Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Ho! Ha ha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust! [Chat]!

12627293132100

Posts

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    alright this is my thing about lolr/atheism

    this isn't directed at anyone in particular because anyone in this thread that is 'religious' almost certainly doesn't infringe their religious beliefs on other people. I don't really comment on it much, I don't like smug atheists either. but I feel like most complaints are about atheists being rude and saying (often terribly) mean things. but whereas the fundamentally religious erode legal rights, limit the access of healthcare by young people and women, and generally make life as theocratic as humanly possible - like many legislations are doing on a state and local level in the united states, like abortion being almost or defacto outlawed in certain parts of the country.

    so, that's why i think smug atheists are so confrontational, even when your beliefs are just some internal thing you think about. i mean r/atheism is a reddit thing, where as the most vocal representations of religion are trying to make it so teenagers need to get parental consent to get birth control

    but it still sucks if someone is a dick to you for something you just think about in your head. but I can see why they're a dick in the first place. i don't know. thats why i don't bring it up usually.

    on the other hand, from my own experience I deal with religious fundamentalism and religious sorts being shitbags towards me on stated account of their religion pretty rarely!

    but r/atheists?

    dime a fuckin' dozen on the internet I go to, bro

    that's my problem there.

    i'd rather have people say mean things to me than be legally inferior

    but now I get both!

    cryingbaldeagle.gif
  • STATE OF THE ART ROBOTSTATE OF THE ART ROBOT Registered User regular
    Orrrrrr you gamble while drunk and win a load of cash!!!
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary Your Dark Descent FriendRegistered User regular
    evilbob wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Well that was a fun little period of being curled up in a ball trying not to think about hurting myself.

    Do not hurt yourself. I would be sad to see you go.

    You are a good man evilbob. Or to use an earlier affirmation, a good church.

    Nah I'd be more likely to go get shitfaced to stop thinking about it and gamble all my money away while drunk or something.

    Church of Scientology then.
    2ItqRJ7.jpgSteam/Origin/PSN: Corehealer / Core's Streamtastical Livestream (Streaming Wildstar Beta later this year).
  • AresProphetAresProphet giggle and the flames grow higher Registered User regular
    evilbob wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Well that was a fun little period of being curled up in a ball trying not to think about hurting myself.

    Do not hurt yourself. I would be sad to see you go.

    You are a good man evilbob. Or to use an earlier affirmation, a good church.

    Nah I'd be more likely to go get shitfaced to stop thinking about it and gamble all my money away while drunk or something.

    man's timeless coping mechanism
    no more need for the old empire
    when the indigo children come
  • ronyaronya hmmm over there!Registered User regular
    hrmm

    good news: I have finally managed to reproduce the results. kinda. sorta..

    bad news: I am le tired
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary Your Dark Descent FriendRegistered User regular
    edited May 2013
    evilbob wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Well that was a fun little period of being curled up in a ball trying not to think about hurting myself.

    Do not hurt yourself. I would be sad to see you go.

    You are a good man evilbob. Or to use an earlier affirmation, a good church.

    Nah I'd be more likely to go get shitfaced to stop thinking about it and gamble all my money away while drunk or something.

    man's timeless coping mechanism

    I prefer to cope with copious amounts of sleep, masturbation and artistic expression, with some meditation, tea, cooking and music. And the ever important application of video games.
    Corehealer on
    2ItqRJ7.jpgSteam/Origin/PSN: Corehealer / Core's Streamtastical Livestream (Streaming Wildstar Beta later this year).
  • ronyaronya hmmm over there!Registered User regular
    geth's sense of humour is unfailing
  • bloodyroarxxbloodyroarxx Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Im off to bed but before I go

    http://abload.de/img/convertyfs2l.gif

    Tell Cyclops,I made him a convertible
    bloodyroarxx on
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    alright this is my thing about lolr/atheism

    this isn't directed at anyone in particular because anyone in this thread that is 'religious' almost certainly doesn't infringe their religious beliefs on other people. I don't really comment on it much, I don't like smug atheists either. but I feel like most complaints are about atheists being rude and saying (often terribly) mean things. but whereas the fundamentally religious erode legal rights, limit the access of healthcare by young people and women, and generally make life as theocratic as humanly possible - like many legislations are doing on a state and local level in the united states, like abortion being almost or defacto outlawed in certain parts of the country.

