Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
General Religious Discussion / Re: Kama Sutra
« Last post by nogodsforme on Today at 04:46:10 PM »
Isn't the ratio of hunting to gathering like, 20/80? So the gathering women provided most of the society's food, built the home, made the clothes, organized the celebrations, had the kids, raised the animals, engaged in barter, and performed the religious rituals. Men were needed for hunting, some heavy lifting and to fertilize the egg once or twice a year. But other than that, women could run the community. And, since the men were off hunting or fishing for days or weeks at a time, women did run the community.

I noticed that was still true when I lived in rural African villages. Women were always working--hauling water, carrying firewood, washing, cooking, planting, weeding, pounding grain, shelling beans, feeding animals. With babies strapped to their backs for nursing.

Meanwhile men worked for a few hours a day in the fields, and then sat around drinking and talking while the women waited on them. Usually talking about how lazy and useless their wives were. Boys went to school and came home to play. Girls went to school and then came home to help their mothers with the endless work.

Once I asked the men what work women did, and as they listed chore after chore, they did admit that women did nearly everything. I asked them what the men did, and they said, with amusement, "We men sit and talk and make the important decisions."

Takes a lot out of you, all that heavy decision making. And a lot of millet beer or palm wine. ;)
Chatter / Re: Ferguson
« Last post by Nam on Today at 04:45:23 PM »
The District Attorney gave the perfect line in his statement about how the witnesses who testified against officer Wilson were liars. And yet, that's considered perjury but he's not seeking perjury charges. And some people wonder why many Americans don't trust law enforcement, or the gov't. It should have been given to a non-biased prosecutor.

Chatter / Re: Ferguson
« Last post by wright on Today at 04:39:44 PM »
PZ Myers posted this quote from King:
But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.

I think both PP and G-Roll made good points. There is a huge lack of trust in Ferguson and similar places, between the authorities and the citizenry. Until that's addressed comprehensively, things like this are going to keep happening.
is there more crime now than in biblical days, are people really less moral. we have more laws to break now eg jaywalking as above, we have a bazillion taxation laws etc.

I think we are generally more moral, eg seriously disabled & sick people do far better at least in developed countries today than they did in same location 1500 years ago.

so skep's claim we are less moral than in days of yore seems untrue.
Also, how does gods law apply to jaywalking? And what about insider trading?

His take on patent trolls would also be nice to know.
I am curious about where skeptic thinks his god comes down on a few moral questions. How do you know what your god wants, or what he thinks is moral? And how does god know what is moral? Does moral = good? And if so, good for whom?

So, skeptic (or any other theist) according to your god:

Is slavery (owning other people) ever okay? If it is sometimes okay, how should it be regulated?

What about masturbation--is there a godly moral guideline about that?

Is there an absolute godly moral rule or law that tells us what to do about rape?

How about hitting children who misbehave or talk back? Is that moral or not, according to your god?

Are there things that should never be eaten as food (human flesh, insects, shellfish, pork, beef, any animal products if the animal was mistreated) or is food not a godly moral issue?

And what about the death penalty? Is there any moral guideline where your god tells us when or whether it should be applied?

General Religious Discussion / Re: Kama Sutra
« Last post by Fiji on Today at 03:57:16 PM »
Also, in hunter gatherer societies men were, to an extent, expendable. Or at any rate, more expendable than women. Nature provides a slight excess of men anyway, 108 men for every 100 women. And that's in modern day societies where there's little structural hunger.
Data from modern times of hunger, such as several of the winters during both world wars, suggest that lack of food triggers an even bigger $ex ratio gap.

Tribes could afford to lose the occasional man ... women, those were too valuable.
When (hunting) technology got better, man refused to die as much. I figure that might have been part of the change.
Chatter / Re: Ferguson
« Last post by nogodsforme on Today at 03:56:19 PM »
It is so often some minor thing, one last straw that sets off the conflagration. People put up with all kinds of crap and then one small thing happens, and we lose our rationality. People  act aggressive towards an armed police officer, security guard, teacher, other authority figure and end up in trouble. Or dead.

I have done stupid things like that in my life. Seems to be human nature.  :(
General Religious Discussion / Re: What is the will of Jehovah?
« Last post by eh! on Today at 03:53:16 PM »
perhaps JB might explain her claim in more to detail to the disgraceful set of;  all theists + atheists = everyone on this site except JB

what other options are there beside believe or non-belief;

 partial belief, no opinion, undecided, avoid the question, confused??

what exactly is JB's position if it does not involve belief or not belief??
I like the categorization of atheists as smart, well-read, articulate and mostly wrong. That is almost the best definition of a scientist I have ever read. If that is who will end up in hell, I want to be there. We will argue, explore and discover while we burn for all eternity. ;D

Nobody learns anything without first being wrong. That is why good science is about trying to poke holes in your favorite idea. Holes are ways to make your ideas better; holes reveal areas for future research.

Bad science (or good religion) is holding onto your favorite idea as hard as you can, no matter how many holes get poked into it. Holes are just lies from unbelievers, tests of faith, tricks from demons, and so on. Heaven is likely to be full of ignorant, gullible, unquestioning and inarticulate people who accept as truth things that seem impossible, just because someone they respect tells them that is the way things are. Being around such people, even if they are right (maybe especially if they are right) would be tiresome.

A day in heaven with such people would seem like an eternity. :P
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10