Does any religion matter at all today?

by Stox 16 Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:35 am

First topic message reminder :

I will be interested to read peoples thoughts on this question. Does any Religion matter at all today?

I cannot see that any religious church's or anything religious even matters today at all. The only true religion I have ever come across is, Money, Political Power, Land, and greed. all the things we are told they are against, this goes for all religions too in my view.

in fact all the faiths I have come across use all of the tools of money, political power, Land and greed to re-force there religious views on there followers. i have never come across any religion that does not use at least one of this tools to enforce there religious views on the people they are said to be looking after.

I have read over the years all the religious books i can find, and have yet too be moved by any of them. some have very good stories that have something in them for every reader. but their it ends for me. maybe someone can explain why any of this is so important today? as i cannot find anything within the books that states this is very important today or in the past. I myself have come to believe that religion has more to do with the thought of death or dying and the human need to believe that life goes on after death.

However, when we was all born we did not feel pain or come into being with some religious thought in our heads or a book in our hands did we? in fact we had know idea about religion at all? so only find out what religion we are when someone tells us that this is our religion? yet you would think we would all know this already if there was a god? So we only find out what our religion is after birth? or do you believe you know what you religion was before birth? (i did not) if someone told me i was a follower of Islam, I would of said OK at five years old. in fact they could of given me any religion and i would of said fine.

So religion seems to me, religion only matters a get deal more the older you get? so I am told, well if so its failing on me badly. so anyway, it matter more as you get closer to death then? so is this more to do with our human need for life to go on somehow? as we find it hard to believe that life comes to an end and we go into darkness of no mans land? just like before we was born?

I was told at about 6 years old by my mother that this was my faith. but in total truth my mother could of said any faith was my religion and i would of gone along with what she said. To me that was it, Its that simple then. i did not then think about anything religious till i was in the Army in standing in a street in the middle of green line in a war zone in the Lebanon. with both Christains killing, Muslims Killing, Catholic Maronite's Killing, Druze faith Killing, Jewish killing. at first wondering why they was all doing this? not for religion or faith but power and using religion to justify there actions. I remember thinking. just suppose these people had been given a different religion by there mothers. they would instead of killing as a Maronite gunman they would of been killing Maronite's as a Druze gunman?

So your religion is picked for you in my view and some even change it too. yet you would think if you know your god at your death. you should know who you god is before birth? but we do not. So does any of this really matter any more?

well i well be interrested to read your thought on this. its not about any one religion but all of them.

by oftenwrong Mon Feb 11, 2013 7:53 pm

He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.
Bible. John 8 : 7

by Guest Mon Feb 11, 2013 8:03 pm

oftenwrong wrote:He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.
Bible. John 8 : 7

I don’t rape children. I don’t cover up priests raping children. I don’t cover up cover-ups of priests raping children. I’ll cast the first, middle, and last stones, figurative stones all, any place, any time.

by polyglide Tue Feb 12, 2013 3:23 pm

I think people do not understand the first stone example.

God does not say you should accept agree with or condone any of the above, what I feel is meant is do not condemn others before considering your own faults, but does not say you should agree with their faults and henious behaviour.

by Guest Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:26 pm

The Washington Post
On Faith

Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony, barred from some duties, will help elect pope’s successor
By Associated Press, Published: February 11

[Text]

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/los-angeles-cardinal-roger-mahony-barred-from-some-duties-will-help-elect-popes-successor/2013/02/11/c1ddf3ea-7479-11e2-9889-60bfcbb02149_story.html

by oftenwrong Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:37 pm

Ephesians. 5:8-13
For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light.

by Guest Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:48 pm

Los Angeles Times Local

Mahony voting for a new pope rankles some Catholics
Cardinal Roger Mahony was relieved of all public duties amid revelations about his handling of the sex abuse scandals. But now he's one of 117 cardinals who will elect a successor to Benedict XVI.

By Teresa Watanabe and Richard Winton, Los Angeles Times
February 11, 2013, 7:50 p.m.

Nearly two weeks ago, Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez announced he had removed Cardinal Roger Mahony from all public duties amid revelations that he plotted to conceal child molestation by priests from law enforcement.

But Mahony on Monday found himself back at the center of church business, as one of 117 cardinals who will elect a successor to Pope Benedict XVI.

