notmyself Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Obviously people that have no respect for religious beliefs aren't going to have any respect for religious leaders no matter how they go to that position. Respect is not a given, it is earned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notmyself Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 So now we're bashing gays as if that has anything to do with spirituality. Almost everyone thinks their way is right, they are wiser than others, those that think differently than themselves are stupid or deluded. Obviously people that have no respect for religious beliefs aren't going to have any respect for religious leaders no matter how they go to that position. Looks to me like this thread has very much run it's course, how about we just let it die, the same topic will be raised again within a week or two. . . I think you have been incarnated. You seem very knowledgeable and wise on TV affairs. How long have you been a member? This topic never lasts long on the open forum. It is perhaps the displayed civility (on the whole) between members which has kept it going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StreetCowboy Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Obviously people that have no respect for religious beliefs aren't going to have any respect for religious leaders no matter how they go to that position. Respect is not a given, it is earned. My understanding was that everyone was worthy of respect, regardless of their position or performance, and respect, like violence, was a measure of the man with the respect, not the recipeint of that respect Perhaps some people have so little respect that they have to measure it out very carefully to their favourites SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Do I think I am wiser than a being who thinks they have been incarnated 14 times. Yes. Not only me but my dog too. Same can be said for the Pope and his newly appointed cardinal who thinks, " homosexuality as a "defect" that can be corrected with treatment," For what valid reason does a homosexual man seek to release his sperm inside another man ? I think Catholic priests might be better equipped to answer that question Ps: I am sorry to hear that you stopped having sex after you had your children . but not as much as your wife I am sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomSand Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 For what valid reason does a homosexual man seek to release his sperm inside another man ? I think Catholic priests might be better equipped to answer that question Yes, they probably would. However; I presume their perspective would be somewhat religious or spiritual in nature, and so, you'd find hard it to extrapolate the meaning without prejudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Obviously people that have no respect for religious beliefs aren't going to have any respect for religious leaders no matter how they go to that position. Respect is not a given, it is earned. My understanding was that everyone was worthy of respect, regardless of their position or performance, and respect, like violence, was a measure of the man with the respect, not the recipeint of that respect Perhaps some people have so little respect that they have to measure it out very carefully to their favourites SC Your understanding of respect is as flawed as your understanding of god. you are confusing civility with respect, Every person should be treated in a civil manner, but respect is earned. When it comes time to do your taxes, you take them to a respected accountant not the village idiot, I hope, But I equally hope you treat both civil. PS: some one said that, because some one was reincarnated an X number of times we should respect his knowledge. to which I reply. Just as soon as he can prove his claims of reincarnation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notmyself Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Obviously people that have no respect for religious beliefs aren't going to have any respect for religious leaders no matter how they go to that position. Respect is not a given, it is earned. My understanding was that everyone was worthy of respect, regardless of their position or performance, and respect, like violence, was a measure of the man with the respect, not the recipeint of that respect Perhaps some people have so little respect that they have to measure it out very carefully to their favourites SC Both respect and disrespect are in no way an ascribed attribute as they are both born of knowledge. One cannot say they respect a person who the have no information of and cannot disrespect them for exactly the same reason. Without knowledge one can only be neutral in not respecting or disrespecting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wym Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I think you have been incarnated. You seem very knowledgeable and wise on TV affairs. How long have you been a member? Hundreds of lifetimes; yes I am the very embodiment of reincarnation, wise enough long ago to stop returning, but continue to do so in the hope of enlightening those poor souls trapped in the suffering of the cycles of desire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 For what valid reason does a homosexual man seek to release his sperm inside another man ? I think Catholic priests might be better equipped to answer that question Yes, they probably would. However; I presume their perspective would be somewhat religious or spiritual in nature, and so, you'd find hard it to extrapolate the meaning without prejudice. Do to recent revelations, I think their perspective might be a little more than spiritual in nature. wink wink PS: how about your stopping to have sex after children, do you care to comment on that??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) I think you have been incarnated. You seem very knowledgeable and wise on TV affairs. How long have you been a member? Hundreds of lifetimes; yes I am the very embodiment of reincarnation, wise enough long ago to stop returning, but continue to do so in the hope of enlightening those poor souls trapped in the suffering of the cycles of desire. Yet not wise enough to stay away from TVF your desire to enlighten others is one of the reason why you have not attain or is even close to attaining enlightenment as such I don't think you return by choice, but by random redistribution of the information that comprised your former self. so sad just an other poor soul trapped in the suffering of the cycles of desire Edited January 21, 2014 by sirineou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomSand Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 PS: how about your stopping to have sex after children, do you care to comment on that??? You must have misread what I wrote earlier. Please read again and ask your question again, in full, if still relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tw25rw Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Unbelievable arrogance. Do you really believe you are wiser than these two spiritual leaders?You'll be telling us next that you are more spiritual. I think you are deluded dude. On the subject of gos/afterlife/reincarnation, the opinions of these "spiritual leaders" is worth no more than that of any other man on the street, believer or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tw25rw Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Have