Forcing your "prayer" or "love" on someone who doesn't want it is flat out creepy.
It's religious rape.
I would agree with that, why waste one's time if someone wants no part of it.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
As is you insisting to send your prayers knowing that they are not 'welcome'. You say it's love, the receiver may not see it that way. If you know it, why insist?
Why must I change my heart because someone perceives me wrong?
I am assuming you think when someone says you are in my thoughts and prayers
or I will pray for you
that there is a alterior motive or a hope to change the atheist.
This is not the case always
if you look in the heart of the sender and not prejudge.
love is love
It is given sincerely, not attempting to change nor find fault with the receiver
it is pure love as I have stated in other posts.
Why would any one not want to receive love?
As I said it takes both sides ....if only people will try
You are assuming wrong. Assuming I think that you are looking to change me? A bit presumptuous.
You ask why you must change your heart because you are wrongly perceived? Why should the 'receiver' change his/her heart just to accommodate you?
You keep on saying that it's the receiver's 'fault'. You are misjudged/incorrectly perceived. How about turning the table? That you are perceiving the receiver in the wrong way. You seem to take it as a personal affront that one is not 'interested' in YOUR kind of love. Why? Why would anyone not want to receive love? Because they don't perceive it as such.
As you say, it takes both sides. Say your prayers if you want, don't be insensitive to those that do not wish to receive them. As I said in my earlier post, insisting sending your prayers knowing that they are not 'welcome' is disrespectful (word you used). Why is this so difficult?
You are assuming wrong. Assuming I think that you are looking to change me? A bit presumptuous.
You ask why you must change your heart because you are wrongly perceived? Why should the 'receiver' change his/her heart just to accommodate you?
You keep on saying that it's the receiver's 'fault'. You are misjudged/incorrectly perceived. How about turning the table? That you are perceiving the receiver in the wrong way. You seem to take it as a personal affront that one is not 'interested' in YOUR kind of love. Why? Why would anyone not want to receive love? Because they don't perceive it as such.
As you say, it takes both sides. Say your prayers if you want, don't be insensitive to those that do not wish to receive them. As I said in my earlier post, insisting sending your prayers knowing that they are not 'welcome' is disrespectful (word you used). Why is this so difficult?
As blondie said... let it be.
this redrock just this
And I agree I see the sides but both sides can work together
I feel this way ....
it is up to the receiver how he will perceive people in general..their gestures, their opinions, their love.
and we can not be responsible for how we will be perceived and will always run the risk of being misunderstood
But we can work towards a loving situation
One should not offer love with an alterior motive,
so if a believer is saying they will pray for someone with the thought of saving them,
this is an insult to them and is not received as a sincere loving gesture.
A loving gesture has no requirements...it is giving....it is pure and it feels this way in your heart
If an atheist flatly says 'don't pray for me' they are turning away a loving gesture
and that is insulting to the one giving,
so discerning they can be and respectful of another's love even if it is based in faith.
I am hoping for more understanding on both sides.
That loving gestures of faith can be ok for an atheist because they see it is sent with love not sent with a motive to change them.
And that believers will not attempt to use prayer as a weapon or catalyst for a need for change,
that their faith is based in love to give....to give only.
It matters not what and who we believe in as long as we believe in each other and love each other
and show we love each other.
Love is contagious, as is hope and being positive, the more we give the more we will get.
...If an atheist flatly says 'don't pray for me' they are turning away a loving gesture
and that is insulting to the one giving,
YOU are saying it's a loving gesture, they may not. It can be just as insulting to the receiver. It's not because one wants to give that another one has an obligation to receive. If one gives 'unsolicited' or gives knowing it will probably not be well received, one needs to be ready to have this 'gift' turned away. Why can't you see that? Why should it be the reluctant receiver having to make the step towards your 'feelings' and not the other way around?
And this is for everything, not just your 'love'.
Also, you can be responsible for how you are perceived - it's how you project yourself. Of course, it's the receiver with the ultimate 'decision', but YOU make the impression.