    so, that's why i think smug atheists are so confrontational, even when your beliefs are just some internal thing you think about. i mean r/atheism is a reddit thing, where as the most vocal representations of religion are trying to make it so teenagers need to get parental consent to get birth control

    but it still sucks if someone is a dick to you for something you just think about in your head. but I can see why they're a dick in the first place. i don't know. thats why i don't bring it up usually.

    on the other hand, from my own experience I deal with religious fundamentalism and religious sorts being shitbags towards me on stated account of their religion pretty rarely!

    but r/atheists?

    dime a fuckin' dozen on the internet I go to, bro

    that's my problem there.

    i'd rather have people say mean things to me than be legally inferior

    but now I get both!

    cryingbaldeagle.gif

    to make it clear i am not being flippant towards your problems in this post

    i am basically saying i am in a position of privilege

    i have the privilege of living in a country where my rights are not under assault because of religious fundamentalism

    like there's nutbag conservatives in parliament but nobody listens to them and they're not a real policy influence

    there's no abortion debate in my country. there's no birth control debate in my country. not on meaningful, federal policy levels. gay marriage has been legal here for almost a decade

    downtown, sometimes at dundas square there's a dude yelling JEEEEEESUS IS THE LIGHT, REJECT YOUR SIIIIIN AND EMBRAAAAACE JEEEEEESUS and he is probably the jerkiest religious person I encounter in my daily life, and really only because he's loud and impolite and smelly and probably mentally ill? like i actually feel sorry for the dude

    but even some of my good friends have smug atheist tendencies. that's a fact of life in my social circles. so it's something that sticks in my craw more

    like i said

    it's a position of privilege

    but it's why r/atheists bug me more than Pat Robertson, in a daily grind kind of sense
  • wanderingwandering Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    As a kid, when I saw that the Bible was divided into "New" and "Old", I was immediately more trusting of the time-tested Old Testament, and leery of the newfangled New Testament, which was, no doubt, as bad as New Coke
    wandering on
    jBEKRTH.png
  • ronyaronya hmmm over there!Registered User regular
    I am so le tired, in fact, that I have no clue how he gets such nice p-values
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    broar link that gif ese
  • WinkyWinky Registered User regular
    I am re-reading the Jesus parts of the bible from the perspective of Jesus just being a philosopher who wanted to spread a message of mercy and forgiveness, and people just making up shit about him afterwards, and seeing if it fits.
    vspgsp.jpg
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.
    xlh6c3.png
  • AresProphetAresProphet giggle and the flames grow higher Registered User regular
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Well that was a fun little period of being curled up in a ball trying not to think about hurting myself.

    Do not hurt yourself. I would be sad to see you go.

    You are a good man evilbob. Or to use an earlier affirmation, a good church.

    Nah I'd be more likely to go get shitfaced to stop thinking about it and gamble all my money away while drunk or something.

    man's timeless coping mechanism

    I prefer to cope with copious amounts of sleep, masturbation and artistic expression, with some meditation, tea, cooking and music. And the ever important application of video games.

    This works too

    but usually, whiskey
    no more need for the old empire
    when the indigo children come
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    pony what you are saying also parleys very smoothly into separation of church and state, or refusing to legislate things based on religious beliefs
    sig.gif
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    wandering wrote: »
    As a kid, when I saw that the Bible was divided into "New" and "Old", I was immediately more trusting of the time-tested Old Testament, and leery of the newfangled New Testament, which was, no doubt, as bad as New Coke

    I wonder how many fundamentalists get started based on coca cola reformulations.
    xlh6c3.png
  • evilbobevilbob Registered User regular
    Orrrrrr you gamble while drunk and win a load of cash!!!

    I've done it before! Went to the pub with $10 and left hours later barely able to walk with $400 thanks to greyhounds. This is incredibly rare though.
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u
    sig.gif
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary Your Dark Descent FriendRegistered User regular
    Time for sleep. Good night chat.

    I leave you with my favourite job:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Diavrc2Htes
    2ItqRJ7.jpgSteam/Origin/PSN: Corehealer / Core's Streamtastical Livestream (Streaming Wildstar Beta later this year).
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.
    xlh6c3.png
  • evilbobevilbob Registered User regular
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Well that was a fun little period of being curled up in a ball trying not to think about hurting myself.

