Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Tuberload

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13
16
A City on a Hill / Re: The Fruit of the Vine (Poetry)
« on: October 23, 2009, 02:46:52 am »
I was going to just sit back in silent amazement and allow you to be king of the hill. I have however decided to clear up confusion…

There are a few ways I generally respond to a claim like this.

I was religious for 18 years of my life.  I sincerely believed in the existence of God.  However, in retrospect, his existence was never "clear" to me.  For this to be true, I require meaningful, tangible evidence.  This is why I gave up the belief: there is none.

Not really.  This is a form of argument from design.  Instead of regurgitating all of the counter-apologetics, here:

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Argument_from_design

I am sorry. However I was not attempting an argument from design, rather suggesting that contrary to what you know both my personal experience and the Bible of which has authority in my life says you are wrong. If God has not been willing to reveal Himself to you in the tangible manner that you require then I sure am not going to sit here and prove Him for you. Maybe you will be unsatisfied with this but I am just the carrier of a message. The rest is between you and God. My relationship with God and the evidence He has given me is more than sufficient for a continued walk. You see I am not trying to convince men with cleverly crafted ideas and human wisdom, I am trying to create a context in which one might encounter the living God. If that encounter should prove not to take place then I am going to move on and trust God in His wisdom to remain hidden.

Quote
I'm not sure if you were just quoting a bible verse verbatim here, but these are the kinds of accusations that really grind my gears.  I don't worship anyone's ideas.  I don't, in fact, worship anyone in the place of God.  I don't "choose" to not believe in God.  I am a type of person who naturally cannot believe in something that has no evidence.  It may have taken me 17 years to realize that there is no evidence for the existence of God, but when I finally did, my faith rapidly faded.

Please take a moment to grease your gears because you completely pulled an accusation out of what I said that was not there... I said individuals who would rather worship there own ideas... To further clarify my meaning, I see my main mode of worshiping God as seeking to know His ways and then walking in them as opposed to walking according to my own ways. Hence the worshiping of ones own ideas as opposed to the worship of God.

Evidence comes as a God given reward for faith. I am fine with your choosing to reject that. You don't choose not to believe...whatever. If that is your philosophy in life you can have it.

Quote
You seem to be making yourself into some kind of martyr.  Yes, I'm going to criticize your beliefs.  I think they're entirely unjustified, and you flaunt them around as if they're obvious facts and that everyone around you is silly for not realizing what you've so clearly convinced yourself of.

Are you suggesting that any atheist has never "really believed in God?"  I'm pretty sure this is a beautiful example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

An aside: what evidence do you have for the existence of God?  What arguments have you used to convince yourself God is real?  That Shiva, Zeus, or Allah isn't?

Where and in what way did I suggest you or anyone else is silly? Am I not allowed the same confidence as you demonstrate in the flaunting of your beliefs or would it be better for me to look at my feet and stutter? A martyr? Better yet a living martyr? All it took was a poem...so what exactly is your point?

In the way you are suggesting belief in God, no that was not my suggestion at all. Now if we want to use the Bibles definition for belief in God then yes, and if they truly did believe in God at one point then there is no hope for them because they have trampled underfoot the Son of Man and put Him to a public shame therefore making repentance, which is a gift from God, impossible for them a second time. In which case I am in no way involved in the matter. Genuine belief biblically suggests the perfection of what Jesus came to accomplish in the believers life. I do not even claim to fully believe in God in this sense. According to the bible a simple acceptance or idea of the possibility of a god or the God is insufficient and not genuine belief.

If you are going to continue in the trampling of my garden spend a little more time trying to understand what it is I am saying and a little less time puking all over the place.

Quote
I was not interpreting it as an attack on non-believers.  However, it does seem to be an attack on yourself.
An attack on non-believers...where do you get this stuff? You lashed out at me for a poem which suggested the personal experience of a believer in the Holy Spirit in the trials of life. I in fact see all you have presented as nothing more than a circular argument. I have done nothing but poetically express a personal experience which is backed by the Bible and Spirit in which I draw inspiration.

An attack on myself? More and more you demonstrate lack of understanding in the faith I profess. I am not sure what your 18 indoctrinated years accomplished but I truly hope that the years you have left are much more fruitful in your natural path.

