Submitted by timm on Tue, 09/26/2017 - 17:57
I see in the Mason Ho Down video you feature Koby Abberton, a shoplifter and a thug.
When will you stop supporting people who behave badly?
"Folauu and his ilk throw plenty of stones" I must admit I haven't been following the story all that closely, but to switch analogies it seems that Folau is more trying to warn people to get off the tracks before the train comes, rather than trying to run them down? Albeit from what I gather his execution has been shockingly tactless?
I can pretty much agree with everything else you wrote, Laurie, and absolutely you have the right to mock. A christian should expect nothing less (John 15:18 “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first."), but should turn the other cheek (Matthew 5:39-40 "... If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well."). Perhaps Folau should have read that last part before going to gofundme!
Lozza , interesting that Christian see humans as sinners......
then there are those who believe in the inherent goodness on mankind.....and that man is the answer to all problems.
This is where beliefs are different ,Falau quoted the bible to his followers. The media and PC /Gay lobby cherry picked the gay comments , making a mountain out of a mole hill , and here we are wasting our lives trying to convince each other of our beliefs/faith........for me the big question is whether you consider yourself an atheist or a secular humanist or???
So this has turned into a political thread and gets to have latest comments printed on the front page of the site? Very well.
WOL, Christianity was otherwise occupied during this time, as you will see:
(but yes they were far from acting in Jesus' teachings in other matters)
So blame the Christians for the dark ages...hmmm .......in a sense we as humans are approaching another very dark period in our history , as since the dark ages we have technologically raped the planet and economically gone into debt , where now it looks like there is a very big adjustment coming , which will mean billions of people need to be culled to continue mans great leap into the future.......so history serves as a reminder !
VJ, religious/worldview discussion = political discussion?
Politics and blame aside , hands up who thins they’ll be able to exist if the importation of oil into Australia was shut down ?
How long till things got very weird ?
Oil zombie apocalypse weird ? Max Rockatansky weird ?
interesting youtube presentation.....but his reason is fundamentally flawed in not taking into account , the roman empire raped pillaged/murdered /conquered and enslaved the whole free world.....then became christian, no wonder they Muslims were aggro...they had suffered 500 years of Roman dominance...
When yo know the history of when the Moors attacked the Iberian peninsula (spain and Portugal) , they actually brought civilisatin to Europe.....
A bit belated but no less appropriate to this thread and what seems to be floating around at the moment.
I don't mind Hildebrand, he can thread a sentence together.
Watashi wa metabo oyagi desu.
yeah Zen , how did you find the info??
Everybody should read and understand what Joe has said , then come back and discuss....https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/joe-hildebrand-a-note-to-those-...
I just remember reading it recently and thinking it was well written- those kinda things stick with me. I like the message he conveys.
I think Jesus would have been a pretty good bloke.
Go Fund me are a bunch of hypocrites.
They allowed that egg boy to raise funds after physically assaulting a politician https://www.gofundme.com/f/money-for-eggboi
But don't allow Israel Folau to raise money after posting some meme that he thinks certain sinners will go to hell (a mythical place that most of us obviously dont believe in) id say all of us fall into some group under his meme.
Doesn't seem to matter dude's already raised over $835K since last night https://www.acl.org.au/donate_izzy
Egg Boy didn't set up a Go Fund Me page. Someone unrelated did as a guesture.
Indo, GoFundMe are a private company and can do what they want.
Izzy's ramblings are against GoFundMe's stand for equality and diversity.
Not comparable those examples above..
No difference, i dont think if Israels mum set it up it would make any difference. (for all i know she did)
It's just more double standards again and again.
Totally comparable both should breach their standards.
It is important to note that Will 'Eggboy' Connolly gave all the funds raised (100k) to the families of the victims of the NZ massacre, not to help pay his legal bill.
Izzy wanted to raise $3 million to help fund his personal legal crusade despite legal experts claiming it will cost nowhere near that much.
Not a double standard at all. Cant see how that's argued.
