God Bless America

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Oct 31 2006, 11:25 AM) [snapback]341272[/snapback]</div>

No. For some of us religion is at the heart of what happened; and see the irony of invoking god in terms of this tragedy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 30 2006, 12:15 PM) [snapback]340799[/snapback]</div>

A careful reading of the post shows no words against you. Believe in the tooth fairy, if you'd like. Just don't try to make that a part of sound dental practice and a legal requirement for all.

It's God I'm demeaning. "Israel," if I've had the words explained to me correctly, translates as "struggle with God." In other words, the Jews, like Job of old, felt it their duty and right to confront God with their grievances and he had better come up with an answer.

I, though not a Jew, arrogantly claim the same right. If God exists and allows such heinous acts to occur, I want a good reason why; why so much pain and suffering is commonplace in this barbaric world, the plaything of a just and loving God. The simplistic response always trotted out, that people are being "tested," is infinitely lame. It reminds me of the testing for witches done in early New England. The only way to pass the trial was to die. They did away with that perversity a few hundred years ago. Therefore I conclude that Russell's opinion is valid: my mother is more loving than God.

Christians emphasize the God of Love more than Jews, so my argument is more with them. Jews, in my slight study, tend to dwell more on a Just God than a loving one. I favor this emphasis, but if you want to buy into this Christian view, this is the kind of argument you should get used to. There was no test of love evident in 9/11. Evil and hatred clearly won the day.

Believing in God should be more than a fuzzy good feeling. There is a responsibility attached, if logic means anything, that requires believers to maintain some consistency of reason. It's the believer's obligation to debate, argue and ponder God's intent, like the learned rabbis of the past such as Rashi and Maimonides did with the Talmud. This involves hard work, such as Harold Kushner's book, "When Bad Things Happen to Good People," not mindless clichés. Making God into the Omnipotent Exam Giver is not enough for many of us.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Oct, 11:39 AM) [snapback]341281[/snapback]</div>

I have to agree with Alric here. I've been mulling about how to say this.

I think it's wrong to come to someone's defense just because they claim to be religious. If you read our exchange, you will see that my only attacks on dbermanmd are for his lies, which have become habitual and are reprehensible. For outing him, I have been personally attacked by him repeatedly, and no one comes to my defense. If you're trying to be politically correct, you guys are discriminating against the atheists here and I am frankly offended.

Religion has never been a part of my life. It makes as much sense to me as Santa Clause. It doesn't bother me if someone is religious, as long as they are living with good principles. But when people use religion as an excuse to harm others, or a facade in an attempt to increase their credibility, that really bothers me. In this case, based on what I have seen from dbermanmd's posts here in FHOP, I just don't see his actions as those of a truly religious person. So I wonder if he's putting it on as a means to give himself credibility, the same way he adds "md" to the end of his user name.

So fine, now I've moved into the realm of attacking his religiousness. Go ahead and flame me. I'm pissed.

One more thing: this is FHOP. I've had to put up with dbermanmd's lies, so you can put up with my attacking him for them. And when God is in the title of an FHOP post, you can and should expect the issue of God to be questioned.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Oct 31 2006, 05:53 AM) [snapback]341188[/snapback]</div>

No it's not. It's a statement of belief, as valid to the speaker as is the faith to a true believer. Is it an insult to say to a Baptist, "I am a Catholic."? There are some pretty serious conflicts between the two.

Somebody's faith is not a sacred subject to the world in general. Why should I have to hid my light under a basket? I believe this, they believe that....let the games begin. Religious folk are insulted way too easily. I think they find it easier to act insulted than to refute the claim. But that's just me...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Oct 31 2006, 12:18 PM) [snapback]341309[/snapback]</div>

"There is no God" is stating opinion as fact. As is saying "God exists". It leaves no room for discussion. Saying "I'm Catholic" is not insulting because it's not an opinion. It's a fact. Same as saying "I'm an atheist". It's the difference between saying "I drive a Prius" and "GM sucks". One is a fact, the other is an opinion expressed as fact. And it's going to piss off people who believe the opposite.

If I remember correctly, you're a teacher. Would you let your students express their opinions in the guise of facts? Every teacher I ever had made me back up my arguments. It's the same thing that happens on other areas in FHP. Progressives say the war is a disaster. Neocons say it's a success. Neither is a fact ... they're both opinion expressed as fact. And as soon as one is expressed, the other side gets their undies in a bundle about it.

No one's asking you to hide your light. If I may borrow your own words, believe in the tooth fairy, if you'd like. And express it loudly and proudly. Just be careful you're not pissing on others when you do it.

By the way, what claim are you asking religious people to refute? That there is no God? Not their place to do that. Personally, I've seen no conclusive proof that God exists or doesn't exist. The only time any of us are able to answer without a doubt, it's going to be a little tough to spread the news. Unless you believe the dead can speak.

I respect your opinions. But I believe you're off-base. But, as Dennis Miller used to say, "That's just my opinion. I could be wrong."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Oct 31 2006, 01:21 PM) [snapback]341354[/snapback]</div>

The only difference is that there is no evidence that god exists and there is plenty of evidence that the concept its unnecesary.

Again, the reason I brought up the question of religion is that in my opinion it was religion and irrational beliefs that caused 9/11. Making the "God Bless America" thread ironical at best, if not deluded.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 31 2006, 01:35 PM) [snapback]341368[/snapback]</div>

Lack of evidence. Do you have one bit of evidence that god exists? Hint: "feeling it" doesn't count.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 31 2006, 01:51 PM) [snapback]341386[/snapback]</div>

Just to take some fields here:

Life, biology, evolution.
The Universe, Physics..
Materials..chemistry
Even the Bible is a proven historical text written by humans.

