Venting

[Wselfwulf]

No probs, and cheers to you too.

[Celestialwolf]

Just so you know, it's not absolutely mandatory that you get married and have a family...

What ever happened to morals and integrity?

Morals are fine. . . For yourself. But it's reached a point where the "Moral Majority" are less interested in analyzing their own moral compasses and more interested in forcing their sense of morality on everyone else...

...I got the impression midway through it that you were sort of parroting something someone else had said to you...

...The one that stuck out for me the most was when you said you were self-centered. Trust me, if you were genuinely self-centered, you'd be too full of yourself to admit it, much less berate yourself over it...

First, I want to say that everything I said came from myself independent of what anyone else has said; everyone else seems to be complimenting me and I don't feel like I always deserve it. Also, "we are our own worst critics."

As for marriage, personally I believe that it's one of, if not the most important things we can do in this life, and frankly for the rest of eternity. While I'm not just going to go marry whoever, I do need to spend more time with the fishing line in the water, if you know what I mean.

As for morals, I guess I should have put ethics; but either way this nation was founded on Christian principles and that's why it's been so great for so long. The way things are going, I'm not sure how much longer we'll last. In case anyone was wondering, I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon). Hopefully I don't get any negative remarks for that.

As for being self centered; I just need to get out and serve people more. I already feel like I'm doing better but need to keep going. I've found it to be true that we are only happy when we serve others.

I don't think I need to vent anymore, I'm starting to feel better about things as I do what I know I need to.

Edit: Sorry Vagrant!

I agree with you in that I feel like life is too... controlled, predictable, and sometimes boring. Werewolves are my way of seeing things in a more interesting and entertaining way. I honestly wish I could be one (on my own terms), as weird as that sounds.

As I mentioned above, I just need to serve people more, and at the same time not be afraid to stand up for what I know is right. There is a group mentality, but if you're in the right groups that's not always so bad. We are what we surround ourselves with. I'd say more but I'm late to my next class...

[Terastas]

As for morals, I guess I should have put ethics; but either way this nation was founded on Christian principles and that's why it's been so great for so long.

It also seceded from a European nation that was also Christian.

I was hoping not to have to get into this, but I'll say it anyway. First, you can be a moral and ethical person without being religious. And second, just because someone insists that they are moral, ethical Christians does not automatically make it so.

Remember the crazy Christian woman on Wife Swap? If not, click here and just try and tell me with a straight face that's the true face of ethics and morality. Something I learned the hard way is that the more someone wants to tell you something without you ever asking, the less likely it is that what they are telling you is true.

I kind of figured you were Mormon since your profile says you're from Utah. I do have some issues with Mormonism, but I don't want to turn this into a religious debate, though I will say this: My advice about questioning someone's motivation in wanting you to believe such a thing? You can even apply that to Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism.

So again, my advice would really be to take some time to yourself and ask yourself where these feelings lie. Talk to yourself even if you can do it in privacy; you'd be surprised what comes out when you can listen to your thoughts coming out.

[Wselfwulf]

I have to agree. What are Christian principles? What's found in an old book? The reactionaries who indeed uphold these pronicples are precisely what keep many from greatness. A persons personal code of conduct almost always holds more merit than the silly and often barbaric laws of that religion.

EDIT: To justify this posts inclusion in the venting section, reactionaries make me very angry. .

[outwarddoodles]

Ehhh, my quick blurb on religion:

It's not the religion itself, Christianity is a commendable religion, like most all others.

It's the 'Christians.'

*scampers away*

[Vagrant]

I'd also like to add that I find it's hard to record ethics in writ tongue anyway, all that should ever be writ are guidelines, because they always get wavy and analogue around the edges, and if one follows a set of rules strictly then they're probably going to end up doing more harm than good.

Personally, my personal ethics system is based around a simple truth: Anyone can suffer, there's plenty of suffering in the World right now, it's not my right to add to it. It is ethical to do what one is able to to alleviate the suffering of the person or the people, but only within a capacity that they would willfully allow. And if possible, to restore some semblance of joy to those lives.