    Do not hurt yourself. I would be sad to see you go.

    You are a good man evilbob. Or to use an earlier affirmation, a good church.

    Nah I'd be more likely to go get shitfaced to stop thinking about it and gamble all my money away while drunk or something.

    Church of Scientology then.

    Basically dead here. Dead/dying pretty much everywhere in this country. It's pretty hilarious.
  • GoslingGosling Team Monica Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    So you know that xkcd 'Time' comic? The one that updated every half hour and then every hour?

    It's now Day 50. It hasn't ended yet. Day. Fifty.

    What in the serious fuck, Randall.
    I'm trying, through my blog, to break into the journalism industry. Any eyes and ears that pick up on any leads towards that end are greatly appreciated. PM me if you happen to hear anything.
  • AresProphetAresProphet giggle and the flames grow higher Registered User regular
    In this [chat] we learn that Geth is a gamblin' man robot overlord
    no more need for the old empire
    when the indigo children come
  • TavTav Registered User regular
    two of my friends have had to travel to a different country to get an abortion and received no aftercare due to Ireland's archaic, religious based laws

    basically what I'm saying is that I'm not voting for anyone who isn't a verified member of r/atheism
  • MadCaddyMadCaddy Riksadvokate Registered User regular
    evilbob wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    evilbob wrote: »
    Well that was a fun little period of being curled up in a ball trying not to think about hurting myself.

    Do not hurt yourself. I would be sad to see you go.

    You are a good man evilbob. Or to use an earlier affirmation, a good church.

    Nah I'd be more likely to go get shitfaced to stop thinking about it and gamble all my money away while drunk or something.

    Go to Hong Komg, participate in those organ lotteries ala X-Files. Or, before you get to that point, just gamble it up in plus EV spots to make something bad into something wonderful.
    League of Legends: SorryNotRly Steam: MMForYourHealth Hero Academy: MadCaddy
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.

    because it is wrong to operate only at that level

    you need to go one level deeper and say "okay if i didn't hold the religious beliefs i do hold, would the things i am about to tell someone still make sense?"

    if the answer is no then just fuck off until that person expresses interest in your faith

    sig.gif
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    News of the day:

    heavy rains as of late has brought up the question of what to do about the palace square, which needs to be repaired several times a year because rain washes away the gravel and leaves it awful.

    Debate is about whether or not using red asphalt instead would be illegal or not.

    Exciting stuff.
    xlh6c3.png
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.

    because it is wrong to operate only at that level

    you need to go one level deeper and say "okay if i didn't hold the religious beliefs i do hold, would the things i am about to tell someone still make sense?"

    if the answer is no then just fuck off until that person expresses interest in your faith

    nothing would make sense then, is what I'm getting at.
    xlh6c3.png
  • AresProphetAresProphet giggle and the flames grow higher Registered User regular
    Ok brain. I did all the right things today. I got up early. I got exercise. I worked all day. I did productive things.

    I drank a stiff whiskey drink and took an ativan.

    and you still don't want me to sleep

    What the fuck, brain?
    no more need for the old empire
    when the indigo children come
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.

    because it is wrong to operate only at that level

    you need to go one level deeper and say "okay if i didn't hold the religious beliefs i do hold, would the things i am about to tell someone still make sense?"

    if the answer is no then just fuck off until that person expresses interest in your faith

    nothing would make sense then, is what I'm getting at.

    even "don't do meth?"

    sig.gif
  • TavTav Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    News of the day:

    heavy rains as of late has brought up the question of what to do about the palace square, which needs to be repaired several times a year because rain washes away the gravel and leaves it awful.

    Debate is about whether or not using red asphalt instead would be illegal or not.

    Exciting stuff.

    In my "anything is better than studying" state of mind, THIS IS HIGHLY RELEVANT TO MY INTERESTS.
  • ShivahnShivahn Registered User regular
    My left hand is delicious.

    Apparently.

    To mosquitos.

    You aren't cute girls, mosquitos! Go away!
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.

    because it is wrong to operate only at that level

    you need to go one level deeper and say "okay if i didn't hold the religious beliefs i do hold, would the things i am about to tell someone still make sense?"

    if the answer is no then just fuck off until that person expresses interest in your faith

    nothing would make sense then, is what I'm getting at.

    even "don't do meth?"