None of these ever invokes god as an explanation or necessity. That's why I ask. Do you have one bit of evidence that god exists?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 31 2006, 02:02 PM) [snapback]341395[/snapback]</div>

Not proof. You can't disprove completely anything. But so far god as an explanation has been unnecessary in all the fileds I mentioned.

But you do believe in god. I ask you; why?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Oct 31 2006, 12:08 PM) [snapback]341302[/snapback]</div>

We've all had to put up with lies/misinformation/stretched truths/selective facts from both sides of the aisle. If you want to follow dbermanmd around and point out his lies, knock yourself out. I'd just as soon roll my eyes at them and try to refute whatever false information I see with facts where I can find them. If someone refuses to see them as valid, there's not much else I can do, is there?

I have no beef with you, Alric, alnilam, or anyone else here. Yours (& theirs) are some of the opinions I value most highly. All of you usually express your views intelligently and reasonably. If anything came off as discriminatory against Atheists, I apologize. I'm not looking to censor anyone's views by any stretch. I'd much rather see meaningful dialog as opposed to battle lines being drawn.

By the way, I practically live in FHOP, so I'm pretty much aware of how things work around here. I just try not to get my undies too much in a bundle over what I read. Most of the time I'm successful, but sometimes ... not so much.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Oct 31 2006, 01:29 PM) [snapback]341362[/snapback]</div>

Define unnecessary. If the concept of God brings someone comfort and helps them live a good life, how is that unnecessary? If people are living their lives well in the hope of enter Heaven, Valhalla, or attaining Moksha, what does it matter?

Religious extremism is a different subject altogether.

 

The common enemies include oppression, lack of opportunity, and religious fanaticism of every stripe.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 31 2006, 01:51 PM) [snapback]341386[/snapback]</div>

This has gone from bad to worse.

Remember: saying something doesn't exist and requesting proof that it does, is *entirely* different than saying that something does exist, and requesting proof to the contrary.

Generally speaking, the burden of proof falls upon the person who claims the affirmative.

[sigh] Another misguided argument destined to go nowhere...except in circles.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Oct 31 2006, 10:21 AM) [snapback]341354[/snapback]</div>

I'm writing this on the fly, not having made up my mind in advance...

""There is no God" is stating opinion as fact. As is saying "God exists". It leaves no room for discussion."

I don't agree. This is playing with words. It is a proposition which naturally invites discussion. Try saying this to a priest, for example, and you'll get a response directly. Nobody who says this is stating it as anything more than a (perhaps very strong) opinion since proof is obviously absent on both sides. It's not equivalent to saying 2+2=4. (And that is sometimes controversial to some.)

That somebody is offended by the statement is curious to me. Why? Why does a proposition of fact cause anger? I'm not offended if somebody says, "There is a God." It just makes me want to talk a little more, contrary to what you said above. Saying "GM sucks," contains intended hostility. "There is no God," doesn't, if said in a normal tone of voice. Anything can be anger-raising if said in a nasty manner. In my experience, stating beliefs only involve rising tempers among those with no answer. If I said "GM sucks," to a delighted Cadillac owner, he'd laugh at me and tell me where I was wrong in my little piece of Japanese tin. Then I'D be mad if I couldn't talk up the Prius.

As a science teacher, when somebody comes in and says, for example, that "Newton was wrong," I don't get mad, even though I know that Newtonian dynamics got us to the moon and back. There are people today saying Newton is wrong, in an attempt to explain dark matter's existence. I listen, but with an undercurrent of doubt. Einstein, after all, found much error in Newton. I find the discussion very exciting though. It's not the statement that is offensive, it is how it is given. There are some very nice ways of saying, "There is no God."

Yes, a believer-in-depth should be able to do more than just say "I believe, but I have no idea why," especially if this belief is trotted forth to influence the public policy. Endless repetitions of "The bible prohibits this" are given as if that were the end of the question. BTW, in the days of the bible, maybe not too many dead, but a whole host of heavenly characters DID speak. Strangely, they are silent today.

I don't like to offend people for their honest and amicable statement of opinions. I get my hackles up when people arrogantly try to force a pet belief down my throat using lies, half-truths, bombast or opinion-stated-as-fact to make their points.

I like the form of talk we are having here. And I very well may be off base, but it isn't the atheists and agnostics who keep bringing up God, or his absence, for some useful purpose, is it?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Oct 31 2006, 02:39 PM) [snapback]341439[/snapback]</div>

I can see how you see it as a point to invite discussion. But some will see such a statement as a blatant disregard for their belief. I believe there are more tactful ways to invite the discussion. Now, just for fun ...

• A physicist says 2.000 + 2.000 = 4.000 +- 0.0001
• A statistician says 2 + 2 = 4 with 99.98% assurance
• 2+2=4 except for very large values of 2.

He might laugh. Then again, he might grab a tire iron and chase you around the parking lot. You don't know for sure. Why not enter the discussion a different way?

Precisely. The problem with having discussions in a text format is we lose inflection & facial expressions. Emoticons can help a little bit, but they seem (to me, at least) out of place in a serious discussion. In my opinion, that's why people get their panties bunched more quickly here then they would at the corner coffee shop.

I'm with you 110% here.