Sip Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 Surprisingly enough, just about the same time as when all of the girls started drooling over you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 That's correct we need a New Testament Part II. That's why Bible says a new saviour will arrive. It also says that he will have a new wisdom... Isn't it obvious that his new wisdom will have to deal with the new sinsof humanity? A constant search of spiritual development can bring to an understanding of the modern evils. The issue is not how to punish gays or that they should be punished. Ths issue is to recognize tha processes that bring to the current social setting, which clearly moves us towards a spiritual degradation. style_images/master/snapback.png We already have our new savior, its name is "Internet". The access to an immeasurable information that is capable of reaching even the most remote sectors of the world, it's a medium for people to connect, share their views and get their messages across. We are more educated than 2,000 years ago and more cultured. We do not rely on the church to produce the information needed to survive or exercise our morality. Perhaps that's why the savior hasn't showed up, because it is not in the conventional form of a human being. Interaction with something higher can be through different vessels, education and science are among some of them. We are given a tool to process the necessary information without having the need for a sterling conditioning, it is our brain. We can make moral and ethical choices based on our current situation and the environment, and those choices are all relative. Faith is when you know that relying on human reasoning and educated decision making will result in a more harmonious existence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 Now my job is to make you a Fadixist. style_images/master/snapback.png No need, I am slowly getting there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 Sasun, will you be the one to befriend her and care for her deeply and make her feel that her life is important? Other than her parents who will care for her? Who will make her feel that she belongs in this world? Unfortunately people are very quick to make judgments based on a person's appearance and the way one looks plays a big importance in one's life, even having a role in whether that person will have a successful life or not. Most probably I will not be. And its good that her parents are in that position, unlike some parents who would opt for euthenesia.  No, now that she is living she shouldn't be killed. But if this kind of deformity was detected early in pregnancy I believe the fetus should be aborted. style_images/master/snapback.png Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 Most probably I will not be. And its good that her parents are in that position, unlike some parents who would opt for euthenesia. style_images/master/snapback.png Sasun, you didn't understand me. Besides her parents who's going to care for her? (And I don't mean medical treatment.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 (edited) Sasun, you didn't understand me. Besides her parents who's going to care for her? (And I don't mean medical treatment.) style_images/master/snapback.png Anoushik, now I am not sure what your question was. If you mean who will help the girl to be accepted in the society completely - I am afraid she will never be accepted as such. There will be people always not accepting her and finding her disgusting, etc. So what? Perfectly healthy people don't get accepted for their views or for whatever reason. Then again, killing is not the answer. On the other hand, there are really people who will accept anyone regardless of how they look. There are such people in the world. Edited December 16, 2004 by Sasun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 We already have our new savior, its name is "Internet". That's not what "savior" is meant to be. Faith is when you know that relying on human reasoning and educated decision making will result in a more harmonious existence. style_images/master/snapback.png That's not what faith is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 That is not to say that sometimes I question my view of euthanasia, because I do believe in Karma. style_images/master/snapback.png I am not sure how exactly you link euthenasia and Karma, but I just wanted to note that Karma makes a lot of sense. Karma is the way the underdog gets even with the top dog. Suppose in a previous life you have done bad things to many people, that is a way of securing a pretty bad life in a future rebirth. Those people will punish you using the laws of Karma - that's God's justice system. It's a mechanical law, its all about mathematics, pluses and minuses built by nobody but yourself. Now if a child is born with defects that is a reflection of bad karma. But you can't say that because the child has bad karma we should kill it. Its about measures, and we don't know what measure of bad things are supposed to happen by the karma. Besides we don't know if killing would be a prize or punishment for any given person. So without knowing the past lives of a person (which is the case always for ordinary people like us) karma doesn't matter when making a decision about euthenasia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 We already have our new savior, its name is "Internet". Mmmm ... Antichirst? The access to an immeasurable information that is capable of reaching even the most remote sectors of the world, it's a medium for people to connect, share their views and get their messages across. We are more educated than 2,000 years ago and more cultured. We do not rely on the church to produce the information needed to survive or exercise our morality. Perhaps that's why the savior hasn't showed up, because it is not in the conventional form of a human being. Interaction with something higher can be through different vessels, education and science are among some of them. We are given a tool to process the necessary information without having the need for a sterling conditioning, it is our brain. We can make moral and ethical choices based on our current situation and the environment, and those choices are all relative. Faith is when you know that relying on human reasoning and educated decision making will result in a more harmonious existence. style_images/master/snapback.png We're not more educated and more cultured than 2000 years ago. Even the guards of wisdom in the Egyptian Labirinth 4000 ago were educated and cultured like we are now. Even the writers of Avesta and Vedas back 5000 ago were educated like this. The only difference is the quality of our consciousness, our evolved Ego and as a consecuence the development of tools and means (technology). Would you say the Egyptians new less about sex, social life, relationships, pleasures, phylosophy, death and life? Has technology changed human being towards goodness even for a yota? The worst nightmares of humanity came