Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?

User: Empath


Polls Created


Click through to message forum for reply and admin options.
Posted in Evolution Option on 2006-11-01 20:28:33

Sorry, but Creationism cannot be legally taught in US public schools in any science class.

This is more than opinion; it is the law.

Suzi Cue posted on 2006-10-01:

"Non of the choices as to my religion applied to me. I'm a christian (I'm a Jehovah's Witness.)"

Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians in the historic understanding of the term Christian. As such, that option will not be listed as it is a sectarian, "semi-Christian" group that is a religion in and of itself.

Posted in Jesus on 2006-09-10 03:15:08

Posted by God's Bass Player on 2006-06-01 19:59:43, "I believe you, but, I don't understand what that has to do with anything. I'm no science buff, but from my understanding if you make a clone it has to start out as egg and sperm and grow just like any other human being, not like in the movies where it's just POOF! Instant clone of somebody, exact same age and everything. And also, it may be the exact same DNA but that doesn't mean the 2 different people will think the exact same or act the exact same."

You are assuming Valer meant instantaneous cloning. Unless you can read his/her mind, don'tcha think that's a bit hasty of you?

"I guess I don't see exactly what that has to do with the bike analogy or about God making us... If you clone someone you didn't "Make" a human being, you just altered the way the person will look so that it will look like someone else..."

Firstly, michael7485 was talking about a, as you put it, "bike analogy," not Valer.

Secondly, you are mistaken. Dolly the sheep was a true sheep. Real sheep DNA means real sheep. If a human were to be cloned, the clone would indeed be a true human being.

"You haven't made a human any more than you do when you have sex and the woman becomes pregnant... the fact that the person was a clone has nothing to do with the way the person thinks, acts, ECT."

Again, you are mistaken. DNA, not souls, determine species.

"So, technically the person was still made by God, unless you somehow breathed life into it..."

God does not make human beings; that is purely sperm plus egg. In addition, you might want to learn what "breath of life" means. Historically in Judaism, it is the first breath a person takes. In Christianity, it means the imparting of an advanced rational mind, something no other species has.

A person is still a person even without an advanced rational mind. Folks in vegetative states are not suddently no longer people. They now lack a critical portion of what they are, but then again, so are those folks who live with an artificial heart.

The notion of what is called a "golem" in Jewish mystical tradition might be of great interest to you.

"How is that an 'Inaccurate statement?'"

Valer might be talking about the assumption of conception, which is indeed implied strongly in the post he/she is replying to.

"Are you just being a smart alec and referring to the fact that no one 'has' to put it together?"

First, did you read the DATE of the posts you are replying to? Sort of odd replying to a long-dead debate, really, though I assume you didn't notice that at first.

Secondly, yes, I think Valer's being a smart aleck. However, I think the reason why he's reacting negatively is because he is correct. "God making us" has no merit because we know perfectly well how humans are created. Back then, they had not a concept of "sperm + egg," so they came up with an answer the best they did.

"Because you know that's not what he meant..."

Can you read michael's mind?

"He's saying for it to be put together then someone or something has to do it, it's not just going to do it by itself."

I believe Valer recognized that, which is why he/she is saying God didn't do it. He's suggesting, correctly, that biology does it.

Now, as for the poll itself, it is quite biased. I'm embarassed that a fellow Christian would be so conceited and self-righteous to state the first question as it has been stated. The Pollster definitely needs to think long and hard whether he or she is truly walking Christ's Way or not.

Posted in Sex Education (in U.S. public schools) on 2006-09-09 21:28:51

Back when I was in high school, my first real health class that had a unit on sexual education was in 7th grade (over a decade ago). However, there were discussions about sex in earlier classes.

Honestly, I believe it primarily the parents' job to teach their kids, though public schools should also include the subject in all health classes. This is too important a subject, since a lot of kids, particularly young teenagers and pre-teens these days have never had "The Talk" yet with mom or dad. Sadly, this is often the parents' fault.

Sex Education should begin the first year of Middle School or 6th grade, whatever comes first, in health class. If some parents don't like that, then they should tell other parents to get their act in gear and get involved in their children's lives, which includes discussion about sex.