    Yes. If I didn't have my reasons for why good is good and bad is bad, then nothing would be either.
    xlh6c3.png
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Tav wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    News of the day:

    heavy rains as of late has brought up the question of what to do about the palace square, which needs to be repaired several times a year because rain washes away the gravel and leaves it awful.

    Debate is about whether or not using red asphalt instead would be illegal or not.

    Exciting stuff.

    In my "anything is better than studying" state of mind, THIS IS HIGHLY RELEVANT TO MY INTERESTS.

    The argument is one of conservation - the palace square isn't gravel because it was a poor man's solution, it was just the way to make a palace square at the time.

    also that it can be solved by digging it up and having a cover with better drainage than the one there now.
    xlh6c3.png
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.

    because it is wrong to operate only at that level

    you need to go one level deeper and say "okay if i didn't hold the religious beliefs i do hold, would the things i am about to tell someone still make sense?"

    if the answer is no then just fuck off until that person expresses interest in your faith

    nothing would make sense then, is what I'm getting at.

    even "don't do meth?"

    Yes. If I didn't have my reasons for why good is good and bad is bad, then nothing would be either.

    most people are pretty comfortable with advising others based on what is likely to make them happy, letting that be 'good' for the purposes of discussion
    sig.gif
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.

    because it is wrong to operate only at that level

    you need to go one level deeper and say "okay if i didn't hold the religious beliefs i do hold, would the things i am about to tell someone still make sense?"

    if the answer is no then just fuck off until that person expresses interest in your faith

    nothing would make sense then, is what I'm getting at.

    even "don't do meth?"

    Yes. If I didn't have my reasons for why good is good and bad is bad, then nothing would be either.

    most people are pretty comfortable with advising others based on what is likely to make them happy, letting that be 'good' for the purposes of discussion

    Me too. I'm just saying that it doesn't actually logically follow.
    xlh6c3.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    like over the years i have had to confront some of the privileges i have in terms of the kind of people i am annoyed by versus the kind of people i don't meaningfully have to deal with

    for example: homophobes. outside of a brief couple spats in high school I've not really had to deal with a lot of egregious, meaningful, upsetting homophobia in my life. this isn't just because i am a hetero-leaning bisexual and thus simply have not had to deal a great deal with the complexities of public affection for another dude without fear, for example. i mean, that's certainly a factor, but it wasn't a very prominent one for me even in the case where the circumstances were such that it applied.

    there's a lot of factors in that privilege. there's the fact that i grew up in a pretty open-minded, non-judgmental homelife that didn't pressure homophobic morality upon me. there's the fact that i grew up in a fairly decently sized, cosmopolitan city in southwestern Ontario. there's the fact that my uncle came out when i was 11, forcing whatever holdouts in my family there might've been on the issue to confront the facts and get over it before i really meaningfully came to understand my own sexuality, so i never really feared reprisal or anything.

    there's the fact that my entire life i've been an aggressive, confrontational, at times outright hostile person with the physical strength and mental capacity to back it up if challenged. that sort of fierceness, that attitude, it's a privilege that for much of my youth i didn't appreciate as such. I didn't appreciate how good I had it in that regard, how I could kiss a guy in public and when he was like "there's all these people here", fail to understand what he was so concerned with. "They could harass us or jump us" he'd say, and I'd flash the kind of grin a sane person shouldn't bbe able to flash, and whisper "let them try", knowing i had a field knife strapped to my calf under my pant leg.

    Walking around with your balls on the outside of your pants like that and feeling comfortable with come what may out of it, that's privilege. It's male privilege, it's a sort of athletic privilege, for lack of a better phrase, it's a white privilege, it's a whole boatload of factors that it took me into my mid-twenties to fully comprehend i had.

    and for a while, it made me feel guilty for years of shrugging incredulously at the concerns and fears of other queers, and it made me better understand the sort of rebuke and animosity i'd face in the queer community for having it so much easier.

    but it is what it is, you can have privilege and not be ashamed of it so long as you're not a prick about it and understand what others don't got versus what you do
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    also tav that is the exact reason why I am even reading this article.
    xlh6c3.png
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    A large amount of people who are stopped from comitting suicide by something won't try again. It's often very much a thing of the moment.