Manuel Vega, a retired Oxnard police officer who as an altar boy was molested from the age of 12 to 15 by Father Fidencio Silva, said Mahony would bring shame on the Catholic Church by going to Rome to vote.

"Mahony is going without clean hands. His hands are dirty ... from covering up years of sexual abuse. How can he be part of the conclave?" Vega asked.

Copyright © 2013, Los Angeles Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0212-mahony-pope-20130212,0,5122056.story

Mahony voting for a new pope rankles some non-Catholics also. Count me among the non-Catholics so rankled.

by KnarkyBadger Tue Feb 12, 2013 10:46 pm

My moneys on the fella from Sao Paulo.

by oftenwrong Tue Feb 12, 2013 11:02 pm

St. Valentine.
Patron Saint of Exploitation.

by polyglide Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:07 pm

There are wrong ones in every religion.

In fact the perverts and others actually use religion to further their own ends and have done so since time began and humans were involved.

Several religions have been established for the sole purpose of the exploitation of the gullible and others have taken over parts of the established religions for the same purpose.

by snowyflake Wed Feb 13, 2013 9:47 pm

Several religions have been established for the sole purpose of the exploitation of the gullible and others have taken over parts of the established religions for the same purpose.

Christianity is one of them...

by polyglide Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:19 pm

Christianity is based on the title and on nothing else, the fact that certain people who profess to be Chritians are anything but does not change the FACT.

by snowyflake Fri Feb 15, 2013 5:47 pm

Christianity is based on the title and on nothing else, the fact that certain people who profess to be Chritians are anything but does not change the FACT.

Christianity is base on the title.....what does this mean? It's interesting, isn't it, that Christians quite often dismiss the Christianity of other Christians by professing they aren't Christians.

the fact that certain people who profess to be Chritians are anything but does not change the FACT.

What does this mean?

Several religions have been established for the sole purpose of the exploitation of the gullible and others have taken over parts of the established religions for the same purpose

This was your statement to which I replied that Christianity was one of these exploitative religions. What does the following message you posted mean?

by oftenwrong Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:18 pm

Semantics is all. Christian behaviour towards others is not limited to believers in Christianity. At the same time, members of the Christian Faith can be remarkably intolerant of e.g. Gay couples or unmarried mothers.

by polyglide Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:56 pm

At last you have proved you are devoid of any real understanding of anything other than the infantile.

Christianity is based on the life of Christ, hence Christianity, get some three year old to explain it to you.

There are people in every religion who are there for reasons other than the faith they are supposed to uphold, that does not in any way change the original intention be it right or wrong.

by snowyflake Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:29 pm

At last you have proved you are devoid of any real understanding of anything other than the infantile.

Oh yeah? Well, so's your face!

by polyglide Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:38 pm

Now, now, Snowflake I was just beginning to feel sorry for you.

by snowyflake Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:30 pm

Oh polyglide there isn't an instrument in the world that can measure the amount of pity I feel for you. Smile

Are you autistic by any chance?

by polyglide Fri Feb 22, 2013 12:01 pm

If I were you Snowflake I would save all my pity for myself, with someone so lacking in the desirable as yourself any consideration for others would be unthinkable.

I would stop attempting to barter with me and find someone of your own grade if you can find anyone so low.

by snowyflake Fri Feb 22, 2013 2:40 pm

If I were you Snowflake I would save all my pity for myself, with someone so lacking in the desirable as yourself any consideration for others would be unthinkable.

I would stop attempting to barter with me and find someone of your own grade if you can find anyone so low.

You make no sense. Smile

As the moderator informed you, perhaps, sniping isn't the way to go. If you have something to add to the discussion besides "I'm right and you're wrong", we might have a reasonable conversation but you never bring anything to the table. You just snipe and tell everyone how wrong they are and post trite Christian platitudes.

So this will be my last post to you. You will have to try baiting someone else to get your kicks.