Posted in The TEN Commandments on 2006-09-08 18:31:40

gumball machine said, on 2006-09-01 19:41:47, "I am an athiest. I do not take the Bible literally, but I do believe that people should practice what they preach. That is why I made this poll."

You don't seem to understand what Christianity is, as you've made a great deal of mistakes in your assumptions. In addition, you've also made a number of mistaken assumptions of the intent of the Ten Commandments.

Commandment 1: Christianity believes in the Holy Trinity. You don't seem to understand what the Trinity is. The Trinity is, as defined, three distinct Persons equally of the same One Substance (homoousious, in Greek). That Substance is God, in which exists equally as Three Persons: Father, Son, Holy Spirit. God's Name is YHVH (Yahveh), which isn't the personal Name of the Father, but of the Substance (God). Thus, the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is the same: Yahveh.

Commandment 2: Jesus is God Incarnate via the Second Person of the Trinity (the Son). In addition, you forget that the Bible says that all humanity is in the "Image of God." Your understanding of what this prohibition therefore doesn't make logical sense. Image here relates to idolatry, which is mistaking the image for the real thing. It is worshiping the cross instead of the Person Who hung upon it, to give an example.

Commandment 3 (which you listed 4th): This is a ritual/holiness law of the Old Testament. Such laws according to Judaism were established to separate Jews from Gentiles, so that they could be a "light to the world." It was established to keep their religion pure and unstained; in other words, keep outside influences from changing it. Pagan religion at the time was quite different in terms of its worship, which the Jews thought to be non-special because it seemed to be all "lip service." The Commandment really is saying "honor the Sabbath by focusing on God primarily today, thanking Him for all goodness He has given to you." This is what is preached in Jewish synagogues and Christian parishes and churches today.

Commandment 4 (which you listed as 3rd): To use the Lord's Name in vain actually has nothing to do with swearing. In vain means "in falsehood" according to the dictionary and eptymology. Thus, if you promise something and invoke the Name of God in that promise, and fail to perform, you've used the Lord's Name in vain. Swearing using the Lord's Name isn't always in violation, but it can be if you are saying "damn" something when God would not Himself damn it.

Commandment 5 (which you listed elsewhere): Loving your parents isn't discussed in the Bible here. It is honoring them that is. To honor them is to respect them. You can disagree or not love your parents, but you must give them due respect for, it if weren't for them, you would never be.

Commandment 6 (which you have listed elsewhere: The Hebrew uses the word "murder," not just "kill." According to ancient Hebrew law, murder is the willing execution of a fellow person. It actually does not include the unborn or those condemned to death, thus it isn't a prohibition against abortion or capital punishment. Those are found elsewhere.

Commandment 7 (which you listed elsephere): The prohibition against adultery has only to do with the one you are legally married to, not with a girlfriend/boyfriend or fiance. The prohibition against sex before marriage isn't covered here but elsewhere. In addition, "cheating" is way too vague a term; you need to be far more specific.

Commandment 8 (which you listed elsewhere): Actually, the Hebrew here uses the word "kidnap." It means to steal people for sexual reasons. Theft of monies, property, or other personal objects is covered elsewhere.

Commandment 9 (which you listed elsewhere): This you got partially correct. It does have to do with telling the truth, but it was originally meant to do in courts. You were not to give false testamony. The prohibition of lieing is covered elsewhere.

Commandment 10 (which you listed elsewhere): Jealousy isn't covered here. What is covered is desire for things that belong to others with the intent to steal. Wishing for a million bucks isn't wrong, though if you rob a bank, then it is. Wishing you had your cousin's PlayStation II isn't wrong, but having the desire to take it is.

I would encourage you, before you make anymore potentially inflamatory polls or posts, to not act like those you do not like yourself, who prejudge you simply because you do not believe as they do. You are only throwing fuel on the conservatives'/archconservatives'/fundamentalsts' fire in that "oh Atheists are all godless sinners who have no morals and hate Christians."

You ask Christians and Jews here to not be hypocrites, but it is you here who is being hypocritical. Another bit from the Bible is agreeable by people of all faiths and beliefs: "take the log out of your own eye before you point fingers at the speck in another person's eye."