I know someone who hates brownies. Say I nevertheless offer her brownies, she says no thank you. I say, but it's from the heart, I spent ages making them to my fantastic secret recipe, everyone likes them! She still says no. Do I have a right to be offended/feel insulted? No. Because I know this 'gesture' of lovingly made brownies will not be well received - so why do I insist? Masochism? An unwanted gesture is still unwanted, whatever the intentions.
...If an atheist flatly says 'don't pray for me' they are turning away a loving gesture
and that is insulting to the one giving,
YOU are saying it's a loving gesture, they may not. It can be just as insulting to the receiver. It's not because one wants to give that another one has an obligation to receive. If one gives 'unsolicited' or gives knowing it will probably not be well received, one needs to be ready to have this 'gift' turned away. Why can't you see that? Why should it be the reluctant receiver having to make the step towards your 'feelings' and not the other way around?
And this is for everything, not just your 'love'.
I know someone who hates brownies. Say I nevertheless offer her brownies, she says no thank you. I say, but it's from the heart, I spent ages making them to my fantastic secret recipe, everyone likes them! She still says no. Do I have a right to be offended/feel insulted? No. Because I know this 'gesture' of lovingly made brownies will not be well received - so why do I insist? Masochism?
You don't have to accept my love redrock, that was the point you can perceive me any way you want to and boy do you
I will repeat myself here
I am saying it is a two way effort. Atheists can allow faith based love, that is being respectful. It is up to them if they embrace it but when the intentions are pure they can be gracious to the giver.
and I'd take the frickin brownies and eat them even though I hate them and I do when offered
now if they are special brownies I will not hate them as much
I am saying it is a two way effort. Atheists can allow faith based love, that is being respectful. It is up to them if they embrace it but when the intentions are pure they can be gracious to the giver.
OK... two way... I see you say what atheist can do - that's their effort. Where is the 'second way'? What's the 'theists' bit then? You don't mention anything (yet again). Could it be that the theist respects the atheist desires and be gracious in accepting they need not 'give'? Or are the atheists intentions not pure enough?
Is it not the purpose of any religion to convert you to there way of thinking, and the easiest way to do so is when the receiver is in some sort of trouble(e.g. grieving,in prison,homeless, poor, sick,dying). As the individual/group would be more acceptable to their way of thinking and more open to influence and corruption, and thus likely to assimilated into the fold.
** Don't worry as I typed this I have feeling I am one sick fucker **
Rod Laver Arena - Feb 18, 2003
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
I am saying it is a two way effort. Atheists can allow faith based love, that is being respectful. It is up to them if they embrace it but when the intentions are pure they can be gracious to the giver.
OK... two way... I see you say what atheist can do - that's their effort. Where is the 'second way'? What's the 'theists' bit then? You don't mention anything (yet again). Could it be that the theist respects the atheist desires and be gracious in accepting they need not 'give'? Or are the atheists intentions not pure enough?
And I agree I see the sides but both sides can work together
I feel this way ....
it is up to the receiver how he will perceive people in general..their gestures, their opinions, their love.
and we can not be responsible for how we will be perceived and will always run the risk of being misunderstood
But we can work towards a loving situation
One should not offer love with an alterior motive,
so if a believer is saying they will pray for someone with the thought of saving them,
this is an insult to them and is not received as a sincere loving gesture.
A loving gesture has no requirements...it is giving....it is pure and it feels this way in your heart
If an atheist flatly says 'don't pray for me' they are turning away a loving gesture
and that is insulting to the one giving,
so discerning they can be and respectful of another's love even if it is based in faith.
I am hoping for more understanding on both sides.
That loving gestures of faith can be ok for an atheist because they see it is sent with love not sent with a motive to change them. And that believers will not attempt to use prayer as a weapon or catalyst for a need for change,
that their faith is based in love to give....to give only.
