Trout

iTrader: (1)

are not the only religious extremists.

This couple prayed whilst their daughter was dying of an entirely treatable disease as they thought God would save her

Faith!

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

Yes, because we've never seen Chrisitians do exactly the same thing. The problem is any religion, not any particular religion.


M

Deep Singh

How about Jehovahs witnesses who would rather bleed to death than have a blood transfusion?

Scooby Hoo?

iTrader: (3)

This is an interesting article, however it doesn't give enough information to enable me to arrive at an informed opinion.
I would be interested to know form any JW Elders, out there, "Does the JW doctrine perceive Jesus Christ as the son incarnate of Yahweh or merely as a Prophet(good man, healer of his time)".
Am I correct in understanding that your current "Bible" is the work of one man
like the "Message" and therefore should not be taken as the "breathed word" from God as is the Christian "Holy Bible" perceived to be.
Kind regards Hugh.

Hysteria1983

The Christian Bible is not the work of one man, it is the work of many men, and over the many many years it has been altered and added to depending how the Men in power wanted to used religion to manipulate 'the people'.
It is a fictional book, and as far as I know th Bible is not the word of God, it is a series of stories that were documented. they are stories in which people have 'supposedly' been spoken to or had an 'experience' with God, or a messenger.
I believe in the Bible as much as I believe in any fictional book. It is not a book to look at as documented factual events.
Most if not all the stories were not even first hand documentations and in some instances were merely hearsay.

As for the op...... Religions all over the world have extremists who believe that there God will heal them before medicine, yet others prefer to seek help from from something they can actually see hear and touch. They prefer to choose medical help as you can see it work.
This is just one example of one religion where people choose to put lives in the hands of a God. It is not new or unusual.

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

Said it before but anybody with religious beliefs are brainwashed idiots in my eyes. I'd also say Jehovah witnesses who let their kids die because of their religions beliefs are worse than the 9/11 bombers

scatty

iTrader: (1)

mmmm obviously never went to sunday school as a kid.....

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

what's that got to do with anything?

what would scooby do

..that's where christian brain washing starts after your parents try to inflict their backwards views on you..

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

That is true to an extent although an intelligent person can decide their own mind and create their own views on such things. Often though the society those people live in restricts that somewhat.

Simon 69

The 'End of Days' fanatics can rival most extreme muslims... (no body belt bombs on retarded children or women yet mind)

DYK

Im not surprised at all hearing of a story like this now knowing it happened in America.These guys drink snake Venom in some churches and all kinds of crazy things in the name of God,as im sure most of you are aware.

The Chief

After visiting Texas a few years ago i can vouch that there is some feckin' nutballs over there and exremism is on both side of the pond. Some are just utterly brainwashed by the church.

What i couldn't believe is if you missed church for a week then you'd be ok, if you missed it for a second week old father rip rap would be knocking on your door demanding an explanation as to why you didn't attend.

Scooby Hoo?

iTrader: (3)

Yes you are correct, however my question was directed at the authenticity of the "Bible" as perceived by Charles Taze Russell which has not been colated by many people.
There are only two kind of people on this planet and we all fall into one of the category's
1. that you believe that the universe happened by "chance".
2. that it was created.
If it happened by chance there was No creation.
If it didn't happen by chance, then it must have been created, then by whom?
I fall into category 2, believing it was created.

TurboKitty

I went to Sunday School as a child, even though my parents are not religious. They felt I should see the options available and be allowed to make up my own mind.

In the most part, organised religion didn't make much sense to me even as a kid. I saw it as a means of control even then, and considered that anyone who needed a religion to tell them how they should behave had some sort of serious problem.

andythejock01wrx

Fair enough that you have your views and have given some thought about these issues (not everyone does!).

The two obvious questions are -

- Who made the creator or how did he come about?

- Wouldn't said designer that is capable of creating everything we know and listening to 6 billion prayers at once require to be every bit as complex as the universe he created, and therefore even more difficult to explain?

....awaits response relating to the fact we if we were able to understand such a creator he wouldn't be any good.

Incidentally, evolution is based on survival of the fittest by natural selection, as opposed to chance.

StickyMicky

People who live by religion = spackers.

Markus

So he thought he'd be putting the doctor before God. What did he expect his God to do to him for doing that, punish him? Hmm, I *thought* God was meant to be a peaceful loving God, not a vengeful God. Why would you want to place your life in the hands of a vengeful God who will punish you if you do not follow him. That is most odd to say the least.

I don't think it matters what religion you are, if you are cowed into doing your God's bidding through fear then you really do have a few other issues you need to deal with.

what would scooby do

What a statement !!!!!!











I prefer to use the word retard

andythejock01wrx

Don't agree with this, but it did make me think of Glen Hoddle's statement re disabled peeps paying for the sins of their previous lives. Nutter!

Trout

iTrader: (1)

However from a secular perspective, their actions are also illegal in most Western Countries, irrespective of their religion.

Scooby Hoo?

iTrader: (3)

If evolution is therefore based solely on survival of the fittest what instigated that? Chance.

We all make decisions in life some we would be pleased to do again and some we are ashamed of.
But trying to make informed decisions is more challenging.
Other wise we would all be going out with the same girl, driving the same car, living in the same house, get my drift.