BTW nice Christian post. Smile

No wonder reasonable people are flocking to Atheism in droves. If that is an example of your christianity I'm glad I'm an Atheist. Smile

by bobby Fri Feb 22, 2013 5:17 pm

I don’t rape children. I don’t cover up priests raping children. I don’t cover up cover-ups of priests raping children. I’ll cast the first, middle, and last stones,
Your very quick in telling lies about what you don't do, what you do is to condone the rape mutlation and murder of uo to 504 civilian old women and children at the My Lai Massacre, one if not the worst atrocity commited in modern times. Commited by the brave soldiers of the American Army. So stop being a poxy hypocrite and stop throwing stones when you most definitely are living in a Glass house.

by Guest Fri Feb 22, 2013 5:59 pm

bobby wrote:
I don’t rape children. I don’t cover up priests raping children. I don’t cover up cover-ups of priests raping children. I’ll cast the first, middle, and last stones,
Your very quick in telling lies about what you don't do, what you do is to condone the rape mutlation and murder of uo to 504 civilian old women and children at the My Lai Massacre, one if not the worst atrocity commited in modern times. Commited by the brave soldiers of the American Army. So stop being a poxy hypocrite and stop throwing stones when you most definitely are living in a Glass house.

This post is libelous (underlined text), implying that I rape children, cover up priests raping children, and cover up cover-ups of priests raping children. If there are legal remedies available to deal with the person who has libeled me, I will utilize these remedies.

by Guest Fri Feb 22, 2013 6:07 pm

polyglide wrote:
If I were you Snowflake…

If I were you, Polyglide, I would stop sniping at Snowyflake now. A word to the wise ought to be sufficient. I hope you are wise.

by boatlady Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:07 pm

Goodness! Doesn't religion make people ill-natured?

by Guest Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:13 pm

boatlady wrote:Goodness! Doesn't religion make people ill-natured?

I don’t know. A male that disrespects an honorable lady makes me ill-tempered.

by oftenwrong Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:30 pm

"A male that disrespects an honorable lady makes me ill-tempered."

Have you verified the profile of 'polyglide' ROB?

by Guest Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:34 pm

oftenwrong wrote:
"A male that disrespects an honorable lady makes me ill-tempered."

Have you verified the profile of 'polyglide' ROB?

Why?

by snowyflake Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:04 pm

It's ok, Rock. I'll just stop talking to him. He just comes on here to bait people. He doesn't actually contribute anything meaningful to the threads.

by Guest Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:03 pm

Snowy,

Cool. If your harasser gets the message and ceases insulting you, I’ll let things stand as you’ve requested.

by bobby Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:10 pm

Rockonbrother said: This post is libelous (underlined text), implying that I rape children, cover up priests raping children, and cover up cover-ups of priests raping children. If there are legal remedies available to deal with the person who has libeled me, I will utilize these remedies
Not only are you a hypocrite, but are now showing yourself illiterate, read my post again, and you will clearly see I have said nothing about you raping children, or anyone else for that matter.

What I have exposed is how hypocritical you are despite your attempt to show yourself to be holier than though. You constantly come on these threads giving your worthless copy and pasted boring extremely long opinions, if indeed they are actually your opinions at all.

A while back when I pointed out to you a massive atrocity committed in Vietnam by US troops, you posted one of your usual responses which was to post almost every US act of congress and tried to justify what those US cowards had done, you even went so far as to say they had suffered massively and where retaliating. All they had lost up to the time of said Massacre (My Lai) was 5 soldiers and had only been in Virtnam for just over 1 month, yet you saw this as justification to rape Children, mutilate Children then murder them. They did the same to the women they found in the unarmed civilian village. I have attempted since to try to get you to admit to your misjudged loyalty and admit that what Charlie Company did was a barbarous act and that each of the perpetrators should have been tried and executed for the heinous crime they knowingly committed, now all you can do is to say that I am libelling you, when clearly I am not. I have said it before and I will say it again, I will not let you get away with your support fop what is possibly the worst atrocity committed by the US, and also to put a stop to your self righteousness when it comes to anything else such as a Scandinavian gunman who you condemned despite him having a mental condition, whilst you condone by your lack of condemnation the Killing, Raping and mutilation of up to 504 Vietnamese Village civilians. Roc You totally disgust me, and you couldn’t make me happier than to take your opinions stick them up your multicoloured arse and fart.

Why cant you show yourself to be more a man than those US soldiers of Charlie Company, and admit you are wrong, or is it that you don’t consider yourself to be wrong.

by Shirina Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:20 pm

I sense a thread lock coming on.

by snowyflake Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:28 pm

The My Lai massacre was a terrible crime but I'm pretty sure Rock didn't have anything to do with it.