true in 20th century. World wars, nuclear weapons, genocides, mass hunger, despots that ancient world would be proud to have. You call this development? Chingizkhan's conquests appear to be a child's play compared to Hitler and Stalin. Any ancient conqueror would consider it animalistic to use a nuclear weapon against peacful population. Did this stop after World Wars and Cold War? Nope. It is still going on. Surely, the saviour is not a conventional human being. It is not even going to be a human being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 I am not sure how exactly you link euthenasia and Karma, but I just wanted to note that Karma makes a lot of sense. Karma is the way the underdog gets even with the top dog. Suppose in a previous life you have done bad things to many people, that is a way of securing a pretty bad life in a future rebirth. Those people will punish you using the laws of Karma - that's God's justice system. It's a mechanical law, its all about mathematics, pluses and minuses built by nobody but yourself. Now if a child is born with defects that is a reflection of bad karma. But you can't say that because the child has bad karma we should kill it. Its about measures, and we don't know what measure of bad things are supposed to happen by the karma. Besides we don't know if killing would be a prize or punishment for any given person. So without knowing the past lives of a person (which is the case always for ordinary people like us) karma doesn't matter when making a decision about euthenasia. style_images/master/snapback.png For you: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4096019.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 (edited) That's not what "savior" is meant to be. Don't you know that the Bible is left entirely to a personal interpretation? According to my interpretation, the Internet fits the description. It destroys as well as upheaves.  That's not what faith is. Oh yeah?? Do you have proof? Edited December 16, 2004 by Anileve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 My interpretation is that HyeForum is the awaited savour, and Fadixism is the path that HyeForumers should follow for salvation... when everyone will be a part of the Domino(it's the name of HyeForums servers CPU )Â I'm your Guru. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 We're not more educated and more cultured than 2000 years ago. Even the guards of wisdom in the Egyptian Labirinth 4000 ago were educated and cultured like we are now. Even the writers of Avesta and Vedas back 5000 ago were educated like this. The only difference is the quality of our consciousness, our evolved Ego and as a consecuence the development of tools and means (technology). Would you say the Egyptians new less about sex, social life, relationships, pleasures, phylosophy, death and life? Has technology changed human being towards goodness even for a yota? The worst nightmares of humanity came true in 20th century. World wars, nuclear weapons, genocides, mass hunger, despots that ancient world would be proud to have. You call this development? Chingizkhan's conquests appear to be a child's play compared to Hitler and Stalin. Any ancient conqueror would consider it animalistic to use a nuclear weapon against peacful population. Did this stop after World Wars and Cold War? Nope. It is still going on. Surely, the saviour is not a conventional human being. It is not even going to be a human being. style_images/master/snapback.png Actually I had the same sort of an argument with my brother not long ago. I was on the same side of the argument as you are now. I definitely agree that intelligence is relative to the time. It’s almost impossible to conduct such a comparison. However, perhaps wisdom would be a more accurate claim. Human civilization as it progresses acquires information of the passing years. Therefore, technically with the knowledge we have gained through the years we are more educated and more open minded. Land exploration and international relations have improved our outlook on other cultures. Human beings overall didn’t really change as much, despite technology and other advancements we hold the same morals, engage in warfare and murder. However, you cannot discredit the advancement of science and medicine. Now people are aware that bacteria and germs cause illnesses, where as before it was discarded as a preposterous idea. Less people die from common diseases, more people are saved because of organ transplants. We do take care of our environment better, considering the continuous population growth. Moreover, I think worldwide the literacy rate has gone up. Certain things change and others stay the same. But in terms of better and worse, I don’t think that it’s a constant escalation towards the worse but rather a persistent equilibrium of the bad and the good which stays at a fixed mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 Don't you know that the Bible is left entirely to a personal interpretation? According to my interpretation, the Internet fits the description. It destroys as well as upheaves. Well, it seems to me that those are not the functions of a savior, but rather saving. I don't see how internet saves us Oh yeah?? Do you have proof? style_images/master/snapback.png Yeah, I say and that's the proof Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 Well, it seems to me that those are not the functions of a savior, but rather saving. I don't see how internet saves us Up heaving can be interpreted as saving. You are talking to a bunch of Armenians who you would otherwise not have the pleasure of knowing. Plus you are saving a family in Armenia through an Internet Fund, thus it is a savior after all. Just not the kind with a beard and a toga. Yeah, I say and that's the proof style_images/master/snapback.png You foget, I am not a believer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 Up heaving can be interpreted as saving. You are talking to a bunch of Armenians who you would otherwise not have the pleasure of knowing. Plus you are saving a family in Armenia through an Internet Fund, thus it is a savior after all. Just not the kind with a beard and a toga. If the Internet saves you then you should build a church called "The Holy WWW" and worship there. You foget, I am not a believer. style_images/master/snapback.png Too bad for you - not my problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 Actually I had the same sort of an argument with my brother not long ago. I was on the same side of the argument as you are now. I definitely agree that intelligence is relative to the time. It’s almost impossible to conduct such a comparison. However, perhaps wisdom would be a more accurate claim. Human civilization as it progresses acquires information of the passing years. Therefore, technically with the knowledge we have gained through the years we are more educated and more open minded. Land exploration and international relations have improved our outlook on other cultures. Human beings overall didn’t really