you been drinking? Actually, I've read that Atheism could be a mental disorder. Studies have shown that Atheist are more prone to symptoms such as depression and suicide. We already know you've read, and believed, all kinds of nonsense. As for suicide, that may be true, I don't know. But it is in no way evidence of anything except that positive messages are good for the mind, especially when regularly reinforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) PS: how about your stopping to have sex after children, do you care to comment on that??? You must have misread what I wrote earlier. Please read again and ask your question again, in full, if still relevant. No I have not I have read your reply carefully and as I said before in this thread , "in debating never ask a question of which you don't already know the answer" You said and I quote: "Well homosexuality isn't very rational. The rational man knows that the reason he desires to release his sperm inside a woman is to fertilise her egg. For what valid reason does a homosexual man seek to release his sperm inside another man ? If you'd argue that the reasons, for homosexual relations, are to reach orgasm and to give each other pleasure; then I ask you this... If it's purely about stimulation of the physical senses, then logically, straight men would introduce their sons to such pleasures at the earliest opportunity. Do you think this appropriate ?" What you have done is employ a very common debating technique , where you attempt to inoculate your self from the obvious answer by later introducing a false premise , a technique that only a debating novice would fall for. back in my University days if I fell for such ploy, my debating coach would take out in the back yard and pistol-whip me The false premise is the qualifying term "purely" a term that did not appear in the body of your argument but only in your "red herring " closing argument A term that no one agrees to. Not to mention that the body of your argument contains many face premises that no one agreed to also, such as : -rationality of sex only for reproduction,- -reason for sex simply to achieve orgasm 5555 set up a straw man and then demolish him with a false premise. I must say well done PS; I just caught the opening line of your argument, ""Well homosexuality isn't very rational. but you don't close the quotes, now I am confused, are you arguing from the other side?? so many qualifying terms. If I misunderstand or you failed to explain properly please clarify. Edited January 21, 2014 by sirineou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notmyself Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 What about infertile heterosexual couples? But this is by the by and somewhat off topic really. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nayet Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Obviously people that have no respect for religious beliefs aren't going to have any respect for religious leaders no matter how they go to that position. Respect is not a given, it is earned. My understanding was that everyone was worthy of respect, regardless of their position or performance, and respect, like violence, was a measure of the man with the respect, not the recipeint of that respect Perhaps some people have so little respect that they have to measure it out very carefully to their favourites SC Seems you're confusing respect and tolerance. Everyone who practices their religion peacefully and without imposing it on others should be tolerated, but not necessarily respected. As someone else mentioned, respect is earned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wym Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 as such I don't think you return by choice, but by random redistribution of the information that comprised your former self. Actually this is pretty close to what I consider to be the way it works. Not sure about "random" though. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notmyself Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Everyone who practices their religion peacefully and without imposing it on others should be tolerated Tolerated is offensive. Edited January 21, 2014 by notmyself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomSand Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The rational man knows that the reason he desires to release his sperm inside a woman is to fertilise her egg. For what valid reason does a homosexual man seek to release his sperm inside another man ? If you'd argue that the reasons, for homosexual relations, are to reach orgasm and to give each other pleasure; then I ask you this... If it's purely about stimulation of the physical senses, then logically, straight men would introduce their sons to such pleasures at the earliest opportunity. Do you think this appropriate ?"________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The false premise is the qualifying term "purely" a term that did not appear in the body of your argument but only in your "red herring " closing argument A term that no one agrees to. Do you think there can be a spiritual aspect to orgasm & sexual pleasure ? Edited January 21, 2014 by RandomSand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomSand Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) What you have done is employ a very common debating technique , where you attempt to inoculate your self from the obvious answer by later introducing a false premise , a technique that only a debating novice would fall for. back in my University days if I fell for such ploy, my debating coach would take out in the back yard and pistol-whip me Did your debating coach ever mention that it might be best to avoid joining debates where you don't have a counter-argument or a point of view to put across ? Edited January 21, 2014 by RandomSand 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wym Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Do you think there can be a spiritual aspect to orgasm & sexual pleasure ? Obviously, it's one of the strongest primal forces known to man. How could it not be related to the creative forces? Tantric practices are among the oldest practices in yoga. It's really only the recent monotheistic organized religions that tried to control the sexuality of the masses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajab Al Zarahni Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Do I think I am wiser than a being who thinks they have been incarnated 14 times. Yes. Not only me but my dog too. Same can be said for the Pope and his newly appointed cardinal who thinks, " homosexuality as a "defect" that can be corrected with treatment," Well homosexuality isn't very rational. The rational man knows that the reason he desires to release his sperm inside a woman is to fertilise her egg. For what valid reason does a homosexual man seek to release his sperm inside another man ? If you'd argue that the reasons, for homosexual relations, are to reach orgasm and to give each other pleasure; then I ask you this... If it's purely about stimulation of the physical senses, then logically, straight men would introduce their sons to such pleasures at the earliest opportunity. Do you think this appropriate ? "The rational man knows that the reason he desires to release his sperm inside a woman is to fertilise her egg." This is the biological reason for this behavior but not the conscious reasoning of the individual. