Religion IS crazy!

[Chris45]

When I talk about liberties that we have obtained over time, I am referring to free speech, religious freedom, sexual and racial equality etc. Freedoms that do not infringe on the rights and freedoms of others.

Well, I think we have found some common ground here. And for the record, while I sometimes make tongue-in-cheek comments, eg about the 40 lashes, I basically agree with your views of the Muslims and their archaic sharia law and I certainly do not endorse their extreme and barbaric punishments. (However 40 lashes for people selling Richard Dawkins books does have a certain appeal. )

Do we do like they do in Singapore where corporal punishment is an accepted practice for such crimes? Maybe. In particular circumstances some form of corporal punishment administered humanely (if such a thing is possible) may be the right course of action.

Many "baby boomers" attended secondary schools where corporal punishment was used responsibly and would agree that it was an effective deterrent for misbehaviour ... it certainly worked for me! I had a maths teacher who used to strap any student who didn't complete the homework exercises he set. Consequently the highest grades I ever received in any subject were in his maths class. We all hated him at the time but when I look back now I see him as one of the most effective teachers I ever had.

I believe that a wide leather strap, not a hard cane, should still be available in high schools today for use by authorized teachers, and just the knowledge that it's there would deter a lot of the misbehaviour that is destroying the learning environment in today's classrooms. In the case of recurring and/or serious misbehaviour, obviously the underlying causes should be investigated rather than just escalating the punishment.

However the problem today is that many schools are now staffed almost entirely by women, many of whom strongly oppose corporal punishment under any circumstances and favour the "let's sit down and discuss this" approach. Added to that we have the current limp-wristed legal system that favours "soft sentences" and "suspended sentences", plus incompetent magistrates who rule that it is OK for hooligans to tell police to F*** OFF, and the criminal sanctions imposed on police who resort to imposing their own justice on deserving "suspects", etc. and you end up with the mess we're in today. How often have we heard of young hooligans grinning and high-fiving as they walk out of a court house after their slap-on-the-wrist.

I would like to know how Singapore's corporal punishment system is working for them. I saw a Malaysian caning on YouTube and it was very brutal and I'd like to know how effective it is, but not just from the bleeding-heart, leftist civil libertarians who just condemn everything but offer no realistic alternatives.

If as a society we come to the conclusion that allowing alcohol to be sold through liquor stores is detrimental to our society taking everything into account, then perhaps the intelligent answer is to ban the sale of alcohol through liquor stores.

Have we concluded that the problem is the sale of alcohol through liquor stores? I think many responsible consumers purchase their liquor from stores like Dan Murphy's and BWS because of the discounts they offer. Would you deny them that opportunity?

Given that most of the alcohol-fueled violence occurs after midnight, my understanding is that the problem is to do with the trading hours of pubs and nightclubs, and perhaps liquor stores, and their reluctance to restrict sales to their inebriated customers, added to the free availability of drugs in these establishments, perhaps even with their approval as part of some business arrangement with the dealers.

Do you agree or disagree and what solutions do you offer?

 

[CanOz]

Given that most of the alcohol-fueled violence occurs after midnight, my understanding is that the problem is to do with the trading hours of pubs and nightclubs, and perhaps liquor stores, and their reluctance to restrict sales to their inebriated customers, added to the free availability of drugs in these establishments, perhaps even with their approval as part of some business arrangement with the dealers.

I don't want to take this too far off topic, however it just crossed my mind that in Phuket Province in Thailand, the party just gets going after midnight yet there is little in the way of violence. Is this because there is a reluctance to cause trouble while in another country? Honestly, I've been to Thailand over a dozen times by myself, with friends or with my wife...I've not seen so many happy people drinking themselves completely stupid...maybe its the Buddhist culture?

 

[bellenuit]

Have we concluded that the problem is the sale of alcohol through liquor stores? I think many responsible consumers purchase their liquor from stores like Dan Murphy's and BWS because of the discounts they offer. Would you deny them that opportunity?

