doesn't brandy or other alcohol "burn" a little bit?

He (all by his onesies) hasn't have the power nor the authority to err.."wave magic wands" and change the Canon law (body of laws). I assure you that if he were to try to wave said wand and change the RC religious laws or creeds we would all see just how fast a Pope can become a Pauper.

“The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be
the hijacking of morality by religion.”

Arthur C Clarke


Religion and morality go together like boiled beef and carrots. You often find them together but it is perfectly possible to have one without the other.

Many people have swallowed the idea that morality started with religion to such an extent that they cannot separate the two. I myself was under the impression that religion had a significant causative link to morality until quite recently when I came to see the truth.

Man is a primate. All primates have innate morality. A moral sense is vitally important to the efficient running of any society or group. There are no amoral primate groups anywhere. The Mafia have morals, baboons have codes. There are differences between the various groups and their codes of morality but all primate groups have some morals and standards of behaviour. Religion is also very common but it is not universal and it did not cause the codes or the instinct to observe them. These are facts that need to be clearly stated. Morality does not require religion.

In Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union millions of people were brought up during the middle decades of the twentieth century in a state that was thoroughly atheist and many of the households and communities within those states were also atheist. There was no collapse of morality. You were not more likely to be robbed, raped, murdered or cheated in Leningrad than you were in Manchester. Why? Why did people freed from the fear of divine retribution not suddenly start behaving like amoral animals? Because we are animals. We are political animals, animals that need to live within societies and feel respected by them.

Religion is not the bulwark of morality any more than the****rel crowing if the cause of the dawn or the virgin sacrifices are the cause of the volcano keeping quiet. This trick has been perpetrated on people for centuries and people continue to fall for it. It is very reminiscent of the great Santa Claus conspiracy. The surest way to lose a job on television is to state clearly that there is no such person as Santa Claus. No adult believes in Santa Claus, but most are part of the conspiracy. We mustn't let children know that there is no Santa Claus because ... er, well, because. And we mustn't let the people, especially the poor, know there is no God because, well, because. We wouldn't want to face those consequences would we?

What is there to be afraid of in the truth that God is just as much an imaginary being as the bogeyman, the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy? None whatsoever. Morality in our species does not rest upon fear of God. We act morally because to do so makes us feel good about ourselves and makes us better friends and allies. Being good and moral is the right thing to do for your own selfish self interest. The best thing we can do as a society to make morality more widespread and more potent is to strip away all aspects of religion from it. Being good is the right thing to do because it simply is the right thing. We as a species have an innate sense of morality just as we have an innate ability to learn language. We need it. We are political animals. We have an innate sense of what is or is not fair. We need respect and the esteem of our neighbours, friends and colleagues. This makes us behave morally.

Our morality breaks down with anonymity. It is no surprise that the biggest cities in the world have the most selfish drivers. If you drive in a small town in Kansas you see people being polite and well mannered not because they fear the wrath of God but simply because in small communities people expect to interact again with you at another time. In contrast in New York, Hong Kong or Rome the rule of the road is to curse and never trust the other driver.

The way to keep morality and lose the encumbrances of religion is to promote morality in and of itself. We as a species know what morality is and we recognize moral behaviour when we see it. We are naturally moral because we have developed complex instincts to help us in social situations. These instincts work as long as we allow them instead of burying them in external threats and admonishments. The ten commandments do not help us discover ultimate morality. We all know it when we see it. The way to get people to behave in a moral way is to trust them, to integrate them and to allow them to develop fully as individuals in a caring society. People will only act as amoral criminals if they fall into a criminal subculture, are mentally deficient in morality (rare conditions do exist that cause these problems) or are in a situation in which crime really does pay in a way that can become a life choice.

However you cannot create a moral society with nothing but kindness. We also need something else, something deeply unfashionable but vital to the healthy running of any society: intolerance. We must promote intolerance of criminality and cheating. We as social animals naturally despise the cheat and the thief, but too many liberal bed-wetter types have been telling us that the thief only steals because of what we do to him. This line must be resisted and fought from both ends. We must both minimize the lure of cheating by ensuring that all can live without falling into crime and at the same time promote natural justice in the community. Criminals must be ostracized. But this is not enough. People who use the glamour of crime and immorality vicariously to achieve their legal business ends must also be shunned. Refuse to watch films that glamorize crime and violence. Refuse to buy music produced by violently antisocial people. Walk away from people who talk about such things. If you are introduced to somebody who makes their living from glorifying violence and crime wipe your hand and walk away. They might claim that they are just satisfying a demand, they are right, but we as individuals should see to it that we never add to that demand and do all we can to spurn those that do.

