You know, it occurred to me: some people have this idea that science is more reliable than religion, but actually the opposite is true. Science is constantly correcting itself and changing its story; first cholesterol is bad for you, now they are saying its not so bad, and actually its more harmful to have low cholesterol; first they say canola oil is good for you, now they're saying its not so good; scientists developed trans fats as a healthy alternative to animal fats, and now they have found that what was thought to be an improvement in our diets is actually far worse! That's why I try to eat a basic, healthy diet like my grandparents did back in the day. We're better off listening to our "elders" when it comes to diet, and pretty much everything else. We may have more technology than they did, but we are stupider and lack the wisdom and comon sense of past generations! Science is constantly screwing up, and changing its story! The Catholic Church, on the other hand, teaches truths that are unchanging, and time-tested. And if you actually take the time to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, you will see how it all makes perfect sense, and is deeply satisfying; the truth will not only make you free, but it is so enjoyable to read and understand that we really do have an understanding of our shared reality as human beings that is complete and effective, for this life as well as a preparation for the next. But you have to study it, you have to learn it, and above all you have to honestly try it. You can always go back if you don't agree with me, or if it doesn't work for you. (spoiler alert: it will work for you!) How do I know this? Because, again, while we all have different interests, talents, and personalities, we all have the same basic human nature)
You're going by one article you found in some magazine called "The Atlantic"? I actually work with recovering addicts every day, and I have personally seen how effective the 12-step program is in the lives of countless people! These are real people I know in my life, not what someone told me in some online article. That must be why AA, NA, and other recovery programs all use religion to help their clients. It just plain works, no amount of BS or rhetoric will change that fact. The proof is in the pudding.
Holy shit nobody has changed their story more than the Catholic Church. What a tool. Yeah, let's sticky this thread so we can see for all time how badly we've been trolled. _
The question was perfectly clear and phrased accordingly, no need for the heavy-handed condescension. It's very simple: a religious denomination is a subgroup within a religion that operates under a common name, tradition, and identity. The term describes various Christian denominations (for example, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicanism and the various varieties of Protestantism). The term also describes the four branches of Judaism (Orthodox. Conservatve, Reform and Reconstructionist), and describes the two main branches of Islam (Sunni and Shia). If you are not currently affiliated with any religious denomination (that is, you are an agnostic or have chosen to be an atheist) all well and good. That said, IF that is the case, what religious denomination were you affiliated with before you made that decision, i.e. at birth…as a kid growing up?
Religion doesn't make you feel guilty? bullshit! then why confession? bless me father for i have sinned. forgive me, please forgive me, oh god forgive me im a horrible person. i had sex!! im going to hell forgive me!!! its fuckin' retarded.
they dont use religion, they say to believe in a power greater than yourself. "God as you see him" not as others see him so you can make it anything you want. yes some people go right back to catholicism or christianity, but its not what AA professes at all. it does use many like teachings of christ, but in the end, those teachings in my opinion are basically are just common goodness that decent people already know without needing a bible for. they just got lost along the way with whatever addiction they had.
I am starting to think you are trolling, which is fucking genius if true. But in case you are not-- there is so much wrong here. The WHOLE POINT of science is that it is repeatable, anyone can do the trial and experience the same results. Or, in cases where experiential evidence is hard to come by, like evidence for plate tectonics, a broad and well-documented set of secondary evidence, laid out for discussion and debate. Don't believe in evolution? Get in the lab, separate some bacteria or yeast into separate populations and let them breed for a few thousand generations. Don't believe in plate tectonics? examine the modern evidence on fossil distributions, sea floor dynamics, continental shape matching, paleomagnetism... and if you are still skeptical, there is now primary evidence from space-based laser rangefinders over 10 years tracking the centimeter-by-centimeter movement. Etc. WTF really dude? What is revelation? What discovery? Show me! There is nothing there! You can't seriously say "for centuries, lots of really smart people said that God exists, he created man in his image and woman from man's rib, blahbity blah, there's your proof, they were really smart!" Classic. Religion is "outside the realm of science so science can't prove it." OK, well... guess I can't argue with that. It is the argument of a 3 year old. We should just take your word for it, that it's all true. Right? Again-- you must be trolling... but-- science keeps evolving because it has no agenda, it is just searching for the truth. As we learn more and more, we refine our tests, see where we made a wrong turn and go back, integrate old and new evidence, etc. And it is all out there and open. And by the way sometimes the Catholic Church does change its tune, like when they finally admitted that maybe Galileo was right about the whole earth/sun thing-- 350 years later in 1992, when it was getting so ridiculous that they had no choice. The fact is, science and religion ARE incompatible, in any subject matter where they might overlap. If you personally find some sort of solace or joy in religious or spiritual feeling, fine.
"The Atlantic is an American magazine, founded (as The Atlantic Monthly) in 1857 in Boston, Massachusetts, now based in Washington, D.C. It was created as a literary and cultural commentary magazine, growing to achieve a national reputation as a high-quality review with a moderate worldview. The magazine has notably recognized and published new writers and poets, as well as encouraged major careers. It has also published leading writers' commentary on abolition, education, and other major issues in contemporary political affairs. The magazine has won more National Magazine Awards than any other monthly magazine." -Wikipedia If you've never heard of the Atlantic it further exposes you for the ignorant sheep you are. The claim that you work with "recovering" addicts daily comes as no surprise considering your existence in some fantasyland created for you and your belief in such a large group of mostly ineffective programs that you espouse to believe in. They just plain don't work. The article, which you should read, is based on a book by a Harvard scientist who uses peer reviewed empirical data to draw its conclusions, not some Jib Jab cartoon sold to you by a church or other self perpetuating organization of those useless anywhere else in society. Your programs don't work and your blind faith in them only expose you further as one unable to think for himself. Either you never had, or allowed to be stolen from you, the ability to reason.
I was indoctrinated as child into the Catholic church. In the incoherent part of your message, you called me a bigot and then something about blowing you. Calling people out on the bullshit of religion is bigotry? That's a new one.
And there lies one problem with ignoring a poster. You could not see the Joe also quoted Truth and that is who he was replying to with the rest of his post. The only sentence that referred to you was.
Makes sense now. I'm still not reading another word of what Untruth has to say. You can lead a moron to logic, but you can't make him think.
Dude, re-read my previous post, there are two separate parts to it - each part addressing a separate quote. The 'blow me' part was me separately addressing Truth4U2's posting the definition of the word "sodomy" (i.e. to include oral sex) and this 2nd part of my post was calling him on his hypocrisy, that is, him preaching 'love' while being intolerant and judgemental. And as far as his 'sodomy lecture' was concerned I used a French/blowjob platform from which to *respectfully* ridicule his b.s. (here's the 2nd half of that post below - his quote & my response to it.): Blow me hypocrite. Intolerant religio-centric bigots like yourself disengenuously preach 'love' that is when they're not finding fault with everyone. Take the French as an example: You: they use their face to have sex! Me: they invented the blowjob - props.