I was speaking hypothetically..... If as a society we come to the conclusion that allowing alcohol to be sold through liquor stores is detrimental to our society taking everything into account, then perhaps the intelligent answer is to ban the sale of alcohol through liquor stores. ...... and it was purely to differentiate between what might be an appropriate action consistent with our societal values (not allowing such sales) and what would be an inappropriate action (40 lashes to store employees)

Given that most of the alcohol-fueled violence occurs after midnight, my understanding is that the problem is to do with the trading hours of pubs and nightclubs, and perhaps liquor stores, and their reluctance to restrict sales to their inebriated customers, added to the free availability of drugs in these establishments, perhaps even with their approval as part of some business arrangement with the dealers.

That may be the case, but my postings on this thread have not been in relation to alcohol fuelled violence, but in relation to the threats from islamic fundamentalists which IMO are a separate issue. The threats are not in reaction to the issues you raised but are to enforce compliance with sharia law in a country that is basically secular and in which they are the minority.

Do you agree or disagree and what solutions do you offer?

Again, you may be right. It is not something I have paid much attention to as I have never come across it in real life other than through TV news items. I would not deem myself knowledgeable enough on the issue to suggest solutions.

 

[burglar]

I don't want to take this too far off topic, however it just crossed my mind that in Phuket Province in Thailand, the party just gets going after midnight yet there is little in the way of violence. Is this because there is a reluctance to cause trouble while in another country? Honestly, I've been to Thailand over a dozen times by myself, with friends or with my wife...I've not seen so many happy people drinking themselves completely stupid...maybe its the Buddhist culture?

I won't visit Thailand but ...

I do commend anyone who stops dreaming and just does it!
A Walter Mitty moment!!

 

[Chris45]

I don't want to take this too far off topic, however it just crossed my mind that in Phuket Province in Thailand, the party just gets going after midnight yet there is little in the way of violence. Is this because there is a reluctance to cause trouble while in another country? Honestly, I've been to Thailand over a dozen times by myself, with friends or with my wife...I've not seen so many happy people drinking themselves completely stupid...maybe its the Buddhist culture?

Good point! There are frequent alcohol related deaths and injuries there, and also in Laos, but mainly due to drownings and accidents I think, not the sort of sickening violence we have here, although:

"Australia has installed a consular presence at nearby Samui island to deal with the traffic in serious incidents: drug arrests, alcohol-related motorbike accidents, injuries from party activities, physical and sexual assaults, fights, spiked drinks, thefts, and ferry and boating accidents."

"Dr Nick Connor, who works at the Bandon clinic behind Haad Rin beach, confirms that drunkenness is the primary cause of disaster. “Hard drugs are difficult to get here. There’s been a crackdown. Heroin, cocaine, you just don’t see them."

"The worst thing I saw was a Thai guy violently kicking another man who was curled on the ground in a fetal position in the midst of drunk people, and no-one was stepping in to help"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/dark-side-of-the-moon/story-e6frg8h6-1226031381017

There is violence, but Asians tend to smile and laugh a lot, could that also be a factor along with the different culture and absence of hard drugs?

 

[DB008]

 

[cynic]

DB,

Thankyou for sharing yet another fine example of a pseudo scientist making bold declarations of ignorance.

If a person could demonstrate that there is at least one biblical passage that demonstrated the existence of scientific knowledge, millenia ahead of its rediscovery by the modern western scientist, would you be willing to entertain the possibility that there might be a lot more to religion than certain (not all) atheists would have you believe?


Would anyone here care to know of the error to which I allude? (An elementary understanding of biological and chemical concepts, coupled with analytical skills and an approach to enquiry that is devoid of cognitive bias, should suffice for this error's discernment.)

 

[Chris45]

Would anyone here care to know of the error to which I allude? (An elementary understanding of biological and chemical concepts, coupled with analytical skills and an approach to enquiry that is devoid of cognitive bias, should suffice for this error's discernment.)

I would certainly "care to know", or should that be, "like to know" ... I'm not quite sure what you mean by that question.

Would you please give us a few more clues?

