Da Vinci code like it? hate it? post here!
#18
Posted 19 May 2006 - 09:25 AM
Yeah. Like Plan 9!
PM me, we'll talk.
#19
Posted 19 May 2006 - 09:42 AM
EVERYBODY wants to make the Catholic Church have a conspiracy. Absolutely everybody. Even H.P. Lovecraft talks about 'rumors that a copy of Al Aziz's Necronomicon in the Vatican'. The Church getting accused of everything and anything isn't new.
Most people don't know that the Inquisition was a political tool wielded by the Spanish in open defiance of the Pope, and that Galileo was censured not because of his heliocentric theory, but because of other claims he made against the Church. Why doesn't someone write a book about that?
#20
Posted 20 May 2006 - 07:48 AM
#22
Posted 20 May 2006 - 08:19 AM
EVERYBODY wants to make the Catholic Church have a conspiracy. Absolutely everybody. Even H.P. Lovecraft talks about 'rumors that a copy of Al Aziz's Necronomicon in the Vatican'. The Church getting accused of everything and anything isn't new.
Most people don't know that the Inquisition was a political tool wielded by the Spanish in open defiance of the Pope, and that Galileo was censured not because of his heliocentric theory, but because of other claims he made against the Church. Why doesn't someone write a book about that?
Oh the poor Catholic Church.
![sad.gif](http://www.chefelf.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)
![crying.gif](http://www.chefelf.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/crying.gif)
![ohmy.gif](http://www.chefelf.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)
![thumbsup.gif](http://www.chefelf.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)
This post has been edited by Sailor Abbey: 20 May 2006 - 08:20 AM
#23
Posted 20 May 2006 - 08:42 AM
Less Is More v4
Now resigned to a readership of me, my cat and some fish
#25
Posted 21 May 2006 - 06:01 PM
Uh... I wouldn't recommend that 'nature intending them to do' argument. If I'm physically capable of beating the tar out of 99.5% of the population, should I? Nature allows me to make napalm, and ensures that it is highly effective on pets and small children, should I do that as well? Nature obviously doesn't even intend for us to reproduce limitlessly, as some people seem bent on trying. Actions have consequences. Science exists on that principle, it does not exist to violate it.
You should feel guilty for doing things you shouldn't do, it helps keep you from doing them again. Should people not have nerves, so they don't feel pain when they burn themselves? After all, that pain only discourages them from doing things.
As for the belief system being the only valid one, with religion you cannot have more than one right. If God as Catholics seem him exists, then being a Buddhist really won't do anything for you. It's all tree-huggy happy and politically correct to say otherwise, but even a child can do the logic. Pascal spells it out quite clearly.
#26
Posted 21 May 2006 - 08:49 PM
I liked the book, though I admit that the characters were 1 dimensional (except Silas, he ruled). I liked the book for it's fast paced writing style that made you rush through the chapters. Also, I like conspiracy theories and what can be more surpirisng that God's power on Earth is a fake?
#28
Posted 22 May 2006 - 08:49 AM
Hey, nature allowing and nature intending are two very different concepts.
I would have to disagree. Nature most likely intends for us to reproduce until we are no longer able to do so. However, we seem to have become quite adept at preventing nature from selecting a large percentage of the population for termination, so it just seems like we shouldnt be reproducing limitlessly.
Oh you mean things like having premarital sex, or having sex with somebody of the same gender, or masturbating, or how bout not going to mass on Sunday, or getting a divorce, or not baptizing your children... the list goes on...
Wrong again. With monotheistic religions, you cant have more than one. You are making the assumption that all religions are, and I assure you they are not.
This post has been edited by Sailor Abbey: 22 May 2006 - 08:51 AM
#29
Posted 22 May 2006 - 03:12 PM
Invalid. If a thing is possible and relatively easy, it counts as nature intending it. Can hippos fly? No, nature does not intend for it. Do most birds? Yes. Does a bird have the option of not flying? It does, but for the bird not to fly is for the bird to waste a natural ability and short itself. Do I have the option of not beating the snot out of people? I both have and exercise that option, but I would profit from doing it.
Nature 'intends' for sex to result in reproduction, as does the Catholic Church. I fail to see how using science to turn it into a recreational activity counts as 'natural'.
Yes... doing something wrong, is wrong. And if something is wrong, you shouldn't do it. And if you do happen to do it, you shouldn't do it again. I fail to see how a guy getting a girl pregnant and dumping her isn't a wrong thing. I doubt that view changes even from a female perspective.
On the contrary, I recognize the presence of polytheism. But Buddhism (which isn't really a religion, per se) hardly agrees with what Vikings believed, and what Vikings believed doesn't line up with what American Indians believe, which is turn doesn't line up with what Hindus believe. Are cannibalism and human sacrifice good things? It varies on religion. Whether you believe in one god or eleventy million, odds are that they don't appreciate you worshipping other, outside gods.
Look at Greek mythology. Some of them get awfully annoyed when they see their worshipers going in search of greener pastures or ignoring them.