phreddy wrote:

I'm thinking three weeks practicing Paganism would yield better results.  Let's see, no alcohol, no pork, no lustful thoughts, prayer five times a day...or music, dancing and sex.  Hmmmmmmmm hard choice.  No wonder the young men blow themselves up just to get to those virgins.

I wonder why their paradise offers virgins. Who the hell in their right mind wants to fuck a virgin? Doesn't seem like much fun to me.

I'm particularly struck by the cynicism of the producers. Not surprised, mind you.

If all these people agreed to participate in the effort, what the hell were they doing resisting all the clerics' efforts? It was only for six weeks, for Christ's - or Muhammad's - sake. "Many of the other women respond by rebelling against the whole regime: they stash illicit supplies of scotch eggs, crisps, sweets and portable DVD players in their dormitory."

On a side note, I was watching "The King and I" last night, and understood why the Thais have always found the book/movie so offensive. The movie's brief forays into Buddhist theology were incredibly shallow and Christian-centric. Actually, the movie's treatment of Thai culture was incredibly shallow, at that.

sofaking wrote:

I wonder why their paradise offers virgins.

I'm wondering how they get the 72-1 ratio.  Female infanticide can't offer those odds (though I find it one of the only downsides of the dowry system)... perhaps Pale is right about the livestock theory.   Then again I stick to the white raisins of crystal clarity doctrine.  Shrug.  I have low expectations.

sofaking wrote:

Who the hell in their right mind wants to fuck a virgin? Doesn't seem like much fun to me.

I've only done one but I was lucky... we were in love.  I was 20 and had some porntime under my belt,  she had just turned 17 and we'd been dating for a couple months.  We lasted almost 4 years, which at that age was a lifetime.

That said I'd have to agree, fucking a virgin is a art, a responsibility and a chore.  Give me one that's had her appetite stoked, and that won't imprint on me like a little duckling.

phreddy wrote:

All the better to hide one's own inexperience.  The only reason to fuck virgins is that they have no means to judge the quality of the performance.

While Islam may be the contemporary worst,  sexual sublimation is a standard of all three of the Big Abes...yet to my knowledge nowhere in the Torah, Bible or Qur'an does it mention dick size or performance...  and women are not supposed to enjoy the act.

Don't get me started on menstruation, slaves, blended cotton fabrics and no shrimp cocktail.

Charming little belief system.   Whenever I feel any symptoms of goodwill toward mankind, I read Leviticus.

pALEPHx wrote:

Give up pork and booze for three weeks? I'd get voted out of the mosque on the first day. What do they win?

Eating pork or getting porked, either way you're out.  (At least that's the "official" line.)

Phx wrote:

Well, then it's not a very fair show, is it?

That's why I suggested Paganism.  They seem to be more inclusive and a lot more fun too.   I haven't watched much of Survivor, but from what I've seen, it appears the game favors the manipulative over the athletic.  Which is probably why it's so popular.

Gotta agree with Pale on this one. People who describe themselves as "spiritual" rather than "religious" make me crazy. What it tells me is that they're looking for feel good religion that doesn't place any obligations or commitments on them, and they don't like to be challenged.

If you're going to be an athiest or agnostic, at least have the courage of your convictions.

opsec wrote:

While Islam may be the contemporary worst,  sexual sublimation is a standard of all three of the Big Abes...yet to my knowledge nowhere in the Torah, Bible or Qur'an does it mention dick size or performance...  and women are not supposed to enjoy the act.

Don't get me started on menstruation, slaves, blended cotton fabrics and no shrimp cocktail.

Charming little belief system.   Whenever I feel any symptoms of goodwill toward mankind, I read Leviticus.

There's actually no mention of the idea that women shouldn't enjoy sex anywhere in the Bible or Torah, and I doubt it's in the Quran.  Those laws seem to have sprouted up later as a way of saving women from themselves.

phreddy wrote:

I believe in no god, so I can't be anti your god, because, after all, he/she/it doesn't exist.

Agreed, but often enough, it isn't the concept of a god to which many atheists are taking issue, but the Abrahamic god. And for many atheists, atheism has become a religion in and of itself. Some atheists are so fervently atheist, the only thing that differentiates them from the theists is the object of their worship.

I'm Buddhist - a result of maternal influence and my own decision to actively convert. As a Buddhist, I'm not particularly concerned about the existence or lack of existence of God or gods. Most Buddhist sects also teach that there are a multitude of paths to truth (or more commonly expressed as 84,000 paths). In other words, if you're gonna call yourself spiritual, pick a single path and commit to it. Don't cherry-pick because you'll end up with a watered down version of whatever you've selected from and you won't derive anything at all.

Religion is about discipline. It doesn't have to be the indoctrinating, moralistic discipline of many Christian, Muslim, or Jewish sects, but it is about giving you the tools to be a better person and, most important, to fully experience being human, pitfalls and all.

I don't need a god to teach me right from wrong. But I do appreciate the teachings offered by my denomination to help navigate much of the day to day experience of being human.

Well, that, and the food's not bad.

phreddy wrote:

I would argue that so-called atheists who are fervently anti any religion are not atheists at all.  The true definition of atheism is the belief that there is no god.  It's that simple.  Those you describe do not fit the definition because they are hateful of the existence or teachings of a particular god (think Madalyn Murray O'Hair).  That can only be if they believe the god exists.

As an athiest, I have to disagree. Being anti-religion does not at all mean you believe in their gods/goddesses. I don't have a problem with the teachings of any god (as no god has ever taught anything), only the teachings of the group who say they follow that god. In general, all religions are in place to control the masses. And their teachings were written by other humans as rules to be followed in order to obtain that control. The thought that an atheist is hateful of a god or his/her teachings is wrong. True atheists don't believe in any god and therefore cannot have hate toward the god.

Is it possible, if you have to vocalize about your particular dogma; you have failed?

I am sorry but too often religion just leaves me feeling beaten down