It matters not what and who we believe in as long as we believe in each other and love each other
and show we love each other.
Love is contagious, as is hope and being positive, the more we give the more we will get.
It seems that "God" would be fed up with what is going on with "His" creation. Though he sits in the clouds and does nothing? Interesting. maybe instead of looking to the clouds for all of our answers (to the unanswerable and unknowable) we should start looking at ourselves. The human race is a plague.
It seems that "God" would be fed up with what is going on with "His" creation. Though he sits in the clouds and does nothing? Interesting. maybe instead of looking to the clouds for all of our answers (to the unanswerable and unknowable) we should start looking at ourselves. The human race is a plague.
In 1947, sociologist Dr. Carle Zimmerman wrote a text called Family and Civilization. He identified 11 "symptoms of final decay" observable in the fall of both Greek and Roman civilizations. See how many characterize the North American societies...
1. No fault divorce
2. Increased disrespect for parenthood and parents
3.Meaningless marriage rights/ceremonies
4. Defamation of past national heroes
5. Acceptance of alternative marriage forms
6. Widespread attitudes of feminism, narcissism, and hedonism
7. Propogation of anitfamily sentiment
8. Acceptance of most forms of adultery
9. Rebellios children
10. Increased juvenile delinquency
11. Common acceptance of all forms of sexual perversion.*
the moral and ethical values that made America strong are dissipating....
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
It seems that "God" would be fed up with what is going on with "His" creation. Though he sits in the clouds and does nothing? Interesting. maybe instead of looking to the clouds for all of our answers (to the unanswerable and unknowable) we should start looking at ourselves. The human race is a plague.
In 1947, sociologist Dr. Carle Zimmerman wrote a text called Family and Civilization. He identified 11 "symptoms of final decay" observable in the fall of both Greek and Roman civilizations. See how many characterize the North American societies...
1. No fault divorce
2. Increased disrespect for parenthood and parents
3.Meaningless marriage rights/ceremonies
4. Defamation of past national heroes
5. Acceptance of alternative marriage forms
6. Widespread attitudes of feminism, narcissism, and hedonism
7. Propogation of anitfamily sentiment
8. Acceptance of most forms of adultery
9. Rebellios children
10. Increased juvenile delinquency
11. Common acceptance of all forms of sexual perversion.*
the moral and ethical values that made America strong are dissipating....
Sounds like some summer reading for me.
Let's see, what can we apply to the U.S.?
1,2,3,5,6 (what's wrong with feminism?),9,10.
We are doomed!!!
You know, with so much greed and corruption in this world, from corporations, companies, governments, law enforcement, religious leaders all so much bad energies, and when the truth that sits within all of us sees such corruption and lies, we turn away from it.
The truth you know inside is what's making you turn away from religion, as it should I guess, religion is covered with lies and corruption, made by mans greed and ego.
But the key is to take away that ego, find the nature of man, that is a path worth moving towards, see how deep the rabbit hole goes.
exactly. that was beautiful. very well put.
Post edited by blondieblue227 on
*~Pearl Jam will be blasted from speakers until morale improves~*
no matter if it's simply a "god bless you" after sneezing (we all remember that thread),
not trying to divert the subject, but I did not see this thread, and had a conversation with a friend recently about this same thing. I hadn't ever really thought about it; I've always just said 'bless you' (no 'god') when somebody sneezes, without literally thinking of blessing their souls or anything religious or the like. What was the consensus on what is 'politically correct'?
It was my thread. My original question in the thread was about saying excuse me after I sneeze. I discovered I'm a rude slob. My question was not about blessing someone but that came up in the thead: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=148739&hilit=+sneeze
[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
actually, i was referring to the thread i started a few months back saying "God Bless you, I don't say it". I got destroyed for pages upon pages for the simple fact that I felt uncomfortable blessing someone. It eventually got locked.
My personal belief is nonbelievers should attempt to feel the love
that comes their way even when associated with another's belief system,
even if it comes with God.
I do the same if approached by a religious person.