You think My Lai was a one off? There are terrible things going on all the time in the name of war. We just don't hear about most of them.

by oftenwrong Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:31 pm

RockOnBrother wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:
"A male that disrespects an honorable lady makes me ill-tempered."

Have you verified the profile of 'polyglide' ROB?

Why?

Is that yet another question you don't choose to answer, ROB? It's not the best way to conduct a discussion, as you clearly understand from your other very full postings elsewhere.

by bobby Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:47 pm

You are quite right snowyflake, and it wont be the last. My point is that rockonbrother constantly posts his usual elongated condemnation for these atrocities, but had in the past made excuses for the dirty bastards who perpetrated the massacre, mutilations and rapes at My Lai. I can not see how he can condemn a mentally ill mans shooting spree, but make excuses for the scum at My Lai.

by bobby Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:53 pm

I sense a thread lock coming on.
And why might that be Shirina, I remember you taking a similar stance to Roc over the original discussion, even to the point of you condoning and making excuses as to the many attrocities commited by the US to Italian civilians after September 3rd 1944, when they where in fact Allies. I do hope your remark isn't an American thing Shirina although I must say I would be very surprised if that was the case.

by Guest Sat Feb 23, 2013 1:00 am

RockOnBrother wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:
"A male that disrespects an honorable lady makes me ill-tempered."

Have you verified the profile of 'polyglide' ROB?
Why?

oftenwrong wrote:
Is that yet another question you don't choose to answer, ROB?

No.

oftenwrong wrote:
It's not the best way to conduct a discussion, as you clearly understand from your other very full postings elsewhere.

Oh?

by Guest Sat Feb 23, 2013 1:00 am

Insofar as I know, as of 23 February 2013 at 1:00, no retraction of the libelous implication about me, authored by the person or persons that publish(es) hereon under the account name “bobby”, published hereon 22 February 2013 at 17:17, visible worldwide via the Internet (www: “world wide web”), has been published on this thread, on this board, or on this forum. I will continue to investigate legal remedies to redress this libelous implication.

by tlttf Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:01 am

Can't see an apology coming roc, having read the so called libellous posting I also can't see any personal attack, best of luck with your action (check with a solicitor first) though it could be just what a skint lawyer would want to chase. Do you ever answer a question without hiding behind continual drip of pointless pasting?

by Shirina Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:01 am

And why might that be Shirina

Why? Well, because this topic is fast becoming a free-for-all extravaganza of finger-pointing, blame-gaming, he said-she said, and resurrecting old arguments that are at least 6 months old. And speaking of old issues, Bobby:

I remember you taking a similar stance to Roc over the original discussion, even to the point of you condoning and making excuses as to the many attrocities commited by the US to Italian civilians after September 3rd 1944

I won't be baited. We already argued our way through this discussion ... and ...

I do hope your remark isn't an American thing Shirina although I must say I would be very surprised if that was the case.

It's not an "American" thing, it's an admin and global moderator thing. See my first sentence for reference and explanation. Considering that this is a very old argument, I don't expect that everyone will suddenly reach an amicable conclusion this time around if it hasn't been reached before - and - there's at least three different arguments (not really debates) going on at the same time, NONE of which have to do with the actual topic.

I'm not picking on you, specifically, Bobby, but when I see a lot of bickering and no real discussion, even my considerable patience and leniency are pushed to their limits. Nothing personal.

by Shirina Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:12 am

I will continue to investigate legal remedies to redress this libelous implication.

Rock, you know as well as I do that you only have a libel case if you can prove that the untruths written about you have actually caused you tangible damage. Since I don't believe that anything Bobby has posted will result in the loss of your job, a reduction in profits, threats to your person, harassment, arrest, divorce, social ostracization, or severe emotional trauma - much less a loss of reputation on this forum - legal threats really aren't the way to go. And good luck finding anyone who will try such a case given the complexities of international law (with three separate nations involved - US (you), Britain (Bobby), and France (Forumotion). So let's put this one to bed, shall we?

by boatlady Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:12 am

This discussion is becoming very ill-natured, and not particularly constructive.

by oftenwrong Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:13 am

Was a discussion that involved Religious conviction ever anything else, boatlady?

In the Officers' Mess, three topics are traditionally not discussed: Sex, Politics and Religion.

by Sponsored content