Athiest state

Originally posted by caissad4
In the words of Ian Anderson "My words but a whisper, your deafness a shout"
actually it is she mentions, not he.

as i said, call me anything you like, deaf for example, i will never deny it!

Originally posted by Lord Shark
I wouldn't claim to have earned your friendship and the label 'atheist' is a first approximation, but my answer is that I doubt that a world without religion would be an improvement.

However, as has been pointed out, secularism is not the same as atheism, and maybe what the world would be better without is authoritarianism and dogma. These need not be ...[text shortened]... every confidence in your ability to realise that religion is not exempt from these problems.

not only is it not exempt, i would state that the atrocities committed in the name of religion have been a contributing factor in why many persons have become atheistic, that and a purely material view of the emergence and diversification of life and appeals to the gods of reason and logic. Although i would stress is it really reasonable and logical to believe 'luck', or 'chance', as a first cause.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Apparently life is not sacred enough to include vegetarianism as a tenet...

vegetarianism is a matter of conscience. In the case of alcohol, its use is not prohibited in scripture, in the case of smoking tobacco, clearly it is a defilement of flesh and thus prohibited, not only that, it harms other persons as well through second hand inhalation, one can hardly be loving ones neighbour as themselves while harming them at the same time. What this has to do with an atheist state i really do not know.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
not only is it not exempt, i would state that the atrocities committed in the name of religion have been a contributing factor in why many persons have become atheistic, that and a purely material view of the emergence and diversification of life and appeals to the gods of reason and logic. Although i would stress is it really reasonable and logical to believe 'luck', or 'chance', as a first cause.

Although i would stress is it really reasonable and logical to believe 'luck', or 'chance', as a first cause.
I have thought carefully about what it is reasonable and logical to believe about the universe, if there is a first cause, and if so what kind of thing it might be.

My conclusion is that we don't know, but that both atheist and theist explanations are compatible with the evidence available. I don't think that the notion of god being responsible is more reasonable or logical than speculations that involve no purposive agent. So on this point we disagree.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
wow kissy kissy Karoly Poly! man what a suck up that dude is! If hes not kissing Fabians butt, 'oh Fabian your posts are so much nicer than Robbies', hes kissing Caissad4s, 'oh your such a wonderful lady Caissad4!', 'winner of the most tournaments ever, kissy kissy'. Karoly Poly should enter a straw tournament, he's bound to win, Golden straw of the year ward!

I consider him a gentleman. 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what! i got beat at chess from a chick! Oh the ghost of Bobby Fischer have mercy on me, next time ill offer you knight odds in his honour!

And I in turn would offer to play blindfold.😛

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
vegetarianism is a matter of conscience. In the case of alcohol, its use is not prohibited in scripture, in the case of smoking tobacco, clearly it is a defilement of flesh and thus prohibited, not only that, it harms other persons as well through second hand inhalation, one can hardly be loving ones neighbour as themselves while harming them at the same time. What this has to do with an atheist state i really do not know.

Clearly K was referring to this declaration you made:
"we are conscientious objectors for life is sacred to us".

Life may be "sacred" to you, but evidently the sacredness only extends so far.

Alcohol "[defiles] the flesh" just as does tobacco. It is at the root of many physical as well as societal ills. Do the JWs allow any other recreational drugs besides alcohol? If not, why not?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Clearly K was referring to this declaration you made:
"we are conscientious objectors for life is sacred to us".

Life may be "sacred" to you, but evidently the sacredness only extends so far.

Alcohol "[defiles] the flesh" just as does tobacco. It is at the root of many physical as well as societal ills. Do the JWs allow any other recreational drugs besides alcohol? If not, why not?

Alcohol in moderation does not defile the flesh, in fact studies have shown that it may even be beneficial, plus its use is not forbidden in our sacred text.

(Psalm 104:15) . . .And wine that makes the heart of mortal man rejoice, To make the face shine with oil,. . .

(Ecclesiastes 9:7) . . .Go, eat your food with rejoicing and drink your wine with a good heart, because already the true God has found pleasure in your works. . .

Originally posted by caissad4
I consider him a gentleman. 🙂

Hes a mammas boy, suck up that he is!

Originally posted by caissad4
And I in turn would offer to play blindfold.😛

Lol, touche! even a blindfold shall not save you from my beautiful moves, i got you in my sights Missy and i am coming to getcha! 😛

Originally posted by Lord Shark
[b]Although i would stress is it really reasonable and logical to believe 'luck', or 'chance', as a first cause.
I have thought carefully about what it is reasonable and logical to believe about the universe, if there is a first cause, and if so what kind of thing it might be.

My conclusion is that we don't know, but that both atheist and theist e ...[text shortened]... r logical than speculations that involve no purposive agent. So on this point we disagree.[/b]

it is one of the most objective statements i think i have come across of the forum, and i salute you Lord of all sharks!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Alcohol in moderation does not defile the flesh, in fact studies have shown that it may even be beneficial, plus its use is not forbidden in our sacred text.

(Psalm 104:15) . . .And wine that makes the heart of mortal man rejoice, To make the face shine with oil,. . .