I respect their religion, their right to it and will listen to their words, although
I do not believe as they do.
Just as I listen to atheists scientific beliefs and thoughts on why God does not exist to them.
We owe it to each other to listen, embrace and try to bond whatever ones beliefs are.
If I show my love by saying I will pray it is up to the atheist to decide if he will embrace my gesture based in love or not but can still remain gracious and respectful.
I do not think it is crowding nor pushing to offer a 'my thoughts and prayers are with you' when I am being sincere and loving. I am not asking them to believe, I am showing my love.
And when I am out and I say thank you and a person responds.... 'no problem' :?
I will not jump on them nor be offended for their lack of politeness.
I will accept the phrase as it was offered because I get where they are coming from.
"nonbelievers should attempt.....". By saying this, you are putting the onus of understanding on ME. Like it's my responsibility to seek out th meaning in your Godlovemessage. That's silliness.
And actually, my standard response to "thank you" is "no problem". What exactly is wrong with that?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I, for one, definitely won't use that argument because I know for a fact that it does not hold any weight. We are born with an innate ability to distinguish between good and evil, it is for this reason that the Quran calls man as 'his own witness'. He knows when he has done wrong, his conscience constantly pricks him about it. Yet, there are people who just don't give a damn.
I may get the chance to see them live someday, but very unlikely
oh absolutely wo/man is her/his own witness. i consider my conscience my soul. weird concept for an atheist to speak of... having a soul?? i dont think so. i answer to myself not some entity some feel may exist, or definitely feel exist.
Everything in life is recorded, from our thoughts, intentions, words and actions. This is science, energy like that is not destroyed, but stored away in space time and beyond.
The entity is simply the truth, the reality of what is. When the usage of the word God is spoken, we lose sight of really what that means, God is nature, God is Life, God is everything from start to end.
Because of human nature, we often find the need to put a face to God, when we do that, we lose sight of the reality of God, which is everything. So indeed you answer to yourself only, which is part of the balance of nature. Your conscience keeps one in touch with nature, after all, if we recycle, we do this for nature, and our conscience, it's one. But again as humans, we like to split things.
Your conscience is your soul, then what is your conscience?
my conscience is my guide.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
...If someone says 'my thoughts and prayers are with you'
perhaps the atheist could just shrug it off and take the sentiment for what it is worth,
as nerve wracking as that is.....
seeing that it was not meant to offend.
shrug it off???? :roll: oh pandora... you must stop assuming everyone you meet or address is a believer. my thoughts are with you is quite enough without adding the prayers. sure feel free to say it to those you know with certainty are believers... but please show some respect and be a little more judicious instead of just tossing it out there and thinking the receiver should just shrug it off if theyre an atheist or irreligious.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
...If someone says 'my thoughts and prayers are with you'
perhaps the atheist could just shrug it off and take the sentiment for what it is worth,
as nerve wracking as that is.....
seeing that it was not meant to offend.
shrug it off???? :roll: oh pandora... you must stop assuming everyone you meet or address is a believer. my thoughts are with you is quite enough without adding the prayers. sure feel free to say it to those you know with certainty are believers... but please show some respect and be a little more judicious instead of just tossing it out there and thinking the receiver should just shrug it off if theyre an atheist or irreligious.
no matter if it's simply a "god bless you" after sneezing (we all remember that thread),
not trying to divert the subject, but I did not see this thread, and had a conversation with a friend recently about this same thing. I hadn't ever really thought about it; I've always just said 'bless you' (no 'god') when somebody sneezes, without literally thinking of blessing their souls or anything religious or the like. What was the consensus on what is 'politically correct'?
It was my thread. My original question in the thread was about saying excuse me after I sneeze. I discovered I'm a rude slob. My question was not about blessing someone but that came up in the thead: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=148739&hilit=+sneeze
[/quote][/quote][/quote]
actually, i was referring to the thread i started a few months back saying "God Bless you, I don't say it". I got destroyed for pages upon pages for the simple fact that I felt uncomfortable blessing someone. It eventually got locked.