Fact is, there's a very good chance that someone, maybe more than a few people, who work at Go Fund Me are homosexual. Why would they enable someone to preach hate at those people?
That's one argument: that their own employees have skin in the game.
Another is that they're a company with some modicum of ethics.
Lot of right-wing bloviaters are trying to make this a proxy war for free speech, but I feel they should've waited till the right cart came along. No chance it'll get up in court, all money gone, and the other side gets the moral high ground.
I'll give you some lee way with Eggboy, but people bringing up Sarah Hanson-Young's fundraiser to show double standards. They don't get it.
"We will all die one day, that's the way it goes.Then we rise and stand before the giver of life."
I have thought much on this, originally out of a sense of belief, later in life out of curiosity and philosophical interest. I get my kicks in strange ways.
For the first part, there can be no doubt, we are all headed for the end game.
The second part, well, that's more complex.
There is thousands of years of mystical experience that can inform us of what may happen 'after life'. The options are either nothing, or something. Suggesting that a 'being' (God or Christ or whoever) gave you life' is hard to accept, an entirely unfounded idea that is neither central to Christianity or any other religion, but is thrown around quite willingly. Nobody, not even God, gives life. Perhaps parents do if they want to be a little un-humble about things, but they are mere bystanders in reality.
Mystical experience from pretty much every religion and indigenous cultures suggests that the Christian afterlife model of heaven and hell is almost certainly the least likely outcome. Near death experiences rarely support the heaven or hell model, with a few exceptions. A much gentler experience is usually reported.
You can explore the Pascal's wager idea, that if the choices are an eternity in hell as one option or being a believer here in this life is the other option, it can seem an obvious good bet to go down the path of the believer. Of course then you have to reconcile that depending in which religion you believe in will see you in the hell of the other religion, so you had better make the right choice.
Pascal's wager then goes off to say 'what is the cost of believing in this life', and assesses it to be very small, 'perhaps going to church a bit, drinking a bit less maybe, or not at all depending in which sect you join up with, perhaps being a little less obnoxious'.
My argument with that is that I consider the cost as being huge, in that taking the 'belief' option requires one to abnegate the very thing that was gifted to you, that of having a capacity to develop an enquiring and curious mind. In going down the road of 'belief' in someone else's idea you throw away the very thing about you that makes life worth living, an examine life, an independent mind.
In other words, you have wasted your life.
Folau's current state is sad. He is not being oppressed, he is having his capacity to oppress others diminished.
Should it come to pass that the end game is fronting up to God or Christ to explain yourself before he pulls a lever that sends you to hell for eternity, you might want to remember a line of reasoning that goes something like this;
"Dear chap, you made me an imperfect being incapable of achieving perfection regardless of effort, and in that respect I was your perfectly imperfect being.
If you invented this game of life so that you could then divide us into the righteous and the unrighteous after the full-time whistle blows, based on which religion we believed in, then why did you make it so difficult to choose the correct religion? There were thousands to choose from, and given that the vast majority of humans who did believe remained within the religion that they were born into, doesn't that sort of mean the game was already rigged, that they were doomed from birth?
And should the punishment for choosing the wrong religion be an eternity in hell with unspeakable physical and mental torment, exactly what sort of demented God are you, and how dare you play your maniacal and vicious games on beings so rarely capable of higher thought?
Send me where you will God, but you made the rules. You should be ashamed of yourself."
Feel free to use that or your own variation on that theme.
I think there's a very good chance it will get up in court. You have to prove intent and proving intention to incite hatred is a very difficult thing prove.
(I just wanted to see if I could use prove three times in a sentence.)
Btw, do they still swear on the bible in court these days?
Apologies, just bored at work and engaging in some task avoidance. 24 months of getting smashed by deadlines leaves you a bit at a loose end when the deadlines stop coming at you.
Dont think the court case has anything to do with hate speech, does it? More to do with abiding by Rugby Australia's contract.