God cannot punish the wrongdoer or the man who sells his products with images of crime and violence but we can. How many crimes have been prevented by the fear of God? Do Christians never commit crime or sin? Do atheists spend all their days stealing from charity collection boxes, murdering strangers and sexually abusing children? There is no link between belief in the supernatural and God and morality. If the only reason a Christian can give for continued belief in his incredible theory is the idea that such a belief is a useful tool to keep the poor from falling into immorality then his religion is morally bankrupt. The only purpose I can see in religion is as a way to catch the attention in order to reinforce the messages of the natural morality that we as a species are already responding to. It cannot be beyond the wit of our species to come up with other ways to spread lessons of morality than this. Surely the poor and the dangerous will be inclined to listen more clearly if we treat them as adults rather than simply threatening them with the bogeyman again?

“When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized that the Lord, in his wisdom, didn't work that way. So I just stole one and asked him to forgive me.”
Emo Philips

I know more women who have uncommited sex for the pure physical pleasure than for the need of being in a relationship or for love.

But is this a growing trend in creationism? Why so much hate? I thought christians preached against hate, but telling people that atheists (all atheists) are immoral is spreading hate no matter how you look at it.

I also made the point that many people who are complaining about religion are using emotional arguments, which are based on the experiences of themselves as a child, with abusive parents. But there is no magic rule that says that if people give up religion, then they stop being abusive. The only rule is that most people who don't think for themselves, want to fit in, and in a religious neighbourhood, fitting in means pretending to be religious. In an atheistic neighbourhood, fitting in means pretending to be atheists. But America has been mostly religious neighbourhoods. So up until now, abusive people fitted in with religion, because that was all that was out there. Now, they can fit in with atheism, and still be just as abusive, or more.

Science is good. But only when we can question everything about it, and only when scientists praise and encourage anyone who questions any or all of any scientific theory.

The bottom line is: why does man need to exclude G-d? What is it in man that fears G-d, and seeks G-d's removal from his point of view?

If there was a way that manned space travel could make a profit from mining, manufacturing etc much more resources would be dedicated to it, cost would decrease and risk would lower.

However, if you had some negative emotional experiences as a child, that stopped the growth of your consciousness, then you might be trapped in being unable to question those assumptions, until you fully dealt with those experiences and the feelings you had about them. That would leave your mind trapped in being still in a childlike state. However, if those negative emotional experiences weren't directly related to your experiences of work, or getting dates, then you might find that you would be very able to work and date, and so you could compartmentalise those feelings to those parts of your consciousness that deal with those types of relationships that were directly involved in those negative emotional experiences. I don't know exactly if you had such experiences, or that if you did, then what areas of your life that were affected by those experiences. But if my observations about people are right, and in this aspect, I have found it to be almost an unbroken rule, then I would say that those areas of your life that were directly impacted by those negative emotional experiences are areas of your life in which you have found an extreme lack of success, again and again and again. You are quite capable of being successful in those areas, but only as long as you can be rational about them, and as long as you hold onto naive, and childlike views based on those areas of your life, you will not be able to think rationally about them, because the minute you apply rational thought to those areas, you will apply lateral mechanisms of thought, which will immediately make you compare your experiences to every other situation, and you will realise that your experiences only occurs to some people, and is usually far more common with indications of low mental health in the people who subjected you to those experiences, that resulted in them acting in extremely negative fashions.

I know we couldn't leave the soler system

Porn shouldnt be abused but when people realized we have been screwed over, they are making money off of us, well that sjust stupid but hey we're human.

A hundred years later, they were possessed by uncivilized and barbarous peoples, and the dark ages began.

I think we put ridiculous demands on our relationships.

Best friend
Partner
Sexual goddess or god
Companion
Same interests
Good conversationalist

But there is belief in less denser worlds such as the astral in which everything we deem as coming from the imagination exists

what they are fighting for is REAL

You might not agree with their methods (as I do not); you might see it as ridiculous (and in many ways I do as well) but you would never assume to tell them that they shouldn't feel the way they do or believe the way they believe.

when a person has a real intimate experience with God and His Spirit, who teaches them about Gods Son, they can not hold it back.... a quote from Gods Word says that they can no more hold it back than the sun can hold back its light....

SO...why can't f-buddies? We've all got itches to scratch so why not have friendship too?

when only the Charity - in this case the church - is tax-exempt

It's called giving it away for nothing. No strings attached. Why buy the cow when you're getting the milk for free, as the vulgar saying goes. Personally, I have emotions attached to my sexuality.

Are you angry that these religious folks are successful and wealthy, and after theyve paid the IRS their fair share, have enough left over to purchase nice rides? Tsk-tsk.

To the nonreligious: I doubt that this is what bothers you the most about the Church.

Televison is the biggest propaganda device ever invented and that is why so many people have been blinded from the truth by satan.

You aren't tithing to the church, you are tithing to God.

