'As soon as we lose the moral basis , we cease to be religious. There is no such thing as religion over-riding morality . Man , for instance cannot be untruthful, cruel or incontinent and claim to have God on his side .'
'Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. WE know more about war than we know more about peace, more about killing than we know about living. We have grasped the mystery of the atom and rejected the Sermon on the Mount.'-anon
Only the dead know for sure Cajun, and they aren't talking!
My beliefs about life after death, are just that, beliefs.
My beliefs are premised on my faith.
If a person has faith in something, then they can have hope too.
I live today with the hope of a better tomorrow, and have the faith to believe that there is life after death.
It is a very personal decision, and I respect all cultures, theologies and ideologies regarding the same.
Just because I believe it to be true, does not warrant a mandate to anyone.
It's interesting to note that the modern theological interpretation of "hell" was and is defined by Dante's interpretation of the same in his classical work "Inferno", part of the classical "The Divine Comedy", written some 700 years ago.
My own personal belief is that whatever there is after death, is the same for everyone. Whatever it is, it is a much better place than we can even begin to imagine as mortals.
For those that haven't gotten it "right" yet, you will be destined to be reborn here again, given another opportunity to get it right.
Anyone ever hear the sentiment, "if ever there was a hell, it's right here on earth!"?
NOHEART, still running that fake profile huh. Give it up, i figured out who you really are long ago. If you ran off at the rear like you do at the mouth, you would spend half your time on the commode.You are almost as dumb as HOTTRASH and thats saying a lot.
Now, now Ed, isnt this fun?I am disappointed in you. I thought you had a sense of humor - oh, that is, until its done to you huh? Not too funny any more? Tough old boy. I have 5 more ready when you get the latest one deleted and will keep on until you do what you said at first and your slut does - LEAVE ME ALONE. You and her stop, i will stop.
I posted against you first? Is that your answer for everything?
No I disagreed with your statements and methods, that was all. You took that as a personal attack or smart mouthing as you put it. They weren't. They were a difference of opinion as far as I'm concerned. And nothing more.
Emailing with you recently under the truce, let me see the gentler side of you, which would be nice if you let others see, instead of this hostility and anger all the time.
I don't like you? I don't know you so have no opinion on you either way.
I don't like some of your ideas on women, children and gays or other religions.
And I don't like to see you attacking other members of MM. Why can't they have their opinion and you yours. No attacks, just a debate.
I don't like to see anyone attacked whether it's HM and Ed, who I think are hysterical, or you, whose ideas I do have problems with.
Let's all just have civilized debates, and no personal attacks, then this would be an interesting forum, vs an attack base.
Since this is the religion forum. And I am aware that some of our
members have stated themselves to be athiests only to be attacked for their right to chose to believe or disbelieve. I thought some of you would find this interesting. The following is a list of some of histories most celebrated individuals. Respected and loved by many, all of which considered themselves either atheists or agnostics. I personally fall under agnostic.
Abraham Lincoln, James Madison and John Adams
Others are famous authors, inventors, atrists, and even theme park creators.
They include Thomas Jefferson, Mark Twain, Helen Keller, Thomas Edison,
William Howard Taft, Walt Disney,Robert Frost, Vincent Van Gogh, Susan B. Anthoney,and Gallileo among many others. In the interest of space I believe this list makes my point for me. In the words of Jonathan Swift
"We have just enough religion to make us hate but not enough religion to make us love one another"
I know I do not have to make a list of all of the wars that were waged in the name of religion. Though the terrorist attacks of 911 do come to mind immediately. Nor do we have to make a list of all the Evangelists that have been publicly ridiculed for various crimes. Nor do we have to name all of the cult leaders who had their flock commit suicide before their eyes in the name of religion. All of those things have made major headlines in our lifetimes. I myself would much prefer to find myself in the company of the men and women mentioned in the top part of this message than the alternative group. especially if to admit that I might believe in a God would mean i would have to behave in the agressive fashion with which the views of others have been faced.
