• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cuchulain

  1. I stray off topic sometimes myself, I don't know why I find it so annoying in others when I have the habit too. I guess it's hypocritical, but now that I have identified the issue, I can work on that. Much good advice given on everyone's part, thanks.
  2. While I can certainly understand trying to examine the framework of the question, I feel personally like a person can reasonably read a question and understand its intent. Perhaps what I am lacking is that people view it with different intent, and so answer in a manner I find unsatisfactory. I can certainly agree with that, and apologize for any affront this might cause. If I understand you correctly, Mererdog, you are suggesting that in the future, if a topic is starting to go sideways that I would prefer to keep straight on, to ignore the post and hope it goes away? That is how it seems, anyway, let me know if I got that one wrong, as I might have.
  3. Mererdog, I can agree to a point with your sentiment, friend. But, I would say it IS beneficial to the rapist to take him off the street. I have a firm belief, and understand it is strictly my opinion, that when a person does harm to another, they also do harm to themselves.
  4. Nail on the head, friend. It does seem to me that the only logical explanation for dodging the question is that the person simply doesn't have an adequate counterpoint. Impugn the source, and the persons point must invariably fall apart eh? I too prefer the straightforward rebuttal, yet often find it lacking. Sometimes I even offer points that are lacking in that same respect, something I intend to watch for in the future debates. In another forum, I had someone try to persuade others about the validity of an argument I was making because I spelled principal for school, principle instead. They seriously thought that the spelling mistake negated the whole argument. Ah well, when lacking, attack the source.
  5. So, I notice lately that a lot of people, rather than answer a direct question, would prefer to nit pick about how the question was asked. It doesn't seem overly complicated to me, but maybe I am missing something? I would hazard to say that everyone I have communicated with on this forum seems intelligent, in my opinion; Intelligent enough to deduce from what is written what the actual question might be, yes? So if I ask a question hypothetically, why is it that it seems to be the phrasing or wording of the question that gets the rebuttal, instead of the actual point of the question? Sure, maybe I make a spelling mistake, or use a term that someone else might find objectionable, but which everyone can clearly see the meaning. Isn't it kind of derailing the topic to go off on a tangent about the spelling/grammar/political correctness of a question? I guess the obvious question in mind is the topic about bashing, and why Mererdog doesn't seem to want to answer the actual question posed. I am certain, or rather I should say it is my opinion, that Mererdog is smart enough to understand the question, despite my phrasing, yet that is what he focuses on. It isn't just that topic either, but others and other people who for whatever reason read a question, understand it, and instead of answering decide to nit pick. What is served? Why not answer the question at hand, instead of derailing? Seems to me easy enough to post a separate topic about the nit picked item, instead of tearing apart the thread that it is in, like I did here, yes?
  6. If there is a road built that shortens the trip from Paducah KY to Cape Girardeau MO, it benefits truckers a great deal. On the other hand, it benefits me very little, since I rarely go to Paducah. Therefor, it benefits some more than others, by nature. This is not a negative thing, of course, since it has no negative impact on me that I can see. That is speaking to the road itself, of course. Applying the increase in local economics and business, it seems like it might have some positive impact on my life in the end, eh? Maybe, in the end, it doesn't just impact one set of society positively or negatively, maybe we are all linked, if not in the metaphysical sense then in the economic sense, eh? What benefits some parts of society, then, would benefit the whole of society as a result?
  7. That is something I can definitely get behind, emalpaiz, and tend to think the world would at least be a kinder place if others would embrace that as well.
  8. You are still welcome to, Brother Kaman.
  9. Splitting hairs is sometimes the way to get to the "Scalp" of the matter, so to speak, yes? We start with a hypothesis, and someone challenges that by splitting hairs, in essence. If their hair splitting has the objective of seeking the truth of a matter, is it wrong? Maybe they turn out to be right, and you change your hypothesis, or maybe they turn out to be wrong, and they change their hypothesis. Either way, knowledge is gained by someone, yes? I can understand that arguing the difference between potato with potatoe is just silly, but debating between who has responsibility doesn't seem so minor to me to be called hair splitting, friend. Lots of legal precedents can be set on who has responsibility, and that can shift perceptions in many areas of our lives, yes? And legal responsibility can change dependent on location, like fence lines for example. If a tree limb falls over a fence, who's responsible? In some states, the person with the tree on their property. In others, the person who owns the fence, which may or may not be the same person. Maybe these little debates do seem silly at times, but I think that people thinking about this sort of stuff are the same people who come up with laws about this sort of stuff in practice.
  10. Dark side, Light side...both one side of the coin, I would say. Ultimately though, we are each responsible for our own actions, regardless of motivation. I could be firmly motivated to ram my vehicle into that jerk that just cut me off, but self control keeps me from doing so. If self control fails, do we blame the person I ram for my actions? Of course not, that is silly. Sure he provided the motivation, but I am still responsible for myself, yes? Although, looking at the legal system of today, I don't actually know anymore. Lots of people pawn off their responsibility successfully. I had a philosophy teacher once in college, who said the woman is responsible for getting pregnant because she knows the consequences, but of course he later argued the drunk is not responsible for accidents behind the wheel, because he was impaired at the time. I think they are both responsible, because they both know what happens in life. Which brings up the question, do you have to be aware to have responsibility? I don't think so. If a mentally handicapped person is playing with a gun and accidentally shoots someone, they are just as dead, regardless of if the handicapped person knew better or not. Just my thoughts of course.