(Ecclesiastes 9:7) . . .Go, eat your food with rejoicing and drink your wine with a good heart, because already the true God has found pleasure in your works. . .

Of course it "defiles the flesh".

You should read the following:
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alcohol/SC00024

which reads in part:

Certainly, you don't have to drink any alcohol, and if you currently don't drink, it's unlikely your doctor would suggest that you start drinking for the possible health benefit. In some cases, it's safest to avoid alcohol entirely — the possible benefits don't outweigh the risks....Even so, the evidence about the possible health benefits of alcohol isn't certain, and alcohol may not benefit everyone who drinks.

Moderate alcohol use may be of most benefit only if you're an older adult or if you have existing risk factors for heart disease, such as high cholesterol. If you're a middle-aged or younger adult, some evidence shows that even moderate alcohol use may cause more harm than good. In fact, if you're a woman and drink alcohol, talk to your doctor about taking supplemental folate to help reduce the risk of breast cancer associated with alcohol use. You can take other steps to benefit your cardiovascular health besides drinking — eating a healthy diet and exercising, for example.

Once again:
Alcohol "[defiles] the flesh" just as does tobacco. It is at the root of many physical as well as societal ills. Do the JWs allow any other recreational drugs besides alcohol? If not, why not?

I notice you've also side-stepped the issue of life being "sacred" to you.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Of course it "defiles the flesh".

You should read the following:
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alcohol/SC00024

which reads in part:
[quote]Certainly, you don't have to drink any alcohol, and if you currently don't drink, [b]it's unlikely your doctor would suggest that you start drinking for the possible health benefit. In some cases, it's s ls. Do the JWs allow any other recreational drugs besides alcohol? If not, why not?[/b]

there are literally squillions of conflicting reports, here is just one,

There are a couple of reasons why you should drink wine everyday and these are quite valid, researched points that many scientists and health practitioners agree upon. If you've ever wondered whether you should drink wine everyday or you should rather avoid it, read on to find out what are the benefits of consuming wine in moderation.

First of all, drinking a glass of wine daily does help retain your memory better. It is also good for your overall health. There are studies that show that older women (over 70 years of age) who are drinking one glass of wine with their food have better memory faculties than those who stopped consuming this drink for many years.

One glass also helps with avoiding blood clots from forming and minimizes any inflammation of the blood vessels. And if you are thinking of your cholesterol levels, you should be in the clear with consuming only one glass of wine: it actually raises your LDL level (the good cholesterol) which is known to help with unclogging your arteries.

It also is famous for keeping down your weight by reducing your body mass index. For example people who drink wine in moderation tend to have smaller waists than those who don't consume it. The alcohol is known to burn faster the calories in the body and it is said that up to 90 calories are burned after one single glass of wine. If you drink excessively or you don't drink at all, this doesn't apply so well.

Due to the resveratrol content in the wine, it seems that it helps minimize the risk of cancer due to its anti oxidant or anti cancer properties. These antioxidants are actually found on the skin and in the seeds of grapes, which is dissolved in the alcohol used in the fermentation process. It is needless to day that this doesn't give the go ahead for drinking too much. Always moderation is the key in everything.

therefore it becomes a matter of opinion, what is more wheat beers and others contain many minerals and vitamins, Guinness for example has lots of vitamin B, therefore i do not accept that wine or beer or even whiskey in moderation is detrimental to ones health, nor does it defile the body.

drugs deserves a thread of its own, why dont you post one, suffice to say that in a Biblical context, it comes from the Greek Pharmakia, which literally means druggery and is associated with spiritism.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there are literally squillions of conflicting reports, here is just one,

There are a couple of reasons why you should drink wine everyday and these are quite valid, researched points that many scientists and health practitioners agree upon. If you've ever wondered whether you should drink wine everyday or you should rather avoid it, read on to fi oesn't give the go ahead for drinking too much. Always moderation is the key in everything.

My source is the Mayo Clinic. What's yours?

Here's more from another source:

The list of health risks mentioned above is by no means exhaustive. In 2004 an article in Nature magazine pointed out that “even small amounts of alcohol increase the risk of injury and boost the chances of developing about 60 diseases.”

Do you believe this source which points to "even small amounts"?

Once again:
Once again:
Do the JWs allow any other recreational drugs besides alcohol? If not, why not?

I notice you've also side-stepped the issue of life being "sacred" to you.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
My source is the Mayo Clinic. What's yours?

Here's more from another source:

The list of health risks mentioned above is by no means exhaustive. In 2004 an article in Nature magazine pointed out that “even small amounts of alcohol increase the risk of injury and boost the chances of developing about 60 diseases.”

Any problem with th ...[text shortened]... not, why not?

I notice you've also side-stepped the issue of life being "sacred" to you.

no problem with the source only with the opinions, therefore rather than get into a fruitless and prolonged debate on the benefits or otherwise, i shall simply state again, its use is not prohibited in our sacred text. We do not allow other recreational drugs, i have sidestepped no issues. Now what else can i help you with? and be brief for i have a meeting to attend in an hour.