The thing is though, if that were followed to the letter, it could go awry, I could see so many ways in which that could be misinterpreted. This is why each person has to have their own variation thereof, they need to understand that it is wavy around the edges, it's not something that's easily quantified in words, and sometimes they just have to go with feelings, empathy, and more colloquially; their gut.

Ethics, to my mind, is a very three-dimensional thing, and something that one has to feel their way around. It's not something that one can carry a book or a ruleset around for and expect those hard writ rules to always serve them and help them act ethically, I don't think it works that way, and personally I think this is what may just be wrong with religious approaches. The Bible, the Qu'ran, or any religious text.

To my mind, such things are like taking a map into a maze that always changes, expecting the map to remain ever true, and believing full well that the maze never changes, putting complete faith in that map instead of one's own senses, observations, faculties, and feelings. Until one's life is restricted to that map, and they're lost in that maze forever.

I've locked horns with people like that, who think they're very moral because they follow what they consider to be a code of morals, but what irritates me the most is that I don't find such people to be very moral at all. Or at the very least, very ethical. And this counts for anyone who limits themselves in such a way. Frustrating interactions, those are.

[Gevaudan]

I'm merely Catholic by upbringing, but I'm more of an ethical monotheist. In other words, I follow my own morals based on my experience and knowledge, but I just use God as a justification for those. It a very relaxed and flexible way of looking at religion, and it works for me. It's my little balance between "secular" and "religious". I can have faith that something will be there for me, while also understanding that that very same something might also not work the way I want it too. It also lets me be tolerant of other people's beliefs/morals/opinions, probably more than I can say for some of my Catholic friends. Just because it works for me, however, does NOT mean that it would work for anyone else.

In the words of Immanuel Kant, "Have the courage to use your own reason!"

*scampers away with outwarddoodles*

[Wselfwulf]

Nothing wrong with whatever works for you, insofar as it does.

[Vagrant]

That's a very enlightened view, Gev, and I was wondering if anyone would bring it up. I do have one or two religious friends and they pretty much say the same thing, and they get frustrated when they meet someone who has blind faith in a system that isn't their own. In fact, what you've said there is similar to something my Grandmother once said, and it makes my heart glad to hear it.

I may raise some ire, here, but I really should've cited strong patriotism with religious texts as well, because often the results are the same. Having complete belief in what one's leaders have to say, to a fault in fact, is very much the same. The thing I really take umbrage at sometimes is when people set their free thought aside too much, using something as an excuse, as a crutch, to build their systems of understanding for them, because they're too lazy to. And they think that's alright just because someone important told them it was.

But I really should've stressed that if a person has their own system of ethics, their own understanding of reality, self formed perceptions of the World, then it doesn't matter what they believe. I think I came off a bit too strongly in my last post, so I wanted to come back and add this as an addendum. I simply have the greatest amount of respect for people who aren't afraid to form their own philosophies and structures.

[Celestialwolf]

It also seceded from a European nation that was also Christian.

Well, the difference is that the constitution actually acknowledged and upheld our God-given rights.

And, if anyone doesn't feel this was founded as a Christian nation:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -John Adams, Second President of the United States

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." -John Jay, 1st Chief Justice, supreme court, helped bring forward the constitution

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens." -George Washington, Farewell Address

I was hoping not to have to get into this, but I'll say it anyway. First, you can be a moral and ethical person without being religious.

Very true, but morals and general goodness came from God in the first place.

And second, just because someone insists that they are moral, ethical Christians does not automatically make it so.

Well, that can be said about anyone following anything. As people, we have ideas and standards and do the best we know how to live up to them, but nobody's perfect.

I kind of figured you were Mormon since your profile says you're from Utah. I do have some issues with Mormonism, but I don't want to turn this into a religious debate, though I will say this: My advice about questioning someone's motivation in wanting you to believe such a thing? You can even apply that to Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism.

