Author Topic: Religion chat anyone  (Read 10353 times)

chrono eric

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1161
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #120 on: February 17, 2009, 05:43:05 pm »
Also, didn't Columbus go crazy because that? I'm pretty sure he was thrown in jail for insanity.

That's interesting, I never knew that. I thought that he died in the New World? But if I were to wager a guess I would say that he probably had syphilus. Do any history buffs have any info on this?

It is perhaps particularly damning because it is thought that Syphilus originated in the New World. I'm not sure about the number of cases in Europe before Columbus' voyage, but it would be truly hilarious if he both discovered the New World and syphilus and then brought the bacterium back with him to Europe.

This is of course speculation, as many things can cause one to go insane. But syphilus is definitely up there on the list. I wonder how we would think of Columbus if this was confirmed?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2009, 05:50:04 pm by chrono eric »

ZealKnight

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1067
  • Loyal Knight of the Kingdom of Zeal
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #121 on: February 17, 2009, 05:46:29 pm »
My friend is a super history whore, and he wrote an essay about that i think.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #122 on: February 18, 2009, 05:48:31 pm »
About 50 years ago, there was a legitimate argument going around that animals such as dogs and cats weren't even conscious for one reason or another and thus there was a legitimate argument about administering pain relief to animals in veterinary medicine.

Sorry, Eric, I'm not quite sure which perspective you are arguing. Was there specific evidence (that is, an increased of knowledge) that put to rest these "legitimate arguments" and allowed ethics to develop into the form we are more familiar? If I had to imagine, I'd suppose that this might have taken the form of comparing the nervous system of animals and humans to indicate that they serve the same function.

If so, was that increase of knowledge fundamental to the current state of ethical treatment of animals in the western world?

Though to note, the debate (as I understand you to be representing it, but I might have misunderstood) existed far longer than just 50 years ago. For example, the Island of Dr. Moreau was quite controversial in 1896 because it contained scenes of animal vivisection. I believe John Locke wrote on the subject as well, in favor of animal rights, though for the life of me I can't recall in what works. Same with C.S. Lewis. The earliest animal rights laws I believe are from the 17th century as well.

Such things would not have occurred if the knowledge that allowed for ethical treatment of animals wasn't discovered until 50 years ago. But again, I'm not sure if that was what you were trying to argue.

I doesn't really contain the history of the people who believed/came in contact with god, if it did it would have to contain the Bible. It isn't about prediction, it isn't about any of that. Just you should live your life this way...

Yup. I became aware of the speed of light claim after a Muslim informed me of it. Unfortunately, individuals taking texts out of context is not limited to Christianity (or indeed, even religion; Erich von Däniken is a famous example of an individual using science in a manner that is rather unscientific).

That's interesting, I never knew that. I thought that he died in the New World? But if I were to wager a guess I would say that he probably had syphilus. Do any history buffs have any info on this?

It is perhaps particularly damning because it is thought that Syphilus originated in the New World.

Ah, good ol Columbian Exchange. There are a number of diseases that passed from Europe to the New World, and visa versa; syphilus is just one of them (though to my knowledge, it has been fairly conclusively traced to a New World origin. But again, this is all out of my area of focus).

Columbus was jailed for a time, but I don't recall anything about insanity. Failing health had him call for governing aid from Spain, but he was replaced instead. The replacement subsequently arrested him and sent him back to Spain for various crimes related to how he ruled (such as torture, I think). I believe the King released him without a trial.

If I am recalling correct, Columbus died in Spain of a heart attack (though I seem to recall it was caused by disease... suppose it could have been syphilus, but I haven't heard of syphilus causing heart attacks either).

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #123 on: February 18, 2009, 10:04:00 pm »
Let's be realistic here. All this yammering serves nothing but the will of the Unclean One. As I have always said, the Lord loves each and every one of us, and all He wants is for us to accept His love.

chrono eric

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1161
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #124 on: February 18, 2009, 11:03:14 pm »
If so, was that increase of knowledge fundamental to the current state of ethical treatment of animals in the western world?

Though to note, the debate (as I understand you to be representing it, but I might have misunderstood) existed far longer than just 50 years ago. For example, the Island of Dr. Moreau was quite controversial in 1896 because it contained scenes of animal vivisection. I believe John Locke wrote on the subject as well, in favor of animal rights, though for the life of me I can't recall in what works. Same with C.S. Lewis. The earliest animal rights laws I believe are from the 17th century as well.

The debate I was talking about was specifically limited to the field of veterinary medicine as that is, in the modern day, the field that directly relates to animal welfare - although I was aware of earlier arguments in favor of animal rights. I was distinguishing between the modern ethical viewpoint of medical practitioners and that of the general public, in an attempt to show that I do not believe that the current ethical views of the general public were influenced directly by scientific evidence, whereas the current ethical views of medical practitioners were. Is this a little more clear?

Ethics in veterinary medical practice were influenced directly by new knowledge on animal cognition, pain perception, etc. Ethics in the general public I think were greatly influenced by media. TV shows like Lassie, for example, preceded many people moving their dogs from the backyard to their home, and treating them like members of the family. This no doubt led to an increase in concern for the welfare of their animals and an increase in the quality of medical treatment for them.