Zen, Code of Conduct Part 2
1.3 -- Treat everyone equally, fairly and with dignity regardless of gender or gender identity, sexual orientation, ethnicity, cultural or religious background, age or disability. Any form of bullying, harassment or discrimination has no place in Rugby.
And 1.7 -- Use Social Media appropriately. By all means share your positive experiences of Rugby but do not use Social Media as a means to breach any of the expectations and requirements of you as a player contained in this Code or in any Union, club or competition rules and regulations.
And 1.8 -- Do not otherwise act in a way that may adversely affect or reflect on, or bring you, your team, club, Rugby Body or Rugby into disrepute or discredit. If you commit a criminal offence, this is likely to adversely reflect on you and your team, club, Rugby Body and Rugby.
The task avoidance opened up a whole new realm of your insight, and I concur.
Be the best you can, be happy and at most times, keep it to yourself is my motto.
"...taking the 'belief' option requires one to abnegate the very thing that was gifted to you, that of having a capacity to develop an enquiring and curious mind. In going down the road of 'belief' in someone else's idea you throw away the very thing about you that makes life worth living, an examine life, an independent mind."
Batfink, the problem with that argument is that it's entirely possible to arrive at a faith by way of examining everying with an inquiring, independant mind (and to continue to test one's beliefs throughout life). Not everyone with a faith does so, and not everyone will arrive at the same conclusions, but it is possible.
Craig, seems that even if he could find an argument that he hasn't breached clause 1.3, clause 1.8 has him cornered due to the media/social uproar surrounding his posts "bringing the game into disrepute"?
[edit: typos fixed]
Hey, i don't agree with Izzy just saying that certain aspects of this circus have morphed into a two sided battle where one side is exercising their right to express religious freedom and free speech while the other side says it's inciting hatred.
Like always i think the answer lies somewhere in the middle. People underestimate the lengths some people will go to to defend their faith. That's why it's called faith- as skewed or as misguided as it is perceived, ya gotta have faith.
Izzy paraphrased and posted a bible quote, i can maybe see the discrimination angle but the bullying and harassment not so much.
btw, great post Batfink.
"In going down the road of 'belief' in someone else's idea you throw away the very thing about you that makes life worth living, an examined life, an independent mind."
Can I have an Amen?
Interesting that people focus on the gay bit of the meme.
Would this be an issue at all if it' didn't have the Gay line in the meme?
I think the question is not about his breach of contract but whether there is a right to free speech that would over ride it. Given that we have no bill of rights and no explicit right to free speech in our constitution I expect that he will lose, but I am not sure that is a good thing. It might be worth putting up with the odd Izzy-like idiot to ensure that journalists and others can freely express themselves.
Weren't we taught the three things not to be discussed at the dinner table, in polite company whatever- religion, sex and politics.
Maybe they should extend that to social media? Unlikely, ha ha.
I wish Izzy could have just shut up. Man that cat can roll.
Laurie, Batfink, Stu, do you honestly believe that belief must be disconnected from reason, that it always must arrive as a result of a lack of rational thought? That one can't arrive at belief "in someone else's idea" after carefully weighing up the alternatives and finding that idea the more plausible? I know the original context of the quote is religious belief, but generalising that philosophy seems to be untenable - absurd example: the programmer of a GPS unit must believe in another's idea (Einstein's general relativity), else his project would be pointless and baseless; does he throw away his independant mind?
My thoughts exactly pops, you just said it better than i could.
Liberal Party backbencher, Bob, discusses freedom of speech with Prime Minister Scott Morrison.
Backbencher Bob - Scott, do you reckon Izzy should be allowed to say whatever he believes, to whomever he wants, without any risk to his employment.
ScoMo - Well Bob, freedom of belief is very important to me. We will be looking at legislation to protect that.
Backbencher Bob - Oh, ok. Does that mean I can say what I like and I don’t have to keep toeing the party line?
ScoMo - Not if you want to keep your nuts attached to your body, Bob.
love it wally
Ha, no worries pops.