His motive? Well, if you had a good thing you'd want to share it too, right? Remember he (and the rest of the members) were persecuted, attacked, killed, and driven from their homes. What could he have possibly gained from that? Because the gospel was restored through him, I have the plan of salvation so I can understand what this life is about. I'll try to decribe it breifly; you can agree or disagree:

Basically the plan of salvation is like this. Before this life, we all lived together as brothers and sisters as spirits with our Heavenly Father. We wanted to become like him, so he presented a plan in which we would come to this earth as mortals, gain expereince, and based on our descisions be able to come back to him. Both Satan and Jesus came forward. Satan volunteered to force all of us to successfully return to God but take away our agency; he wanted all the glory. Jesus came forward and offered to atone for our sins that we'd inevitably commit so that if we chose the right and repented we would be able to return to God; we would be able to choose for ourselves what we'd do and maintain our agency. Jesus' plan was accepted and Satan rebelled--him and his followers rebelled and were cast out of heaven.

The earth was then created, and Adam and Eve, our first parents came to the earth.

Now we're here in this life with a physical body with influences of both good and evil so that we can truly choose for ourselves who we will follow--God or Satan. In this life we need to live the gospel of Jesus Christ which is Faith in Him, repentance when we sin, baptism, recieving the gift of the Holy Ghost, and enduring faithfully to the end. If we do so, we will be exalted and be able to live with our families and our Heavenly Father forever and become like he is now.

That's what I beleive and I personally know it to be true. I know the restored gospel is true. I also respect everyone else's views.

I know this is too long; I don't like to argue for the sake of arguing but that's what I have to say in response to what we've been discussing.

[Wselfwulf]

And, if anyone doesn't feel this was founded as a Christian nation:

Your're picking quotes. Contrary ones aren't hard to find from other sources.

Very true, but morals and general goodness came from God in the first place.

I don't see many christians taking the line of supernaturalism these days, for good reason. Why is supernaturalism still alive? It makes me want to vent!

[Midnight]

.

[Celestialwolf]

I didn't want to keep going with this...

And, if anyone doesn't feel this was founded as a Christian nation:

You're picking quotes. Contrary ones aren't hard to find from other sources.

I quoted the founding fathers. 'Nuff said.

Very true, but morals and general goodness came from God in the first place.

I don't see many Christians taking the line of supernaturalism these days, for good reason. Why is supernaturalism still alive? It makes me want to vent!

Take it from someone who lives in a de jure theocracy: the separation of Church and State is one of the healthiest things a nation can do.

The government shouldn't sponsor or endorse any religion; nor should it remove all reference to religion from the public domain or restrict it from operating (as long as it doesn't harm anyone else).

[Wselfwulf]

I quoted the founding fathers. 'Nuff said.

But not all of them. And another thing that requires venting is 4chan lingo spilling out into all manner of place. Grr!

Sorry to throw it in there without explaining but you'd probably understand it better from a quick google rather than from me.

EDIT: I'm not steadfast on the american contitution but maybe check out the treaty of tripoli.

[Gevaudan]

OBVIOUS WARNING ALERT!

I know everyone here is trying to untangle the nuances and strands and bits of the other one's argument, but people get pretty angry when you pick a bone with their beliefs. Unless this banter stays at this level of emotion (and it's going pretty calmly, by the way), I suggest we let sleeping dogs (or wolves) lie, and move on. My spider-sense is tingling here.

END OF OBVIOUS WARNING. THIS WAS ONLY A TEST.

[outwarddoodles]

OBVIOUS WARNING ALERT!

I know everyone here is trying to untangle the nuances and strands and bits of the other one's argument, but people get pretty angry when you pick a bone with their beliefs. Unless this banter stays at this level of emotion (and it's going pretty calmly, by the way), I suggest we let sleeping dogs (or wolves) lie, and move on. My spider-sense is tingling here.

END OF OBVIOUS WARNING. THIS WAS ONLY A TEST.

Thanks for mentioning that, I've been considering stepping in and saying this for awhile:

This is a venting thread for a reason (not a debating one). Some vents are going to be veiwed as inappropriate by others, but that's simply the nature of this thread.

[Terastas]

His motive? Well, if you had a good thing you'd want to share it too, right? Remember he (and the rest of the members) were persecuted, attacked, killed, and driven from their homes. What could he have possibly gained from that? Because the gospel was restored through him, I have the plan of salvation so I can understand what this life is about. I'll try to decribe it breifly; you can agree or disagree:

He might have had a good idea, but he did two things to taint it:

1) Canonized himself ahead of schedule.
It was his claim while he was still alive that his role was equal to that of Jesus, if not greater.