However, I think that if there was one scientific achievement that greatly influences the publics view of animal rights today, it would likely be the discovery of the genetic code and the subsequent comparison of the human genome to other animals. This was a largely publicized achievement, and it for the first time really solidified the concept that mankind is not separate from nature, but we in fact share most of our DNA with many other animals. Ethics in the medical field have clear cut causes, but ethics in the general public do not. The only sure thing is that within the past 50 years the state of the perception of animal rights and animal welfare by the general public has greatly improved (with the greatest improvement occurring in recent years), and this paralleled both cultural changes and scientific advances.

Let's be realistic here. All this yammering serves nothing but the will of the Unclean One. As I have always said, the Lord loves each and every one of us, and all He wants is for us to accept His love.

What a truly compelling argument. I must say I am thoroughly convinced.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2009, 11:44:05 pm by chrono eric »

ZealKnight

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1067
  • Loyal Knight of the Kingdom of Zeal
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #125 on: February 19, 2009, 11:15:27 pm »
Let's be realistic here. All this yammering serves nothing but the will of the Unclean One. As I have always said, the Lord loves each and every one of us, and all He wants is for us to accept His love.

What a truly compelling argument. I must say I am thoroughly convinced.


If thats sarcasm thats a little awful when directed at a religion. If that's serious that makes you an idiot for caving that easily, you should have your own opinions. You see how your comment was uncalled for?

FouCapitan

  • Black Wind Agent (+600)
  • *
  • Posts: 626
  • Whatever it is, I'm against it.
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #126 on: February 19, 2009, 11:42:59 pm »
Let's be realistic here. All this yammering serves nothing but the will of the Unclean One. As I have always said, the Lord loves each and every one of us, and all He wants is for us to accept His love.

What a truly compelling argument. I must say I am thoroughly convinced.


If thats sarcasm thats a little awful when directed at a religion. If that's serious that makes you an idiot for caving that easily, you should have your own opinions. You see how your comment was uncalled for?

A sarcastic reply to a sarcastic comment is what I read.

KebreI

  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1607
  • A true man never dies, even when he's killed
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #127 on: February 19, 2009, 11:52:30 pm »
Let's be realistic here. All this yammering serves nothing but the will of the Unclean One. As I have always said, the Lord loves each and every one of us, and all He wants is for us to accept His love.

What a truly compelling argument. I must say I am thoroughly convinced.


If thats sarcasm thats a little awful when directed at a religion. If that's serious that makes you an idiot for caving that easily, you should have your own opinions. You see how your comment was uncalled for?

:lol: You guy don't even know who your talking about do.

chrono eric

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1161
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #128 on: February 20, 2009, 02:04:28 am »

If thats sarcasm thats a little awful when directed at a religion. If that's serious that makes you an idiot for caving that easily, you should have your own opinions. You see how your comment was uncalled for?


lmao is all I have to say for that. If you've read any of my other posts you should know what my viewpoint is.

EDIT: Originally I left it at that since I found your post incredibly ironic, but you (no doubt unintentionally) raised an interesting question:

What is alright when having an intelligent discussion about religion? Is sarcasm alright? Does the topic of religion have some sort of conversational bounds that one shouldn't cross? If so, then why? How is discussing religion different from discussing anything else? Because people hold it so close to heart? Because we don't want to offend people? How can we have a legitimate conversation about religion without the possibility of offending others?
« Last Edit: February 20, 2009, 02:13:16 am by chrono eric »

Daniel Krispin

  • Guest
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #129 on: February 20, 2009, 03:20:35 am »
Let's be realistic here. All this yammering serves nothing but the will of the Unclean One. As I have always said, the Lord loves each and every one of us, and all He wants is for us to accept His love.

What a truly compelling argument. I must say I am thoroughly convinced.


If thats sarcasm thats a little awful when directed at a religion. If that's serious that makes you an idiot for caving that easily, you should have your own opinions. You see how your comment was uncalled for?

:lol: You guy don't even know who your talking about do.

I think I do. And I don't think the Lord loves me at all.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #130 on: February 20, 2009, 08:02:09 pm »
Oh, but you're wrong, Daniel. The Lord forgives, and the Lord protects, all those who turn toward Him.

BROJ

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1567
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #131 on: February 20, 2009, 08:13:26 pm »
Oh, but you're wrong, Daniel. The Lord forgives, and the Lord protects, all those who turn toward Him.
Would you happen to be in a bad mood Josh?

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #132 on: February 20, 2009, 08:24:38 pm »
BROJ, your senses of perception are even worse than I realized. Next time you want to spoil someone's fun, I hope you won't think of me. Oh, and I forgive your trespasses!

BROJ

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1567
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #133 on: February 20, 2009, 08:33:22 pm »
BROJ, your senses of perception are even worse than I realized. Next time you want to spoil someone's fun, I hope you won't think of me. Oh, and I forgive your trespasses!
Sheesh... didn't know I was spoiling anyone's fun. A little kidding humor -- nothing serious. At any rate, thought I'd receive a little more courtesy than that, Josh.

ZealKnight

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1067
  • Loyal Knight of the Kingdom of Zeal
    • View Profile
Re: Religion chat anyone
« Reply #134 on: February 20, 2009, 09:05:11 pm »
You cant make fun of religion. You have to understand that people base their existence off of god. You basically calling into question their life meaning and motivation. You can't insult it. They have to become defensive, if not they lose mental stability and basically become eternally depressed. Seriously one guy in my community committed suicide because he lost faith.