Can't believe noone picked up the irony in my post. Gonna have to try harder next time.
Pops, belief in Einstein's theory of general relativity is based on evidence from experiments that have been repeated many times and produced results consistent with the theory. More importantly the theory itself is inherently testable, belief in God is not. So there is no meaningful comparison. Faith is belief in the absence of evidence. History suggests it doesn't work out well.
BB, Einsteins theory of relativity was being used as an example in this context. Maybe what pops means you could take a myriad of ideas and that's what they all start at, simple ideas and either accept or refute them. An idea isn't static and I dare say a belief system isn't either.
BB , you’ve never had a faith based belief of any description ?
Nothing purely spiritual at all ?
zen I respect Pop's views and have always appreciated his contributions as thoughtful and respectful, but in this case, it was a poor example as he admitted himself. I hope the debunking wasn't too painful and that he will be back to clarify his position.
Ever taken acid and gone bushwalking? Spiritual might not be the word but some cool shit goes on in the depths of the mind.
Nothing like a good debunking. I get debunked regularly.
Ha ha as long as it's not from the top bunk zen!
Laurie, I'm round at my folks for dinner so don't really have time to post for now.
As you perceived, the relativity was an extreme example to provoke thought.
I guess the core of the point is that belief in ideas is a necessity. As you point out, different ideas have a range of testability/verifiability.
Though physical experimenntion is not the only way to test an idea (metaphysics, historical enquiry being others).
Also, thanks for the comment re my contributions; right back at you.
Have a good evening.
"I think the question is not about his breach of contract but whether there is a right to free speech that would over ride it. Given that we have no bill of rights and no explicit right to free speech in our constitution I expect that he will lose, but I am not sure that is a good thing. It might be worth putting up with the odd Izzy-like idiot to ensure that journalists and others can freely express themselves."
Never agreed more with something you've written Loz.
Except that piece you did about the power of negative thinking.
Thanks freeride, always nice to be appreciated.
Isn't it about 2000 year old thinking meets the modern (current world).
Have we not grown beyond the thoughts of men 2000 years ago?
Zen, re tripping and nature.
A long time ago, after ingesting a feed of fresh mid north coast gold tops I chanced by a large jacaranda tree . a tiny bit of foliage caught my eye, a small stem about 5 cm long with about 30 even smaller leaves racked in order on either side of the stem -you know the object. I stared at this " miracle of nature" for some time (cant say how long!) noting the individual minuscule veins in each leaf pulsing with life. Oh yes they did.
After this study I tuned around and contemplated the whole tree. - What a blast!!
I'm hearing you H20 nice story,
Never tried the shrooms, always wanted to.
But, many years ago I did a stint in FNQ. Never really liked tripping in clubs or even around other people but one day set off solo for a day trip in the rain forest. I remember it kicking in hard and I was just loving where my mind was taking me but one thing in particular stands out- I sat down on this flat rock looking towards a crystal clear babbling brook watching the Jungle Perch popping and just loving the sounds of the forest. All I had on was this kinda blue sarong (hope my bro doesn't read this, he has a thing for sarongs). Anyway, sitting cross legged and assuming the aum pose one of those giant iridescent blue and black butterflies, I think they're called Ulysses butterfly started fluttering around me. Maybe it was attracted to the colour of my sarong cause it was about the same. I watched it dancing around me then it landed on my knee and just stayed there, slowly and rythmically beating its wings. I swear, I looked into its eyes and it was looking back at me. We were staring at each other if that's possible? I just took in every detail of its form and how beautiful and how perfect it was. Something so fleeting and frail, something that had no earthly business wasting its time on me, but I'm glad it chose to do so. It seemed in no hurry to leave and I didn't want it to but after a while it took off, did a loop around me and fluttered off into the mottled light of the canopy and morphed into the colours. Then it was gone.
I was kinda channeling my inner Charles Lutwidge Dodgson that day and that moment (whether it happened or not) will stay with me forever.