change as much, despite technology and other advancements we hold the same morals, engage in warfare and murder. However, you cannot discredit the advancement of science and medicine. Now people are aware that bacteria and germs cause illnesses, where as before it was discarded as a preposterous idea. Less people die from common diseases, more people are saved because of organ transplants. We do take care of our environment better, considering the continuous population growth. Moreover, I think worldwide the literacy rate has gone up. Certain things change and others stay the same. But in terms of better and worse, I don’t think that it’s a constant escalation towards the worse but rather a persistent equilibrium of the bad and the good which stays at a fixed mean. style_images/master/snapback.png I agree that we stay at an equilibrium but only for some period. However, the difference (and the danger) is that world has never been this globalized and with this amount and quality of deadly weapons. If we assume that the human instincts have not changed a bit this globalization is as much a danger as it is a positive factor. When civilizations fought before, one part of the world was destroyed but the other survived. Never, did humans have weapons to destroy nature with long term consequences. Now we have it. We do cure more people but we kill several time more than they did before. The surplus of population comes from undereducated, poor countries. I wouldn't say that population is a plus for countries like China and India. In fact it is view as demographic problem. New deseases come around because of industrial development based on growing rate of return. We create the deseases and then we cure them. Overall I think world development goes in up and down cycles. But again, this time it is different. The fall that could come will be much more deep than before. We are more educated in terms of public accessibility of education and deeper knowledge of technology. But what do you mean by "open minded"? There have been many civilisations with different understanding of openmindedness. E.g. do you consider the Republic of Venice in 14th, 15th century a close minded society? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 If the Internet saves you then you should build a church called "The Holy WWW" and worship there. I already did, but it has a slightly different name. It's called "The Holy PC," and I am an avid worshiper when it comes to it. I visit my sanctuary half of the day and tend to worship for consecutive hours. Â Too bad for you - not my problem You are lost, oh wise one. Don't confuse a blessing with a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 I already did, but it has a slightly different name. It's called "The Holy PC," and I am an avid worshiper when it comes to it. I visit my sanctuary half of the day and tend to worship for consecutive hours. Your savior is my prison 2/3 of the day You are lost, oh wise one. Don't confuse a blessing with a problem. style_images/master/snapback.png Oh, how good it is that finally somone could lead me out of my lost place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 And what happens when she matures and enters into adulthood? Even before then? Knowing that the way she looks like is not accepted by society and people find her "disgusting"? It's very painful emotionally. And the pain she has to endure after each surgery? The anesthesia? Sasun, have you ever been under anesthesia for a couple of hours? Do you know how horrible it feels when you wake up? I have. It took me nearly three days to recover from the effects of anesthesia. And have you ever had surgery performed on your face? I have. It's horrible. The swollen eyes, not being able to eat correctly, feeling faint every time you look down, the light pain right after the surgery that gets worse and worse by the hour? Like I said, it took me three days to recover from anesthesia and about a week to get rid of the pain and feel a bit "normal". Only a week, and I knew that this was an only time, yet a week felt like forever. What about her? Knowing after each surgery that more is to come? Sasun, you think that people who support euthanasia are selfish because they don't want to take care of the sick. Well, I think opponents of euthanasia are the truly selfish because they fail to put themselves in other people's shoes and really examine the pain they have to endure. style_images/master/snapback.png I think this case is very different from what I had in mind. She's going to face a life of jeering and recovery, not pain and certain premature death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 We already have our new savior, its name is "Internet". The access to an immeasurable information that is capable of reaching even the most remote sectors of the world, it's a medium for people to connect, share their views and get their messages across. style_images/master/snapback.png Hmm... interesting. That makes sense. The only bad thing is that it only applies to 1% of the world's population The people who need the most information regarding an understanding of each other and population control (the developing countries) don't have access to the Internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 I think this case is very different from what I had in mind. She's going to face a life of jeering and recovery, not pain and certain premature death. style_images/master/snapback.png I agree with Stormig. I shouldn't bring this child into the debate about euthanasia (even though she will lead a much tougher life and suffer much more than the rest of us). Â Sasun, however, I want you to know that my objections about keeping the terminally ill alive as long as possible don't have anything to do with monetary issues or worrying about who will care for them. I object because I don't want them to suffer any more than they have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 I object because I don't want them to suffer any more than they have to. style_images/master/snapback.png Neither do I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 Neither do I style_images/master/snapback.png I know that... Therefore we have to value the quality of life more than how long one will live. If euthanizing these babies will end their unnecessary suffering then why shouldn't we accept that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakharar Posted December 16, 2004 Report Share Posted December 16, 2004 For you: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4096019.stm style_images/master/snapback.png This is scary. I also had a small and very faint birthmark exactly at the same place as my grandfather's (below the chest). But it completly disappeared in my teens. Does this mean that that there are no bad omens hovering above me now? Does this mean that I am the "chosen one"? Not that I believe any of that claptrap of reincarnation and spirituality (whatever that means). I desperately need some answers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.