"nonbelievers should attempt.....". By saying this, you are putting the onus of understanding on ME. Like it's my responsibility to seek out th meaning in your Godlovemessage. That's silliness.
And actually, my standard response to "thank you" is "no problem". What exactly is wrong with that?
Nothing wrong. The language has evolved and the 'traditional' you're welcome is no longer the only acceptable response, especially amongst the 'younger' people.
And that believers will not attempt to use prayer as a weapon or catalyst for a need for change,
that their faith is based in love to give....to give only.
I really don't think anyone is suggesting that with 'I'll pray for you' is an attempt for a theist to change an atheist. You are again choosing to ignore the point of this. If that's the best a theist can do on the 'two way' thing, it's poor. Again, how about respect for the atheists views in not automatically assuming they wish to have some 'prayer love'? Whether you say love is love or not.
You work on the premise that everyone wants what you want to give in the manner you want to give it and that it's disrespectful or rude to refuse. How about you think you have something that some would gratefully receive - let's find out first so you are not disrespectful to those who don't.
And that believers will not attempt to use prayer as a weapon or catalyst for a need for change,
that their faith is based in love to give....to give only.
I really don't think anyone is suggesting that with 'I'll pray for you' is an attempt for a theist to change an atheist. You are again choosing to ignore the point of this. If that's the best a theist can do on the 'two way' thing, it's poor. Again, how about respect for the atheists views in not automatically assuming they wish to have some 'prayer love'? Whether you say love is love or not.
but do they truly mean it or is it just a convention of their faith and they do it to get into their paradise.
Rod Laver Arena - Feb 18, 2003
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
Wookie - though some theits/followers of a religion do see their actions on earth as paving the way to 'paradise', the question I am asking is can a person impose a 'gift' (that they really want to give) to another person with the prior knowledge that it is not something they want and it will not be well received. Should this 'giving' person be offended/feel disrespected because this unsolicited 'gift' is unwanted? Is the 'receiver' closed hearted/minded if he/she says no to this 'gift'. Is this 'gift' still 'of the heart' / unselfish then? Or is it rather given for the benefit of the 'giver' (make them feel good?)?
A bit of a flippant example but an example nevertheless - Looking at the devastation in Japan, I see a family that have lost EVERYTHING. I have three TVs, I think 'from the bottom of my heart, I'll give them one of my TVs, I don't need 3, and they lost theirs. Then the family can gather around it and have a bit of cheer watching a funny film - just like my family do.' Do you think the family that lost everything will be grateful? Does the 'giver' have a right to feel disrespected when the 'gift' is not well received?
I know I keep on bringing up some strange concrete examples, but it seems the more abstract concepts are not fully understood.
Why no tolerance for the believer of God? Why no tolerance from the atheist?
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
Why no tolerance for the believer of God? Why no tolerance from the atheist?
Everyone can believe in what they want, but when one starts 'imposing' - that's different. ""The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
A double glazing salesman comes to your door, he's doing his job, you're not interested, you say no thank you. No problem. He comes to your door the next day knowing you are not interested but insists on 'doing what he needs to do'. Again, no thank you. And the next day... getting annoyed? What? He's back for a 4th time???? Don't you get pissed off? Bet you do.
Comments
It's religious rape.
I would agree with that, why waste one's time if someone wants no part of it.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
You are assuming wrong. Assuming I think that you are looking to change me? A bit presumptuous.
You ask why you must change your heart because you are wrongly perceived? Why should the 'receiver' change his/her heart just to accommodate you?
You keep on saying that it's the receiver's 'fault'. You are misjudged/incorrectly perceived. How about turning the table? That you are perceiving the receiver in the wrong way. You seem to take it as a personal affront that one is not 'interested' in YOUR kind of love. Why? Why would anyone not want to receive love? Because they don't perceive it as such.
