Once you guys are settled on the very nature of the supreme God himself (or themselves), which ever it comes out to be, perhaps you can concentrate on a question that really matters: festivus vs. christmas.
MMM
MeanMrMustard
JoinedPosts by MeanMrMustard
-
199
Trinitarians! Who is Jesus Christ's father the Holy Spirit or the Father?
by booker-t inthis is one question that trinitarians try to avoid because they have created a very embarrassing problem.
the bible is very clear when the angel tells mary that holy spirit will overshadow her and she will become pregnant.
the angel does not say the father will overshadow her but the holy spirit will and if the holy spirit is a person that would make him the father of jesus.
-
-
-
51
BREAKING NEWS ! Finland attacks judicial committees
by raymond frantz inthe finish minister of justice has publicly attacked the practice of judicial committees in her country which are in violation with the basic rights and freedoms enjoyed from citizens in her country .read the full article here :.
finland attacks judicial committees.
please like and share article so more get to see it!.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
The Universal Declaration of Human rights.. I see...This list, although containing some real rights, is peppered with entitlements, not rights.
Which "right" from above is violated by shunning?
Negative rights vs Positive rights. You have to be clear what a "right" is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXOEkj6Jz44
MMM
-
51
BREAKING NEWS ! Finland attacks judicial committees
by raymond frantz inthe finish minister of justice has publicly attacked the practice of judicial committees in her country which are in violation with the basic rights and freedoms enjoyed from citizens in her country .read the full article here :.
finland attacks judicial committees.
please like and share article so more get to see it!.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
I don't see this as a good thing at all. But this is Finland - I'm not sure what protections are awarded relgions. But even as an atheist, I worry about that precedent that it would set. And what are the "human rights" that are violated if a group doesn't want you as a member anymore?
MMM
-
199
Trinitarians! Who is Jesus Christ's father the Holy Spirit or the Father?
by booker-t inthis is one question that trinitarians try to avoid because they have created a very embarrassing problem.
the bible is very clear when the angel tells mary that holy spirit will overshadow her and she will become pregnant.
the angel does not say the father will overshadow her but the holy spirit will and if the holy spirit is a person that would make him the father of jesus.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Although I am no longer a theist, I find that the Trinitarian concept of the Biblical God is closer to that of an Unitarian. The WT flurts with "the Word" in John 1:1 as being qualitatively God, and yet, back away from the implications of that (WT 11/15/75, Insight, Vol 2 p. 54). In the end, however, I think the correct viewpoint is that having the correct model of the nature of God is not important. I don't find Trintarians deserving of damnation (as JWs teach) any more than Unitarians are deserving of damnation (as some Trintarians teach). I think the Bible is unclear for a reason - it doesn't really matter as a Christian.
MMM
-
55
Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.
by FlyingHighNow insign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.
if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.
that worked for me.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@GrreatTeacher: Now why would you say that?
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
So would you be OK with "Whites Only" shop signs, an if not what's the difference?
Personally, no. I think it is repulsive. And so does everyone else. They would go out of business. I don't like the government getting the camel's nose under the tent.
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Tell me the difference...
So you (a black man) have a publican refuse to take serve you a beer - so what? Why not go to another bar? Sheesh.
Are there laws preventing me from entering into the bar next door - which is glad to accept black men? In relation to the photographer, this does have religious freedom issues tied to it. But let's say it did not - that the photographer just hates gay people. In other words, she is just a bad person. What policy would be the best to maximize her punishment, while NOT punishing others? If the society does not accept that behavior, then the market will soon see that her business ends (or is badly hurt).
MMM
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
" For the same reasons Jim Crow laws bothered people."
Apples and Oranges - Jim Crow laws were laws originating with the state and local government, legislating the segregation. This is different than a personal choice. I do think these laws were a horrible choice, as they prevented the segregation from ending sooner.
MMM
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Good Lord.
For the life of me, I can't figure out why it bothers people. So you have a photographer refuse to take the job - so what? Why not contract with another photographer? Sheesh.
" While this case applies in New Mexico, does it mean that Joe Eldubwindowasher cannot refuse to wash windows on the Catholic church or the local military base?"
Perhaps. But the I wonder if the Catholic Church would even care to make such a fuss. This is really horrible. But, I am OK to have the Supreme Court staying out of it. At least people can move out of New Mexico.
MMM
-
55
Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.
by FlyingHighNow insign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.
if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.
that worked for me.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@EOM:
to mrmeans question, yes the healthcare industry is very wrong and corrupt. The profit is by unethical means and by hurting people than by helping people.
I agree to this. But not to the notion that profit, in and of itself, (even in the field of healthcare) is unethical. Having employer based insurance was first created by government wage and price controls, and is perpetuated by giving employers tax incentives to continue to offer it.
For example, our bodies are like machines, they require a certain amount of vitamins, amino acids, minerals, etc to function properly. A zinc deficiency can give you bad sexual side effects. A vitamin D deficiency will make you fatigue, etc. Almost all health problems are due to a deficiency or bad balance of nutrients.
Yes, I do agree to this too.
If you go to a doctor with a bunch of issues, logic would dictate that they would first run a complete nutrient panel to see if the symptoms may be due to deficiencies or overdoses in what your body needs just to function properly. But NOOO, not only will you have a hard time finding that, your insurance won't cover it either.
Right, the doctor can change larger amounts doing things that the insurance will cover. There is clear motivation for the doctor to do things he/she shouldn't be doing.
Also many people are allergic to foods and additives, etc, so logic would dictate having a food allergy test as well. Again, NO, insurance, etc, won't cover that.
Hmmm, some policies might. But that is beside the point. Again, I agree.
Why is that? Because the doctors will treat the SYMPTOMS NOT the cause. Why? Because if you identify the cause as a deficiency in a certain vitamin, you change your eating habits or get some cheap over the counter vitamins and you get better. The pharmacy companies would lose out on the pills they would prescribe for that.
Under what scenario would the doctor be more likely to do the right thing? I would say when the doctor is financially accountable to the consumer.
But it gets even better, the doctor then prescribes a pill instead of identifying the cause, and the pill has side effects, so you start off on one pill and end up on 10 pills to manage the side effects of the other pills.
I agree.
It still gets even better,,,,if you are taking psychological drugs, many of them will change your body and it will become dependent on them, trying to stop can be near impossible. Some take years to stop and suffer life long side effects.
I agree.
Why is there no cure for cancer? Because they make billions a year, they dont' want to cut off their money supply.
I agree. But I have a feeling a cure for cancer might be a hard nut to crack, so-to-speak. But the question I would ask is: what environment provides the most potential for profit while at the same time being consumer oriented?
If the healthcare industry was moral and not corrupt, then tests of vitamins and nutrients would be the starting point. If everything was checking out well there, then it would look into other matters.
Perhaps. I don't have anything against this. We agree on many things.
Also the FDA has allowed and continues to allow many foods, preservatives, additives, methods that are bad and dangerous and have bad long term side effects.
Abso-freaking-lutely. For the big government crowd - how does that make you feel?
So yes, the profit in the healthcare industry is wrong, the profit is tempting them to hinder and keep people sick to keep milking them for money. If the healthcare industry has their way, you will be reliant and live your whole life hooked on their pills.
They can only have their way with the help of legislation. A market would curtail that.
We agree on many things.
MMM