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomSand Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) "The rational man knows that the reason he desires to release his sperm inside a woman is to fertilise her egg." This is the biological reason for this behavior but not the conscious reasoning of the individual. I'm able to personally testify that your blanket statement is also not always true. Edited January 21, 2014 by RandomSand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Actually this is pretty close to what I consider to be the way it works.Not sure about "random" though. . . Not sure if it is random also, so far all the evidence presented indicates that it is, but I could be wrong It is my view that all that really exist is information, me and you and everything else are packages of information , when we discorporate , that information forms different relationships incorporating in to different forms, Perhaps the formula of the package of information that constitutes you, is what the soul is, and since information is indestructible so is the soul, but if that's true then everything has a soul. Now comes the crux of the problem and argument, is there an entity. actively orchestrating the mix of the information or is it a random event. Do you think there can be a spiritual aspect to orgasm & sexual pleasure ? First let me say that I am not debating you. I don't know you , and I am not sure if I understand your position properly, so please don't take it personally, Before I attempt to answer your above question please define your understanding of what spiritual means, Did your debating coach ever mention that it might be best to avoid joining debates where you don't have a counter-argument or a point of view to put across ? I do have a counter argument, I could probably argue with some degree of success both sides of the argument, But I cant present a counter point unless I understand your point which I don't. Is it your view that sex between two consenting adults is strictly for procreation? if you do then I can offer an opposing view. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkjames Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Other than the chance / fact / assumption that the OP and replying members live in Thailand, have visited Thailand or dream of doing so in the future, what does this topic have to do with Thailand? Perhaps on my way to church on sunday, i will visit the nearest wat and ask for an answer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notmyself Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Most all the posters so far are Thai Buddhist atheists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Other than the chance / fact / assumption that the OP and replying members live in Thailand, have visited Thailand or dream of doing so in the future, what does this topic have to do with Thailand? Perhaps on my way to church on sunday, i will visit the nearest wat and ask for an answer... If God created everything then he/she also created Thailand. but not that Suthep guy, the other guy created him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post wym Posted January 21, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted January 21, 2014 Actually this is pretty close to what I consider to be the way it works. Not sure about "random" though. . . Not sure if it is random also, so far all the evidence presented indicates that it is, but I could be wrong It is my view that all that really exist is information, me and you and everything else are packages of information , when we discorporate , that information forms different relationships incorporating in to different forms, Perhaps the formula of the package of information that constitutes you, is what the soul is, and since information is indestructible so is the soul, but if that's true then everything has a soul. Now comes the crux of the problem and argument, is there an entity. actively orchestrating the mix of the information or is it a random event. I prefer to imagine that the sum total of energy/information in the universe(s) IS God. Our mind/spirit/soul is PART of that, and we like to think more important than that of rocks and trees. There is just as much organization in this totality as there is among all the parts of my own body, certainly not random. But "actively orchestrating"? More that the component parts of the aggregate are creating an overall pattern, self-organizing. I can no more imagine an overall/central purpose for all this than I can truly comprehend this vision of the totality of the universe. But I'm OK to accept my ignorance and happy to live my life "as if" there is a purpose for at least my own little universe I've got going on here. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomSand Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Do you think there can be a spiritual aspect to orgasm & sexual pleasure ? First let me say that I am not debating you. I don't know you , and I am not sure if I understand your position properly, so please don't take it personally, Before I attempt to answer your above question please define your understanding of what spiritual means, Dictionary says "Relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things." " Who am I ? " ...you may have never asked this question seriously but I'm sure you already take the answer for granted. Is it your view that sex between two consenting adults is strictly for procreation? if you do then I can offer an opposing view. Yes of course people are having sex for many reasons... money, lust, love, ego, greed, shame, guilt, revenge, affection, kindness, escapism, fetishism, self-healing, self-harming, healing-another, hurting-another, occultism, shamanism, voodoo, procreation, recreation, etc. Edited January 21, 2014 by RandomSand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Actually this is pretty close to what I consider to be the way it works. Not sure about "random" though. . . Not sure if it is random also,so far all the evidence presented indicates that it is, but I could be wrong It is my view that all that really exist is information, me and you and everything else are packages of information , when we discorporate , that information forms different relationships incorporating in to different forms, Perhaps the formula of the package of information that constitutes you, is what the soul is, and since information is indestructible so is the soul, but if that's true then everything has a soul. Now comes the crux of the problem and argument, is there an entity. actively orchestrating the mix of the information or is it a random event. I prefer to imagine that the sum total of energy/information in the universe(s) IS God. Our mind/spirit/soul is PART of that, and we like to think more important than that of rocks and trees. There is just as much organization in this totality as there is among all the parts of my own body, certainly not random. But "actively orchestrating"? More that the component parts of the aggregate are creating an overall pattern, self-organizing. I can no more imagine an overall/central purpose for all this than I can truly comprehend this vision of the totality of the universe. But I'm OK to accept my ignorance and happy to live my life "as if" there is a purpose for at least my own little universe I've got going on here. Yea OK, not only I like this but I respect your intellectual honesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now