 

[cynic]

Thanks for your interest Chris.

(It sure is nice to know that there's at least one member of ASF that is yet to place me on ignore.)

The next clue:

24 - 1 = 23

(Note the anatomical significance of those numbers and their presence in a certain biblical passage.)

 

[bellenuit]

Thanks for your interest Chris.

(It sure is nice to know that there's at least one member of ASF that is yet to place me on ignore.)

The next clue:

24 - 1 = 23

(Note the anatomical significance of those numbers and their presence in a certain biblical passage.)

So you think the Biblical myth of Eve being made from the rib of Adam has significance?

Why don't you quit the teasing and say what you want to say.

 

[cynic]

So you think the Biblical myth of Eve being made from the rib of Adam has significance?

Why don't you quit the teasing and say what you want to say.

Yes! Highly significant!

I am hopeful that others will be able to appreciate the true intent of this account!

As such I would prefer that others arrive at an understanding of it for themselves. That way it will be less likely to be dismissed out of hand (as has all too often been the case throughout history)!

 

[bellenuit]

Yes! Highly significant!

I am hopeful that others will be able to appreciate the true intent of this account!

As such I would prefer that others arrive at an understanding of it for themselves. That way it will be less likely to be dismissed out of hand (as has all too often been the case throughout history)!

Adam and Eve have been dismissed by the Vatican as mythology. Even Cardinal Pell said it on Q & A when he and Dawkins were on it together early last year.

Are you suggesting the story is true and if so, why?

(BTW, I can see why you think people have you on ignore. If it takes you 3 or 4 posts just to get to the point of what you are trying to say, then people probably couldn't be bothered interacting with you. We still don't know what you are suggesting in these series of posts).

 

[cynic]

Adam and Eve have been dismissed by the Vatican as mythology. Even Cardinal Pell said it on Q & A when he and Dawkins were on it together early last year.

Are you suggesting the story is true and if so, why?

(BTW, I can see why you think people have you on ignore. If it takes you 3 or 4 posts just to get to the point of what you are trying to say, then people probably couldn't be bothered interacting with you. We still don't know what you are suggesting in these series of posts).

There is truth expressed in a symbolic way within the account.

I understand the frustration that others experience in communicating with me, having experienced the same frustration when attempting to be understood plainly - hence my cryptic approach.

Thanks for persevering with me on this.

What is your understanding of the significance of the number 23? How might this relate to a process whereby a male might be transmuted into a female?

P.S. I have a fairly low opinion of the capacity of either Pell or Dawkins to engage in objective enquiry. Both of their respective religions (Catholicism and Science) deserve better representation.

 

[bellenuit]

There is truth expressed in a symbolic way within the account.

I understand the frustration that others experience in communicating with me, having experienced the same frustration when attempting to be understood plainly - hence my cryptic approach.

Thanks for persevering with me on this.

What is your understanding of the significance of the number 23? How might this relate to a process whereby a male might be transmuted into a female?

P.S. I have a fairly low opinion of the capacity of either Pell or Dawkins to engage in objective enquiry. Both of their respective religions (Catholicism and Science) deserve better representation.

Don't worry, I am no longer persevering. I don't intent to discuss this further until you get to the point. And BTW, in case your are leading to it in some way, the Bible did not say Adam was transmuted into Eve.

 

[cynic]

Don't worry, I am no longer persevering. I don't intent to discuss this further until you get to the point. And BTW, in case your are leading to it in some way, the Bible did not say Adam was transmuted into Eve.

Of course you're not going to persevere any further! You no longer need to! My last two questions directed you right to it!!

As to what existing translations of the bible actually say, on more than one occasion, I've observed conflicting translations of the same passages. It is important to bear in mind the timespan and chain of diverse societies through which this information has been conveyed.

My belief is that the passage in question was originally intended to convey something akin to the following:

"Through removal of an item from the 23 components of the man a woman was fashioned."

The ease with which such a statement could be mistranslated into things written in current day biblical texts will undoubtedly be apparent.