Hottie, I have no idea how things got started between me and 'Spoil.' I don't recall the posts that far back, and don't have time to read back that far. He can plainly see that I am offering a truce and an end to my part of the mudslinging. Can't he at least meet me halfway and do the same? These are forums made up of debates. Some remain friendly debates, while others get off track and turn a little ugly sometiimes. It's because everyone is different with differing opinions, and for some of us, it's hard to read something we don't agree with and still remain silent. I'm guilty of that myself, but I'm trying to change. It's okay to disagree, but in a nice way. One last time, I offer my apologies for my childish posts to him. It doesn't matter anymore who started it. When you forgive and move on, you don't dig up the past. It's the past. Do we finally have a truce, and does this end right here right now?
Mr.Legalbriefs42, below, i presented and rest my case. Tell me your professional and honest opinion as to what any judge would rule as to whose fault all the fighting was caused by - "Spoils" or those listed? Doesnt the law allow one to defend themselves when attacked?
HairyBalls, "Spoils" never said one word to you - did he? He never made one post to or about you - did he? My post to your friend says it all as to her character.Just maybe you should consider that people like you and those i listed had behaved themselves, all that fighting would have never happened.
HeartOfFire, in your case, you also posted aginst "Spoils" on the old message borad without him saying one word to you or against you - didnt you? You came to this forum and did the very same thing - didnt you? If he didnt attack you first then, how did you determine you didnt like him and just came to this forum for the purpose of attacking him? What did i say that isnt the truth?
Bikerking, in your case, you also posted on the old message board against "spoils" first without him saying one word to you- didnt you? You also came here to this forum and did the very same thing - didnt you? He never said one word to you or posted against you first - did he? Again, since you did the attacking first, which one of you is the jerk here?
lioncourt, your post yesterday takes a very big person to admit wrong. I guess you can see that others made fun of you for that, showing the real character they have. You too jumped to conclusions and made a post to him and now, you have made the effort to mend that. Not many would do that. Now, i hope you can see by the others i addressed, why he gave back to them, what they gave to him first and they couldnt stand it so, they all ganged up on himand told lies to get him removed but, today, you will read, person by person, why he gave it back to them. He reacted just like any of you would if he attacked you first - didnt he?
intelligentblonde, you got on this forum and made the statement that you just couldnt keep quiet and posted against "Spoils" - didnt you.You also posted against him on the old message board first - didnt you? You also deceided you didnt like him and that is why you posted against him on this forum without him saying one word to you - isnt it? Tell me which one of you started trouble - you or him?
Steelmagnolia, in your case, you stated that you posted against "Spoils" because you just couldnt keep quiet - didnt you? You also posted on the old message board without him saying one word to you - didnt you? You posted on this forum without him saying one word to you or against you - didnt you? Now, you tell me truthfully, which one of you started things here - you or him?
fun4two, in your case, you posted against "spoils" on the old message board without him ever saying a word to you - didnt you? You came to this forum only because you had already decided you didnt like him - didnt you? You posted against him on Jan.30th, 05 and called him names ( its still there) - didnt you? He never said one word to you first - did he? Yet, you get on here and start in on him - didnt you? You got a response you didnt like - wonder why? Yet, you accuse him of name calling and he is the bad guy.Go figure.The real truth here is, you should have never made one post against him - should you? Tell me what i said isnt the truth.
Edtarboosh, in your case, "Spoils" never said one word to you - had he? You leashed an all out attack on him without knowing a thing about him - didnt you? You just went by recent posts and got the idea he was just a jerk that attacked women without any research of the why - didnt you. Therefore, you just jumped to conclusions - didnt you? As to you personally, tell me what he ever did to you or say about you first? Nothing? Then, if i am to judge which one is the jerk that attacked the other first and which one between the two of you is in the wrong, how do you figure it is him? Have you ever considered that just maybe others did what you did that caused a reaction from him? You also got on this forum and showed no respect for yourself and others by using curse words and rude, filthy remarks - didnt you? Seems to me that you are sailing a sinking ship if you are trying to blame him - pot calling the kettle black here seems to me.As with the others, tell me what part about what i said is wrong.