doesn't know. When it comes to this kind of knowledge, there are 2 types of people: those who can ADMIT that it's not possible to know this, and those who CLAIM to know it anyway. Faith makes people into the 2nd kind, CERTAIN that what they FEEL is true MUST be true, without ever having seen it demonstrated, and without ANY process of discover or confirmation. You'll dismiss "George Lucas style theories" that can't be (or haven't yet been) proven, but then you make claims that you KNOW what the universe will do, even though THAT is ALSO not proven. Why aren't your religious beliefs held to the same standard? Why not withhold adopting them AS beliefs, until THEY are proven?

It's not true that you don't elevate your religious beliefs above others. You say so yourself, above: "I don't believe in the liberal Church's who have this ideal of "collective" salvation. That is exactly the opposite of what I have been taught and what religion is supposed to be about, so why would I care what other INDIVIDUALS think or believe?"

Why is what YOU'VE been taught to believe about religion TRUE, but anyone else's ideas about it are not? HOW do you go about confirming that the "liberal church" is wrong, and that you are right? What process do you use? How can you be SURE that what you've been taught is correct? If you wanted to investigate this, where would you start? Who would you ask? What tests could you conduct?

I am not "bigoted" against anyone with faith, but I don't see that faith is a viable path to true knowledge. I could suddenly decide to have faith in the Hindu Veda scriptures, but that wouldn't make them true. My biggest problem with faith is that it has no PROCESS for gaining knowledge, it just CLAIMS to have it anyway. This is not trustworthy, and I would not trust any claims made on this basis. Faith makes people CERTAIN about what the gods want, which gives them a false sense of authority. If you sense anger from me, it is because these people are trying to USE this false authority to BEND my life to fit their religious values, and I strongly resent that. I don't hate people of faith, but I hate the arrogant CERTAINTY that they exhibit. I'd much rather see people embrace the possibilities that COULD exist, rather than ASSERTING things that they CANNOT know.

In everything I've said above, paragraph 5 has my most heartfelt convictions. HOW do you gain your knowledge? What is your process? How do you determine if it is true or false? What standards do you use? If you are skeptical about the claims of science, and the claims of Islam, and the claims of the "liberal church", why do you give YOUR religion a PASS? Couldn't the bible be just as false as any other belief system? Isn't this at least POSSIBLE?
Fed up

Warwick, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
Mar 25, 2011
 
When I talk about an ideal, I am not talking about individuals, which is why I stressed the point. I question any group, especially religious groups that seem to lead people astray or to do evil things. I never question an INDIVIDUALS faith. Big difference. I don't question you as an agnostic atheist (which by the way makes no sense to me, you are one or the other and if what you say is true, you are an agnostic). I do question what atheism has become, which seems to be a belief system that is guilty of doing everything it accuses organized religions of doing, such as trying to assert itself above other belief systems.

And the current belief of the smartest scientists in the world is that the Universe did have a begining, a day that did not have a yesterday, and will have an end. I am open to all new ideas, but this one seems to have the most evidence (cosmic background radiation, doppler shift, galaxies flying away from one another, even the latest images of the oldest galaxies have proven to be what scientists expected).

And not all of us need the world to be based in black and white, or to be put in a neat box that we can look at, touch and feel.

I am amazed that people think that the miracle of life, of creativity and the human mind can spring from nothing. That is all I need. To think that the human mind with all of the amazing things it can do sprung from some helium and hydrogen atoms that randomly led to the creation of the solar system, the earth, the perfect conditions that exist for life on earth such as the magnetosphere, the chemical processes, etc. all were just a random happenstance of good luck is complete nonsense to me. I do think about it, and it makes perfect sense to me that there was a design behind it all. How you get something from nothing and the belief in it just makes no sense to me as an individual.

I have faith, that is all I need, but it is based on my own feelings and thought on the matter. Faith by definition means I don't need to have proof, nor do I need to supply you with it. It is an abstract, but it works for me. It means I don't need everything to be wrapped up in a nice neat box for me. It also allows me to have a more open mind to see and accept people.

“Welcome to Cyberland!!”

Since: Sep 10

Newark, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#60
Mar 27, 2011
 
Anyone who uses religion as an excuse for an act of violence is lying. A gang of teens who drink and use drugs and talk about the women the want to f**k while speaking against religious beliefs and making fun of other teens who read the Bible and go to church ar NOT trying to serve God by beating up on Gay people.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 41 - 58 of58
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Advocate Discussions

Search the Advocate Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
How to handle a Cyber-bully (Nov '13) Nov '13 ononothimagin 20
Quality Auto Group closes doors (Oct '08) Sep '13 JMM 24
School board interested in moving forward with ... (Dec '12) Dec '12 Former 1
Carpentersville parent wants answers about drug... (Jan '12) Jan '12 Cville resident 1
Malloy's first year in the eye of the storm (Dec '11) Dec '11 the big stink 1
Day by day family events in Berkshire and Benni... (Sep '11) Sep '11 Tara 1
Letter to the Editor - Charlie Julius - Julesbu... (Mar '11) Mar '11 Amee Duncan 1
•••
•••
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••