After sifting through the logorrhea before me I have found two things worth noting: an assertion that God can not be proven as to exist based upon a criteria which rejects the context in which God has chosen to reveal Himself, and a finely tuned inability to communicate.

17
That's nice, but I always find myself rolling my eyes at these kinds of stories. I can't put my finger on why, exactly. Maybe because I feel like I've been a church-goer all my life, and kept myself out of doing "hood rat" things because of moral reasoning, despite having the opportunities, and I feel like you're just doing this for a easy way out with somebody telling you that all the pain you caused other people doesn't matter anymore. But then that'd make me very judgemental. So, I don't know where I stand but I do know that I definitely rolled my eyes while reading this several times.

This is why I had a hard time looking up to people that I knew too much about at church. Our youth leaders used to tell us about all the terrible things they used to do, and that it lead them to church. Awesome. I'm sitting in church listening to somebody preaching about everything you shouldn't do, except they've done it.

I haven't been to church, much, since I got my drivers license years ago because of this, but I still consider myself an active "prayer" and stuff. The politics that come a long with going to church are just retarded, though.

I am truly sorry that you were unable to look past what you think you see far enough to discover the point of this story.

The easiest way out would have been to rot in prison or perhaps just get myself killed… It really is amazing to think that there is good news. I am choosing to take that same hope to a rapidly declining populace and if possible contribute to the life of someone in a positive manner. I am not interested in the ease of my burden, rather the living of life as described by Jesus Christ and the taking upon myself of His.

Is that all an allegiance to God is to you? Politics and the preaching of morality? Please cast what man has done with religion and the church aside, and cast me aside with whatever suits you best, but discover that what I was trying to convey is that there is a living God in which you can experience if He so chooses to manifest Himself to you in such a way. Please see that my point was this: if you will take the record of experiences I have claimed to be true and recognize that a low life piece of shit such as I had been granted them by God, imagine what could be in store for you in your own personal relationship with God. Forget me, forget the supposed church and really find God for yourself.

18
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 17, 2009, 10:50:50 pm »
That's definitely a good question, and I don't know if I can give a good answer to that. But, I'll try!

I think my response to that would have to be: the reason people have difficulty killing an animal (or a person, for that matter) is most likely because the person knows what they're doing is wrong. They're ok if it's abstracted and they don't have to think about the death that they're benefiting from, but when they're faced with it, they know it isn't right.

I think that taking a life is something that is innately wrong, and that makes this situation different than discipline.

Does that make sense?

So then the emotional block present in the two scenarios is too far separated to in any way draw such implied conclusions?

From your response it seems that you are insinuating the emotional block in killing is different than that in the situation I presented because one is a product of some innate mechanism and the other, well that is yet to be defined. My concern with this would be that the struggle with proper discipline would seem innate to one personality type whereas the willingness to kill a little more innate in another, vice versa. I could conclude from this that it is possibly more a matter of temperament and personality.

To take it a step further we can include upbringing and childhood experience. For one brought up in a household structured with positive loving discipline it would more than likely be easier for that person regardless of temperament to carry the same discipline into a family of there own. For another child brought up in a severely abusive home yet having a naturally gentle disposition grows up to be a psychopathic murderer. From this I could conclude that which is defined as innate could in fact be more of a product of upbringing and other social and cultural influences.

The question is, how do we really isolate what is innate and what is not? Once again this gives rise to the question, is this really grounds for a moral stance against the killing and eating of animals?

Now allowing the possibility that it does give way to some natural innate law written on the hearts of mankind, what is the source of such law in which we are violating? Can we really be the product of randomness and chance, yet all posses such basic matters of conscience?

Now I do see your comparison between animals and humans and its implied point that if it is alright to kill an animal then why not allow the same liberty in the killing of humans, vice versa. This would however take me back to the source of such conscience and its standard.

To put it bluntly if we are all just a product of chance with no real purpose in life then morality seems to be a rather trivial matter. Eat and drink for tomorrow you die, and don’t be fooled into thinking you are somehow better for sparing Bambi when Yogi the bear wouldn’t hesitate for a second to tear you to pieces. Are we not just animals who somehow ended up a little farther down the evolutionary line? Or is there really something to your suggestions of morality? I think there is.

19
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 17, 2009, 08:41:50 pm »
This isn't targeted toward you specifically, but people in general.

I expect that the majority of people would have trouble killing an animal while looking it in its eye. But at the same time, those people don't think twice about eating a hotdog, or feeding a hotdog to their children.