Going back to the original post. The article makes no mention as to Dale Neumann financial circumstances, unlike the UK, health care in the USA is not free and has to be paid for up front not after (only if there's extras).

Now do I fix the child by selling the Scooby?

TurboKitty

Er, no, because we are all different and have different needs and desires. Therefore what is a good decision for one person is not necessarily a good decision for another. Plus the tastes and desires of an individual will change with time, and (for some at least) with factors such as fashion.

There are provisions for people who cannot afford to pay though, and according to the available information he didn't try any of those either.

Either way, I would hope I would value the life of my child above a car!

andythejock01wrx

Survival of the fittest is survival of the fittest, not chance. Do we need an instigator? I suppose the question is really whether everything has to have been manufactured by someone to exist. To my mind science doesn't fully explain everything, religion attempts to but fails.

busby330

In my opinion - having been brought up in a mainly Catholic family,

ANY religious book be it the Qaran, Bible, JV etc is FICTION.
I can see why some people prefer to follow relgion as it gives them something to believe in (as misguided as that sounds)

As for JV's not liking blood transfusions nor do real Rasta's.

In my opinion religion the OP stories like that have been happening for MANY years (its wrong and i agree) but nothing can be done about it as such, as say if Social Services were to get involved they would be classed as discrimanatin against that relgion.

Scooby Hoo?

iTrader: (3)

[QUOTE=TurboKitty;8858533]Er, no, because we are all different and have different needs and desires. Therefore what is a good decision for one person is not necessarily a good decision for another. Plus the tastes and desires of an individual will change with time, and (for some at least) with factors such as fashion.

Interest point but you are assuming that we are all different but survival of the fittest means that eventual we will all become the some as all others will not survive.


There are provisions for people who cannot afford to pay though, and according to the available information he didn't try any of those either.

Only if you are unemployed and have no other saving.

I'm so pleased that you would sell the car, you aren't a survival of the fittest type then.

TurboKitty

Scooby Hoo you are entitled to your own religious beliefs, but some of your arguments and theories are, at best, deeply flawed.

For one, it is not a given at all that survival of the fittest means we will eventually all become the same. And even if that were the case, your claim regarding decision making would apply only at this unknown point in the future.

How would selling my car to save the life of a child of mine imply I am not a "survival of the fittest type"? You are saying that if I fully supported the idea of survival of the fittest I would not get treatment for my child on the basis that if they die then they were not strong enough to live?

Maybe survival of the fittest in the current day and age also includes factors such as wealth and access to good medical care? After all, life expectancy of wealthy people in Western countries is far better than for poor people in Third World countries. Perhaps having money, for example, has become a part of what "fittest" means?

Geezer

Evolution is not survival of the fittest, it is survival of the genes that enable the host most suited to it's environment at the time survive. It's an important difference, as the sickly people surving Spanish flu in 1918 illustrates.

I would like to hear this guys views now that his daughter is dead. I'd like to think he would realise the folly of his ways, but I doubt it. He would probably say it was pat of God's great plan, so be it etc.

Of course, if God has a plan, why pray? It won't make Him change his mind.....

Obvious, really......

Geezer

Scooby Hoo?

iTrader: (3)

[QUOTE=TurboKitty;8858781]Scooby Hoo you are entitled to your own religious beliefs, but some of your arguments and theories are, at best, deeply flawed.
All arguments and theories can be debated and only facts can be proven. So only facts are without flaws.

For one, it is not a given at all that surival of the fittest means we will eventually all become the same. And even if that were the case, your claim regarding decision making would apply only at this unknown point in the future.
And your fact that proves me wrong is.

How would selling my car to save the life of a child of mine imply I am not a "survival of the fittest type"? You are saying that if I fully supported the idea of survival of the fittest I would not get treatment for my child on the basis that if they die then they were not strong enough to live?
I would surgest that emotion would have guided your thought process placing you above "survival otf type"

Maybe survival of the fittest in the current day and age also includes factors such as wealth and access to good medical care? After all, life expectancy of wealthy people in Western countries is far better than for poor people in Third World countries. Perhaps having money, for example, has become a part of what "fittest" means?

I would debated this in great length with you as diet and environment are major contribute factors not merely wealth..

Trout

iTrader: (1)

I think you need to understand what survival of the fittest really means. As another poster has stated it is at a genetic level.

Species with a wide gene pool usually have a better chance of survival. The reverse is very obvious, inbreeding creates an extremely narrow gene pool, a lack of variation that leaves the species population extremely vulnerable to external forces. These forces could be the availability of certain food types, mean temperatures, disease, etc.

The variation in the gene pool comes from mutation - simple errors in the creation of the genetic code that transfers into new form of protein. Most often the mutation will have no effect, or a negative effect. Sometimes it has a positive effect such as sickle cell, a recessive genetic state in African negroes that happens to provide some protection against malaria. It has a cost in that sickle cell itself can kill, but for those where it is only expressed recessively it has a beneficial survival effect.

Mutation comes from a variety of sources - simple transcription errors as cells replicate, radiation, chemicals and toxins.

These are all random, non-causative effects. Unless God is in guiding every molecule and every radioactive particle or radio wave!

An example of this in action in the human population is HIV - there is evidence that there is a very small proportion of women (sex linked gene?) that are completely resistant to HIV. This has not been isolated yet but in some populations will be a powerful selection criteria in the gene pool.