As you say, it takes both sides. Say your prayers if you want, don't be insensitive to those that do not wish to receive them. As I said in my earlier post, insisting sending your prayers knowing that they are not 'welcome' is disrespectful (word you used). Why is this so difficult?
As blondie said... let it be.
this redrock just this
And I agree I see the sides but both sides can work together
I feel this way ....
it is up to the receiver how he will perceive people in general..their gestures, their opinions, their love.
and we can not be responsible for how we will be perceived and will always run the risk of being misunderstood
But we can work towards a loving situation
One should not offer love with an alterior motive,
so if a believer is saying they will pray for someone with the thought of saving them,
this is an insult to them and is not received as a sincere loving gesture.
A loving gesture has no requirements...it is giving....it is pure and it feels this way in your heart
If an atheist flatly says 'don't pray for me' they are turning away a loving gesture
and that is insulting to the one giving,
so discerning they can be and respectful of another's love even if it is based in faith.
I am hoping for more understanding on both sides.
That loving gestures of faith can be ok for an atheist because they see it is sent with love not sent with a motive to change them.
And that believers will not attempt to use prayer as a weapon or catalyst for a need for change,
that their faith is based in love to give....to give only.
It matters not what and who we believe in as long as we believe in each other and love each other
and show we love each other.
Love is contagious, as is hope and being positive, the more we give the more we will get.
YOU are saying it's a loving gesture, they may not. It can be just as insulting to the receiver. It's not because one wants to give that another one has an obligation to receive. If one gives 'unsolicited' or gives knowing it will probably not be well received, one needs to be ready to have this 'gift' turned away. Why can't you see that? Why should it be the reluctant receiver having to make the step towards your 'feelings' and not the other way around?
And this is for everything, not just your 'love'.
Also, you can be responsible for how you are perceived - it's how you project yourself. Of course, it's the receiver with the ultimate 'decision', but YOU make the impression.
I know someone who hates brownies. Say I nevertheless offer her brownies, she says no thank you. I say, but it's from the heart, I spent ages making them to my fantastic secret recipe, everyone likes them! She still says no. Do I have a right to be offended/feel insulted? No. Because I know this 'gesture' of lovingly made brownies will not be well received - so why do I insist? Masochism? An unwanted gesture is still unwanted, whatever the intentions.
You don't have to accept my love redrock, that was the point you can perceive me any way you want to and boy do you
I will repeat myself here
I am saying it is a two way effort. Atheists can allow faith based love, that is being respectful. It is up to them if they embrace it but when the intentions are pure they can be gracious to the giver.
and I'd take the frickin brownies and eat them even though I hate them and I do when offered
now if they are special brownies I will not hate them as much
OK... two way... I see you say what atheist can do - that's their effort. Where is the 'second way'? What's the 'theists' bit then? You don't mention anything (yet again). Could it be that the theist respects the atheist desires and be gracious in accepting they need not 'give'? Or are the atheists intentions not pure enough?
** Don't worry as I typed this I have feeling I am one sick fucker **
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
Powered by Pearl Jam
I feel this way ....
it is up to the receiver how he will perceive people in general..their gestures, their opinions, their love.
and we can not be responsible for how we will be perceived and will always run the risk of being misunderstood
But we can work towards a loving situation
One should not offer love with an alterior motive,
so if a believer is saying they will pray for someone with the thought of saving them,
this is an insult to them and is not received as a sincere loving gesture.
A loving gesture has no requirements...it is giving....it is pure and it feels this way in your heart
If an atheist flatly says 'don't pray for me' they are turning away a loving gesture
and that is insulting to the one giving,
so discerning they can be and respectful of another's love even if it is based in faith.
I am hoping for more understanding on both sides.
That loving gestures of faith can be ok for an atheist because they see it is sent with love not sent with a motive to change them.
And that believers will not attempt to use prayer as a weapon or catalyst for a need for change,
that their faith is based in love to give....to give only.