  11. Yeah, I always heard the theories and thought them kind of demented, personally Of course, considering I am a Druid, it isn't really a stretch that I would believe the mythology over the sci fi, eh? I could see someone having the blood of the Celtic gods in them, considering our mythology is riddled with references of such, and our deities have always been very human in nature as well. Aliens? I don't buy that one, myself. Perhaps its just genetic mutation? Who knows the reasoning behind such, and I think personally that it's up to each of us as practitioners to decide for ourselves, much like you have done friend.
  12. I don't believe society is responsible for each of us, whether it be our successes or our failures. Sure, society can certainly aid in success or failure. My mom and dad divorced when I was five, I turned out fine. Other kids fall apart and become problems for society. The key to that is that divorce isn't the cause, like so many people like to claim. Sure, maybe the stats are there to support that theory, but I believe that one is not necessarily a function of the other, regardless of the numbers. I think it is all in people's upbringing and education. Some black kids make it out of inner city life, so the opportunity exists clearly for ALL of them to make it, in my opinion. However, the problem is that today's society wants to blame anything ELSE, when in all reality the ultimate responsibility for all actions a person takes is theirs and theirs alone. Everyone I know has a sob story, and could have used that story as an excuse to flop instead of succeed, but most of them persevered and prevailed. Some persevered and didn't succeed wildly, but still are not criminals and get by just fine. Others gave up and turned rotten. Just my opinion, of course, but people need to suck it up sometimes and realize they are in charge of themselves. I don't believe the ONLY tools for success are dispensed by society, or even that society gives us tools at all. It's all about personal choices, and if a person makes even one bad decision, that can have disastrous repercussions on the rest of their life and their ability to succeed. I think we teach our kids it's alright to get it wrong, but then when they do, they find out we were lying.
  13. Viewing my ancestry from the stereotypical light, I realize that I should be a drunken brawler, but I have never been drunk and extremely rarely have I gotten into a fight
  14. I am Scotch Irish and Cherokee, equal parts of all three, roughly speaking. It doesn't really factor into my traditional views of Druidry, although I will admit, I have adapted some Cherokee beliefs in with the Druidry that I practice. That is the wonder of eclectic belief systems, I suppose. I have heard others with the opinion that heritage is essential for certain pagan practices, such as Druidry and Witchcraft, but I tend to view such as hogwash myself. After all, there had to be a first at some time, eh?
  15. That is true, the possibility of new ecclesiastical evidence didn't enter the equation for me. Thanks for pointing out the should have been obvious
  16. So how does a change in policy measure up with past belief? This is something that I have wondered about, especially having had personal interactions with such happening. How does a person claim to believe a certain set of values, say a particular branch of Christianity, like this topic is about, then decide to change it? Do the old beliefs just not measure up anymore, or what? I am really curious about how this comes about. I can understand expediency, of course, but in religious matters, I would think that true belief would trump any expediency issues, yes?
  17. I understand that, and hope you understand I didn't mean my above statement towards you, or in any offensive manner. I respect your beliefs, and I know they are vastly different than mine. But, I think if you look at it per capita, the percentages would still heavily favor Christians taking quotes out of context, but since I haven't seen any studies on such or don't have any stats, I have to qualify that statement as pure opinion, of course.
  18. I, too, find it aggravating when people pick out one specific verse to support their points. Whether it be on the side of the bible or against it. Context is always important, but in all honesty, most people who pick out a verse to prove a point are Christians, and when you tell them the context of the verse and how that negates their point, they just tell you how the Holy Spirit says otherwise, or come up with excuses. Context. Look at the bible, with all the blood, murder and wrath, the injustices, and realize that it shouldn't be called "The Good Book". Just my thoughts.
  19. friend, I appreciate your opinion, but telling me I have my stupid hat on is just plain rude, don't you think? Think I am done with this topic...
  20. that is very true, but having spent a little time in those institutions, I can certainly attest that many of the Christian criminals are those who convert after incarceration, and that some of them just lose all those supposed values when they get freedom. I am not saying they are the only ones, of course, just saying that might skew the stats a little.
  21. just finished Lord Foul's Bane, somehow I never got around to reading Donaldson before now, and I loved that the main character is a leper. Also recently finished the wheel of time series, that was forever and a day waiting for those to come out. I found myself enjoying the writing style of Sanderson more than Jordan, which almost feels like a betrayal.
  22. If religious text is all they are receiving, I see it as a neutral benefit. Those studying such text are apt to reduce their own criminal involvement, at the least, if they believe what they are taught. But I think a good step further would be to send educational materials on a variety of subjects, not just those espoused by the jw. There are plenty of studies showing links between education and reduction in crime rates. I don't specifically know of any off hand about the reduction of crime rates with regards to the introduction of religious ideas, but I am sure someone could research such if they were inclined. Nix that, just tried looking for an hour about statistics of crime in countries with religious teachings, couldn't find much of anything.
  23. I could agree that god only penned the stone tablets...if they were around for proof. Or, if they were moved and relocated so often, if I could even come across the ancient shipping manifest that states they had the stone tablets in custody, but again...lack of contemporary evidence to back that one up as well. Of course, even producing the tablets, I would probably lean towards Moses wrote them himself in an effort to lend credence to his claims. Skeptic in me I guess.
  24. I have never gotten the straight answer either, Mererdog, but I realize of course that since it isn't my spirituality, I don't actually need a straight answer on that particular subject. I can fully respect wanting one, though. Johnathan, I agree for myself. As I said, I was speaking for someone else when I realized they are perfectly capable of speaking for themselves, my bad. If the Holy Spirit were indeed part of the Holy Trinity, and thus infallible, our interpretations of the bible would all be the same, wouldn't they? That's always been my take on it at least. I was simply attempting to view things from the other side for a while, like I do sometimes, and usually I guess that annoys people, eh? But I find that a person can learn a lot simply by trying to view things from other perspectives. Doesn't always work, of course, but I like to try anyway.