As in many historical and/or philosophical texts, numbers can provide a valuable clue, one that often survives the corruption of mistranslation throughout the ages.

 

[bellenuit]

"Through removal of an item from the 23 components of the man a woman was fashioned."

Actually the Bible refers to the removal of 1 item from a set of 24 components of this item that Adam had. 23 doesn't come into it other than as a left over quantity.

Perhaps you need to go back to the drawing board and reassess your mystical number 23.

 

[cynic]

Actually the Bible refers to the removal of 1 item from a set of 24 components of this item that Adam had. 23 doesn't come into it other than as a left over quantity.

Perhaps you need to go back to the drawing board and reassess your mystical number 23.

Please give due consideration to my comments regarding translation throughout ages and societies!

Imagine a medieval monk translating an ancient language equivalent of my statement!
There he is wondering what is meant by the removal of an item from one of 23 components of a man. Bearing in mind that he has no knowledge of chromosomes, said monk erroneously concludes that the statement must be in reference to the human ribcage after removal of one of the ribs!

 

[bellenuit]

Please give due consideration to my comments regarding translation throughout ages and societies!

Imagine a medieval monk translating an ancient language equivalent of my statement!
There he is wondering what is meant by the removal of an item from one of 23 components of a man. Bearing in mind that he has no knowledge of chromosomes, said monk erroneously concludes that the statement must be in reference to the human ribcage after removal of one of the ribs!

No, he wouldn't be wondering that. He can count his own ribs and know there is 24. So if the Bible said:

"And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.'" (Genesis 2:18, 21-23, NKJV)

... he would not be wondering what is meant by the removal of an item from one of 23 components of a man. He might be wondering what is meant by the removal of an item from one of 24 components of a man. Your statement is nonsensical. First you say he is wondering about the removal of an item from the 23 components of a man. Then you say that 23 is in reference to the ribcage after the removal of one rib. If you start with 23 and take away one, you end up with 22.

You have obviously screwed up on the significance of 23, something which the Bible does not refer to at all in that passage (unless you can produce some text that was mistranslated).

However, if you think all that Bible text is not in relation to ribcages, then spell out what you are saying. You are becoming tedious to the extreme.

 

[cynic]

No, he wouldn't be wondering that. He can count his own ribs and know there is 24. So if the Bible said:

"And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.'" (Genesis 2:18, 21-23, NKJV)

... he would not be wondering what is meant by the removal of an item from one of 23 components of a man. He might be wondering what is meant by the removal of an item from one of 24 components of a man. Your statement is nonsensical. First you say he is wondering about the removal of an item from the 23 components of a man. Then you say that 23 is in reference to the ribcage after the removal of one rib. If you start with 23 and take away one, you end up with 22.

You have obviously screwed up on the significance of 23, something which the Bible does not refer to at all in that passage (unless you can produce some text that was mistranslated).

However, if you think all that Bible text is not in relation to ribcages, then spell out what you are saying. You are becoming tedious to the extreme.

As to the significance of 23, did you fail to notice the inclusion of the word "chromosomes" in my medieval monk hypothesis?

Which statement is more nonsensical?

My claims that this passage is simply a mistranslation of an otherwise accurate account of the chromosomal constitution of mankind,

or the insistence of certain (not all) atheists that an ancient account, predating modern English by many millenia, can somehow retain sufficient integrity to be debatable on the exact wording of one of its modern English translations?

 

[Ruby]

As to the significance of 23, did you fail to notice the inclusion of the word "chromosomes" in my medieval monk hypothesis?

Which statement is more nonsensical?

My claims that this passage is simply a mistranslation of an otherwise accurate account of the chromosomal constitution of mankind,

or the insistence of certain (not all) atheists that an ancient account, predating modern English by many millenia, can somehow retain sufficient integrity to be debatable on the exact wording of one of its modern English translations?

Cynic - no, I had not failed to notice you are trying to draw a correlation between the remaining 23 ribs and the 23 chromosomes contributed by the male and the female, but I think you are drawing rather a long bow!! You are trying to manipulate data to fit neatly into your hypothesis.