It isn't your money, it belongs to God

The money you have wouldn't be yours if God didn't bless you and give it to you

I tithe 10% of my gross income and God has never failed me. People say they can't afford to tithe. You can't afford not to tithe.

There are some people who won't/can't go to church and so they watch/listen to these people that you are referring to.

In essence a tax exempt establishment, such as a church, should be allowed to maintain their status if they are giving back to the community - taking care of the widows, the poor, etc.....but that's just my opinion.

Whats the perpose of filling a church with riches?

The problem is that you are mistakenly equating "character" and "morality" as givens if "Christian" is true. Ideally, it should be so, especially in a President, but recent history has demonstrably shown that this is not always the case. You must first make your case that a President who is "Christian" is de facto a person of the highest character and the greatest morality. Once you've established that as a Truth, you will then have to demonstrate that this person has the ability, leadership, and will to lead a nation -- because neither good character or morality are necessary indicators of leadership qualities.

And that really is my point. If it was a choice between highly moral Christian of outstanding personal integrity who was politically naive and unaware of the complexity of the role, a highly moral Atheist of outstanding personal integrity who was more knowledgeable and skilled but still lacked necessary qualification, or a moderately moral Taoist with great personal integrity who was intelligent, educated, and demonstrably capable of leadership, I'd vote for the Taoist. Not because (s)he's a Taoist, but because (s)he's most qualified for the job.

I watched all of Expelled but I would like to know how acid coming to life on its own is a better theory then God, Aliens or flying pasta making life happen on Earth? If that is how it happened and there is no reason to treat others kindly

Interesting when did that become true? I watched all of Expelled but I would like to know how acid coming to life on its own is a better theory then God, Aliens or flying pasta making life happen on Earth? If that is how it happened and there is no reason to treat others kindly. Why get out of bed?

hate to point out the obvious my friend, but the level of credibility of the media and churches are pretty much the same, non existent.

Churches have ulterior motives which involves possibly individual financial gain, as opposed to what, oh I don’t know, how about commercials, or political parties, or ratings?
I am sorry; I fail to see the difference…

I must disagree with you on thinking that Science could even begin to fix what is wrong with our humanity or lack thereof.

Contrary to popular belief not many Churches these days do not stand for what He does

your disobedience to God.

why must there be evidence god exists? Just have faith.

i just have had many miracles

We are so bad at using our votes to get changes in place. That is why I want a person who is not for sell to the highest bidder if not one with faith in my God at least some one with Fear of Him.

I think that science would advance best if we let every one study and not limit it to only people who do not believe in ID.

i am sure you have seen charities that have did the same. should we stop helping charities aswell?

Tithing to god means looking after and taking care of the people in the lower classes to you, and it doesnt just mean in monetary terms, labour, time, even words - if done i nthe faith for God is Tithing to god. So whenever you are walking, and see someone hurt, or sick, always give them your ear - you dont have to tithe to the church - just to God.

It has been picked up and made to be something it was never intended to be.

I have seen people who doctors say are barren have children because of their prayers and faith in God.

Do we come up with policies that promote peace and good will among nations?
Yes most do.

Do we come up with policies that promote peace and good will among nations?
Yes most do.

I am part of a UN commitee tthat collects data on how we are doing this and we are improving sats every year.
We are trying.

Not from your friends, wife, or ex-wife or anyone you know, and it doesn't have to be the whole story, just the high lights of your "first hand" experience with it...

Yeah, I Didn't think so...

Consistently, my faith and the combination of it and my political views are questioned..

I would like to open this thread in order to redirect any questions

How bout' the love I have for this God is stronger than both?
Will you now claim to know what feelings I have for my God?

You boldly claim knowledge of my studies, claiming that my faith hasnt been challenged by other sources of wisdom? Other studies? My faith is constantly under attack, doll.

...lets say he worships Satan, or is into Scientology or belongs to the Cult of the Machine God?

If the candidate is qualified for the job, has the education, experience, knowledge and desire to lead a nation - then why should his choice of religion matter? In a country that is so diverse and full of many cultures and religions, how dare we say that one religion is right over another.

"Those who say that religion has no place in politics, does not know what religion is."

. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.
8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.

1. the science or art of political government.
2. the practice or profession of conducting political affairs.
3. political affairs: The advocated reforms have become embroiled in politics.
4. political methods or maneuvers: We could not approve of his politics in winning passage of the bill.
5. political principles or opinions: We avoided discussion of religion and politics. His politics are his own affair.
6. use of intrigue or strategy in obtaining any position of power or control, as in business, university, etc.
7. (initial capital letter, italics) a treatise (4th century b.c.) by Aristotle, dealing with the structure, organization, and administration of the state, esp. the city-state as known in ancient Greece.