It matters not what and who we believe in as long as we believe in each other and love each other
and show we love each other.
Love is contagious, as is hope and being positive, the more we give the more we will get.
I felt that was pretty clear
Holy Fuck!
In 1947, sociologist Dr. Carle Zimmerman wrote a text called Family and Civilization. He identified 11 "symptoms of final decay" observable in the fall of both Greek and Roman civilizations. See how many characterize the North American societies...
1. No fault divorce
2. Increased disrespect for parenthood and parents
3.Meaningless marriage rights/ceremonies
4. Defamation of past national heroes
5. Acceptance of alternative marriage forms
6. Widespread attitudes of feminism, narcissism, and hedonism
7. Propogation of anitfamily sentiment
8. Acceptance of most forms of adultery
9. Rebellios children
10. Increased juvenile delinquency
11. Common acceptance of all forms of sexual perversion.*
the moral and ethical values that made America strong are dissipating....
Sounds like some summer reading for me.
Let's see, what can we apply to the U.S.?
1,2,3,5,6 (what's wrong with feminism?),9,10.
We are doomed!!!
exactly. that was beautiful. very well put.
actually, i was referring to the thread i started a few months back saying "God Bless you, I don't say it". I got destroyed for pages upon pages for the simple fact that I felt uncomfortable blessing someone. It eventually got locked.
http://forums.pearljam.com/viewtopic.ph ... +bless+you
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
"nonbelievers should attempt.....". By saying this, you are putting the onus of understanding on ME. Like it's my responsibility to seek out th meaning in your Godlovemessage. That's silliness.
And actually, my standard response to "thank you" is "no problem". What exactly is wrong with that?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
my conscience is my guide.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
shrug it off????
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i get where's Pandora's comin from.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
actually, i was referring to the thread i started a few months back saying "God Bless you, I don't say it". I got destroyed for pages upon pages for the simple fact that I felt uncomfortable blessing someone. It eventually got locked.
http://forums.pearljam.com/viewtopic.ph ... +bless+you[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
I'm sorry, I thought you meant my thread. I never saw your thread til now
8/08 - Ed solo in DC, 6/09 Ed in B'more,
10/10 - Brad in B'more
and I actually didn't see yours until you mentioned it either!
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Nothing wrong. The language has evolved and the 'traditional' you're welcome is no longer the only acceptable response, especially amongst the 'younger' people.
I really don't think anyone is suggesting that with 'I'll pray for you' is an attempt for a theist to change an atheist. You are again choosing to ignore the point of this. If that's the best a theist can do on the 'two way' thing, it's poor. Again, how about respect for the atheists views in not automatically assuming they wish to have some 'prayer love'? Whether you say love is love or not.
You work on the premise that everyone wants what you want to give in the manner you want to give it and that it's disrespectful or rude to refuse. How about you think you have something that some would gratefully receive - let's find out first so you are not disrespectful to those who don't.
but do they truly mean it or is it just a convention of their faith and they do it to get into their paradise.
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
Powered by Pearl Jam
A bit of a flippant example but an example nevertheless - Looking at the devastation in Japan, I see a family that have lost EVERYTHING. I have three TVs, I think 'from the bottom of my heart, I'll give them one of my TVs, I don't need 3, and they lost theirs. Then the family can gather around it and have a bit of cheer watching a funny film - just like my family do.' Do you think the family that lost everything will be grateful? Does the 'giver' have a right to feel disrespected when the 'gift' is not well received?
I know I keep on bringing up some strange concrete examples, but it seems the more abstract concepts are not fully understood.
Everyone can believe in what they want, but when one starts 'imposing' - that's different. ""The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
A double glazing salesman comes to your door, he's doing his job, you're not interested, you say no thank you. No problem. He comes to your door the next day knowing you are not interested but insists on 'doing what he needs to do'. Again, no thank you. And the next day... getting annoyed? What? He's back for a 4th time???? Don't you get pissed off? Bet you do.
Same principle.