2) Used his position as author/translator to excuse himself.
Joseph Smith was a polygamist. But he never said there was anything wrong with that; instead he wrote it right into the book as perfectly excusable, not much different from Henry VIII forming his own church so he could legally divorce. He was also racist and wrote into his creation myth his own definition of ethnic supremacy.

He might have started with a good idea, but by twisting it to his own benefit, the final result is nothing better than what he'd broken away from in the first place. Now the Church of Mormon (no offense Celestial) is run, endorsed and comprised almost solely of bigots and hypocrites just like Smith himself once was.

[/end religious rant]

[Baphnedia]

The only part to this that I'll add... and it's not against Mormons or any other religions specifically, is that every religion - atheists included - have their bigoted stupidheads. This applies also to any other group of people in the world. I think Frank Zappa put it best when he said "There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life."

[Gevaudan]

bigoted stupidheads

That made my day.

[Vagrant]

I missed that Baph had said that! Hm, do you read Ozy & Millie, Baph? That sounds like the sort of thing that Millicent would say, so that's all the funnier for it.

I'll try not to hijack the venting thread beyond that, though.

[Baphnedia]

I got compared to millie!

That made my day.

[Wselfwulf]

atheists included

not a religion damnit! Unless you want to semantically redefine religion.
Also ventworthy is people telling me nihilism is self-detonating. That get's my goat.

[Baphnedia]

[Celestialwolf]

He might have had a good idea, but he did two things to taint it:

1) Canonized himself ahead of schedule.
It was his claim while he was still alive that his role was equal to that of Jesus, if not greater.

False. You might be thinking of this quote (not written by Joseph):

D&C 135: 3
Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. In the short space of twenty years, he has brought forth the Book of Mormon, which he translated by the gift and power of God, and has been the means of publishing it on two continents; has sent the fulness of the everlasting gospel, which it contained, to the four quarters of the earth; has brought forth the revelations and commandments which compose this book of Doctrine and Covenants, and many other wise documents and instructions for the benefit of the children of men; gathered many thousands of the Latter-day Saints, founded a great city, and left a fame and name that cannot be slain. He lived great, and he died great in the eyes of God and his people; and like most of the Lord’s anointed in ancient times, has sealed his mission and his works with his own blood; and so has his brother Hyrum. In life they were not divided, and in death they were not separated!

2) Used his position as author/translator to excuse himself.
Joseph Smith was a polygamist. But he never said there was anything wrong with that; instead he wrote it right into the book as perfectly excusable, not much different from Henry VIII forming his own church so he could legally divorce. He was also racist and wrote into his creation myth his own definition of ethnic supremacy.

I don't want to get into polygamy, but to be brief; all throughout the Bible, when the Lord said it was OK, there was no problem with it. That's the difference--He has to authorize it, which it was in this case.

Now the Church of Mormon (no offense Celestial) is run, endorsed and comprised almost solely of bigots and hypocrites just like Smith himself once was. [/end religious rant]

That is pretty offensive, actually, but no different than the names everyone else is throwing out these days (so you must just be repeating them). It's sad that people who stand up for their beliefs despite the fact that others might not agree with them are labeled and marginalized as crazy religious kooks.

Oh well, I won't let myself get offended. It's not worth it. Terastas, I've always respected you on this forum for your good ideas and opinions; hopefully that respect can be mutual, and from here on out we can just agree to disagree.

[Terastas]

I don't want to get into polygamy, but to be brief; all throughout the Bible, when the Lord said it was OK, there was no problem with it. That's the difference--He has to authorize it, which it was in this case.

You're still making the assumption that the Lord actually did say that. It's circle logic: the automatic assumption that the Book of Mormon is the word of God because it says so in the Book of Mormon.

"Why not ask the wise old Bonboon? He knows everything. He told me himself."
~Franklin, Viva Pinata

Charles Manson said he was Jesus, but you wouldn't hesitate to question his claim, would you? So why not Joseph Smith Jr? Because he has the full support and belief of a bunch of racists/polygamists just like himself?

And yes, you can apply that to the Bible. And the Koran, and pretty much every other religious text that's ever been printed. Just because it's written doesn't mean it's true.