This seems odd to me. :)

Let's say for example that I know my children have need of positive loving discipline in there lives so that they will grow up to be productive citizens in life who contribute to the general welfare of society as a whole. However when faced with the challenge of implementing this discipline I find an emotional block inside of me that severally hinders my willingness to follow through. Yet I know that this is a mountain that must be overcome within my soul lest my children grow up to be another darkened statistic of America’s rapidly declining population.

The point at hand is the emotional block that is present within. Does this block justify a claim that positive loving discipline is in fact not ok? Therefore does a potential emotional block when putting my animal down justify a moral stance against the action itself?

20
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 17, 2009, 07:44:46 pm »
That's pretty much what I mean, yeah. I'm not saying it's a killing blow, I think it'd be great if somebody was able to do that, but there are drawbacks to everything. It's all about weighing the benefits/drawbacks. :)

Well then that being the case I can at least in part reveal where I stand on the issue.

From what I have heard the current population of the world could be herded together to fit within the state of Florida. Now I recognize that I do not have a legitimate source to verify this claim on hand, but I tend to believe that it is accurate none the less. I believe there is plenty of land and resources to go around and think the issue lie not with a selfish desire to own a couple of acres of land and animals, but rather in the way the powers that be run the world. Unless of course one would think the right thing for humanity to do is build skyscrapers in which families live in as small a space as possible.

Now whether the animal is grazing on my land, someone else’s land, state or national land, or whatever, the fact is the animal is going to continue to eat. I fail to see the selflessness in my harvesting only a small garden thereby not selfishly consuming resources in the raising of animal. It would seem that the only solution to the cost of resources incurred by the consumption of the animal would be to eliminate the animal altogether. From one perspective it could be seen as doing the world a favor by limiting the grazing of the animal to my land alone.

Onto the issue of providing for others, I myself am very generous at heart and would find great joy in the giving of my increase to those in need. It would be one of the many joys of the blessing of prosperity when handled in the right way. I think greed corrupts but I do not believe that prosperity is a bad thing in and of itself. I hold the position that prosperity is meant for the sake of many therefore I look for ways to disperse it that many may in fact be blessed.

As a side note I have come to such a realization, that when the time in fact came to put the animal down I do not know how I would feel about putting a device to the back of its head were the spinal cord attaches to its brain and pulling the trigger. This is just a note of interest that although one might argue his position, it in fact may not be the position held when placed in such a situation. This is said to explain why I am only able to reveal in part where I stand on the said issue.

21
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 17, 2009, 03:43:14 pm »
You asked the original question, and you responded when I mentioned your name. Therefore, you must have been following it at least to some extent. ha! :P

Just trying to introduce a light heartedness from the get go.  :)

Quote
I fully respect what you're saying here, and for the most part I agree.

Since we have already been able to, for the most part, find agreement I will not brandish my sword and start swinging it at you over the minor issues in which we do not.

Quote
I have seen a lot of really horrible videos and read a lot of blogs/etc about things that happen in the meat industry. It stems from people treating animals as objects (or products), not as living creatures. When the main goal is profit, they're going to raise the animals as quickly and as cheaply as possible, without regard to animal welfare. That means they should be fed as much as possible, given pharmaceuticals to help them grow faster, given the minimum amount of space they can survive in, and killed as early as possible.

The worst parse, in my opinion, is that animals that are 'useless', such as the vast majority of male cows/chickens (bulls/cocks..whatever) are killed immediately after birth, normally in an incredibly inhumane way (baby chickens are stuffed in bags and/or ground up in machinery, alive).

But, like I said to deadly earlier, I *really* don't like giving graphic descriptions to people. It normally just makes them not want to hear what you say, and I can totally see why. I try to post things that are veg*n friendly without being really graphic or anything, so as to turn people off.

I am not well viewed in such content, so I would need further legitimate data of which I am sure there is abundance.

Quote
I think that would be a fine lifestyle, one where you can be assured that the animals aren't being harmed.

That being said, it's also somewhat selfish, in my mind. Animals take substantially more resources to raise than plants. A more utilitarian method would be raising plants either using less land, or giving the excess to people who need it. But that's just my opinion -- as far as farming goes, that's probably the best way.

