Are you religious?

[tattybadger]

You may be right, but they dont use that calendar here they use the the Iranian calendar, also known as Persian calendar or the Jalaali Calendar.

Thanks for that - what does the start date represent?

[eodmatt]

The vernal equinox as defined each year by astronomical observations from Tehran.

[Excognito]

Theist logic

"God exists"

"Oh, yeah! Prove it!"

"YOU can't prove that he doesn't"

In order to prove a crime has occurred, the prosecution must prove something has happened, not the defence.
We can assume there are no gods until theists provide evidence to the contrary.

I thought we'd been through this?

http://www.animallawcentre.org.uk/[/url] ]
A particularly exciting area of animal law concerns the question of whether animals can be legal persons. At present the law divides persons from things. Only humans (and companies created by humans) enjoy the status of a legal person and have rights. Animals are ‘things’ at law and cannot have legal rights. There are, however, laws to protect the welfare of some animals. But there is now a strong argument for granting some animals, e.g., adult chimpanzees, some basic legal rights, e.g. freedom from torture and slavery.

Torture is an offence under English law. The International Criminal Court Act 2001 defines torture as "the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions.

So rather than put the physiological and genetic similarity of chimpanzees to use in the lab to help understand, cure and prevent human disease, I may be legally forced to accept that I cannot carry out some experiments on chimpanzees because they would constitute torture (ie intentional inflicting of severe pain on a chimp under my control for the purpose of directing its behaviour). Well, bully for all these animal activists. Stuffing a cattle prod up a chimp's backside results in some really hilarious-to-me antics and it's just stuff and nonsense to insist that I should give up my harmless pastimes because some weak headed numpty 'ooh's and 'aah's about 'chimps have feelings too'.

I want to see them prove that a chimp feels pain or suffering. Until they do I can, using your argument, assume that chimps feel no pain until someone provides evidence to the contrary.

Bend over Cheetah. Daddy's fixed the fuse

[OriginalSnowy]

[BoomShackerLacker]

The Narnia Code - excellently constructed contribution

[OriginalSnowy]

I pity you, Democritus. You're worshiping a gap...

I can probably get by without pity, thanks, and you have no idea what, if anything, I'm "worshiping". I did refer to the wearisome futility of circular arguments, and to the wisdom (in my opinion, at least) of avoiding them. I can do no more than recommend that course of action to you.

Rather than attempting to close down debate with pseudo-intellectualism, why don't you share your beliefs (which I would assume includes atomic theory, given your name) with the rest of the class?

[BoomShackerLacker]

The Narnia Code - excellently constructed contribution

Polkinghorne surfaces in the above programme... an interesting individual in his own right Clickety click

[Dimebag]

100% atheist, as a man of scientific principals I'll believe in facts and put my faith in proof.

The idea of putting unfounded belief and blind faith into the mix to answer unexplainable questions insults me to the very core. There are no doubt issues that we do not posses the knowledge to explain or capability to understand yet as our primative senses have only just evolved out of a period where we were no more than apes.

In my opinion religion is a tool used for the waging of wars, unjustified killing in the name of an almighty and a mass method of control via brainwashing.

The worst are parents who "educate" their children to believe in a certain God, whatever one they happen to think is real. Inflicting their own mental illness and delivering something that is essentially a class A drug of control onto the poor kids who's minds close usually in fear of putting a foot wrong and angering their new imaginary friend.

Show me proof and I'll believe in it, until then I'll leave my mind open and my life free of a made up God.

[Excognito]

100% atheist, as a man of scientific principals I'll believe in facts and put my faith in proof.

The idea of putting unfounded belief and blind faith into the mix to answer unexplainable questions insults me to the very core. There are no doubt issues that we do not posses the knowledge to explain or capability to understand yet as our primative senses have only just evolved out of a period where we were no more than apes.

In my opinion religion is a tool used for the waging of wars, unjustified killing in the name of an almighty and a mass method of control via brainwashing.

The worst are parents who "educate" their children to believe in a certain God, whatever one they happen to think is real. Inflicting their own mental illness and delivering something that is essentially a class A drug of control onto the poor kids who's minds close usually in fear of putting a foot wrong and angering their new imaginary friend.

Show me proof and I'll believe in it, until then I'll leave my mind open and my life free of a made up God.

You might benefit, although I have to express my doubts, from reading this thread a little more closely.

a. One of the key points about modern (ie, for about the past 80 years) scientific and mathematical thinking is that "proof" doesn't necessarily exist for things that are true.

b. Our current state of knowledge is imperfect, which requires us to make decisions based upon more than just logical analysis of commonly agreed facts, eg intuition or personal experience (people's mental experiences are not generally shareable - eg, it is difficult to convey the meaning of a colour picture to someone who was born blind).

c. Some of us deist types do not adhere to our religion based on "unfounded belief and blind faith".

d. Religion is indeed a tool for justification of political/social actions, such as war and negative behavioural control. However, it is also used to justify more positive behaviour, such as seeking peace or aiding people in need. Furthermore, even a brief perusal of history should show that lack of religion doesn't prevent people from finding ways of killing or controlling each other (BTW, if a ruler appeals to the people to kill "their" enemies as a service to a deity, then it's not actually "unjustified" killing - you might disagree with the justification but that's a different matter)

e. Parents will generally educate their children to follow their beliefs - why would you expect them to do anything different, whether they are agnositics, deists, supernaturalists or deranged atheists?

[tattybadger]

Whether they are agnositics, deists, supernaturalists or deranged atheists?

You naughty little deranged fish you!!