    Which is something we should strive to avoid people doing. Not just through dissuasion but from tackling them so they don't swallow the pills kind of deal. We
    Pony wrote: »
    Corehealer wrote: »
    I also use my beliefs as a religion in my fiction, but I explicitly make it the kind of thing that is not evangelical. So much so that the planet that the religion's female prophet and the bulk of her followers inhabit is outside of the Andromeda Galaxy in the void between galaxies and is neigh on impossible to find unless you have someone or something (like a specific religious text) to guide you there.

    Which I have also found is a hard sell for a religion because it goes against what a religion intrinsically is, belief wise; you want to show others the truth, the way to live. How do you do that if you don't spread the word? It's an interesting theme to explore in art.

    The way I see it, a person doesn't need to believe what I believe to conduct themselves in accordance with the principles I believe important.

    The reason they conducted themselves in such a way is of lesser (if any) importance to me when compared to the consequences of their conduct.

    By skillful means, by a practice in care and concern, a person can come to the same values I come to from a different fundamental ideology and I care not one bit about that

    The consequences matter. The results matter. The means are the means. The means only matter insofar as what becomes of them. This isn't saying throw caution to the wind, that the ends justify the means, but that the drive behind the means matter less than the means themselves, and the means themselves matter less than the result so long as the means and the result are things I think are right.

    So I don't need to "spread the word" of my faith. It's unimportant to anyone but me. However, the values I hold, the results of those beliefs, I think are secular results that people of many religions could arrive at, and do not in and of themselves require a religion at all to arrive at either.

    So, those I spread. Those I extol, even if I don't pull back the curtain and explain to anyone why I believe these things or how I come to believe in them. I think they have enough value on their own to stand under their own light, so I put them out there and people make of them what they do, and that is all they need to know to accept them or not accept them.

    If I have to quote my faith at you, if I have to explain the underpinnings of my religious beliefs and how they led me to this conclusion, in order to persuade you to view the underlying ethic or notion positive? Then I am failing to represent those virtues as the virtues I truly believe they are. I am failing you, and I'm failing myself.

    I don't necessarily apply this same standard to others, but I certainly don't find their arguments as palatable if they crutch about on their faith as an argument in and of itself.

    To me, that smacks of "This is good because I like it" instead of trying to argue an independent merit, and anything a person believes strongly is good both for themselves and others should be able to stand on its own merits.

    what kind of independent merit does those virtues have

    independent from well, reality as it is. Which is there the faith comes in

    I don't see how one can just go, these are good things, now I'll adjust my view of the world to fit that?

    You shouldn't do meth, for example.

    Meth's bad, m'kay.

    I can create what I feel is a pretty persuasive anti-meth argument (it consists largely of Lindsey Lohan pictures) without getting into say

    my religious beliefs regarding drug abuse

    that is unimportant

    My argument to you isn't reliant on it

    the argument has it's own independent merit

    that I have my own reasoning atop that is neither necessary nor important for you to understand

    if I feel you benefit as I benefit from sharing in being anti-meth, I should either be able to make that argument without relying on my faith

    or I shouldn't be making the argument to you at all

    well yeah, but if I earnestly believe that salvation comes through self-destruction, for example, then the argument doesn't have independent merit. Then I should, according to everything I believe to be true, let myself be bricked up inside the monastery wall.

    u can go do that man

    just dont tell me about it or try to get me to join u

    why shouldn't I? Everything about my world-view says to do otherwise is to do you a disservice.

    because it is wrong to operate only at that level

    you need to go one level deeper and say "okay if i didn't hold the religious beliefs i do hold, would the things i am about to tell someone still make sense?"

    if the answer is no then just fuck off until that person expresses interest in your faith

    nothing would make sense then, is what I'm getting at.

    even "don't do meth?"

    Yes. If I didn't have my reasons for why good is good and bad is bad, then nothing would be either.

    most people are pretty comfortable with advising others based on what is likely to make them happy, letting that be 'good' for the purposes of discussion

    Me too. I'm just saying that it doesn't actually logically follow.

    but do you agree that there's a more logical basis to advising people based on your assumption that they are interested in being happy and not being unhappy than to advising people based on your sincerely held belief that self-destruction leads to salvation?
    sig.gif
This discussion has been closed.