I find myself a little confused as to the reason for this selfishness. Is it because I own the land in which the animals graze therefore somehow robbing humanity of resources result of my over abundance? Before I venture an answer I would like to broaden my grasp of the issue at hand.

22
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 17, 2009, 03:09:08 pm »
That's good. I don't expect you to change, but I'm happy enough to raise a little awareness. Hopefully if anybody else is still reading this thread, it's given them something to think about -- like Tuberload, for example, who really started the line of questioning. :)

What makes you think I would even be following this craziness?  ;)

First, I am very unaware of the way in which animals are farmed and treated on these farms. Although I did hear a story about fosters growing genetically altered chickens that had no feathers or beaks and such which caused me to recoil from there brand in a more than mild disgust. That being said, a more enlightened awareness would probably cause me to more heavily discriminate my sources of food.

Second, I have some thoughts concerning the issue of denial. Without going into much detail at first glance it becomes more of an issue of conscience for me, which is heavily molded by my faith and current level of revelation. Taking a second glance, my first point comes into play and I find myself a little more uneasy with the methods used by man in producing the meat. A third glance would bring me into issues of either emotional attachment, or detachment. If I find myself becoming emotionally attached to an animal then I find within my heart it becomes like a part of my family. However because of first glance reasoning most animals do not find such a place within my heart and I therefore am not hindered by my emotions. Is this denial? And if it is fitting to define it as such, is it unhealthy? These are the questions I would have to ask, and then again it would be guided by my faith and the conscience therein produced. All that being said I am not one to just flow with the masses and think the issues of animal farming are real ones that would need to change, although I do not have the proper understanding of the issues to make any conclusions.

Third, concerning issues of health and convenience I am persuaded that my upbringing and current mind on the issue are irrelevant. What I mean by this is that I will not sit here and try to argue with you just for the sake of being a raging bull only capable of seeing red. This is the way I am, so you better prepare yourself to be charged and if possible trampled. If there is a better way to live my life then I would have to step out of myself and examine legitimate data before I could make proper decisions. I am very interested in my health, and personally issues of convenience are more issues of my own unwillingness to change because I am a creature of comfort and habit. With all that being said I throw my hands in the air and say I just don’t know. I do however believe that to let my heart flow unchecked is not producing the best quality of life.

To conclude, my ideal situation would be to own land and produce my own food. This would be heavily reliant upon an organic garden, but would also include meat. I have observed cows and am hard pressed to believe that allowing them to wander around several acres of land is in anyway hindering there quality of life. I would not be cruel to my animals, and if emotional attachment should arise in either family or me then I would have to cross that bridge when I came upon it. From there I would be guided by conscience and faith. The animals would have a relatively safe environment to grow, eat, receive medical attention, etc, and there end would be as quick and painless as I could provide. Sure seems as if that beats getting ripped to shreds by a more violent carnivore, or breaking its legs and being left to suffer and die.

23
Found a link to it on you tube as well for non facebook users.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3kyNGVK-hI

25
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 14, 2009, 10:11:13 pm »
I love a nice steak, and some BBQ country pork ribs. I feel no shame.  :P
That's fine, people can make their own choices. And my choice is to consider that wrong. :D


I can understand your perspective, and because of that I don't think less of you. Make a stand! ;)

26
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 14, 2009, 09:53:18 pm »
I love a nice steak, and some BBQ country pork ribs. I feel no shame.  :P

27
Gaming / Re: Evony
« on: October 13, 2009, 10:33:20 pm »
LOL. I had to take a second glance at one of the ads to make sure I saw it right. I got past it though and enjoy the game. Even if it is played in the basement.  ;D

28
Gaming / Evony
« on: October 13, 2009, 08:14:55 pm »
http://www.evony.com/

I think it's a fun browser game, similar to Civilization. The best aspect, imo, is the alliances and PvP aspects of the game. I'm playing on server 75 if anybody is interested.

29
General Discussion / Re: Excerpt from "Against Meat"
« on: October 13, 2009, 05:16:02 pm »
iago what's your take on the fact that animals themselves eat other animals?

Edit: It was an inappropriate question for the purpose of this thread, so you can just ignore it if you like.   :)

30
General Discussion / Re: Let's hear it!
« on: October 06, 2009, 02:52:31 am »
I put my hand through a window pane today. It was a good way to end twelve hours of work. I got nine stitches and two decent size gashes on the palm of my hand.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13