The Local is not responsible for content posted by users.
This discussion forum closed permanently on 25th February 2021.
112 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Jan.2019, 10:51 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Bsmith @ 14.Jan.2019, 09:31 PM) *
Of course, I can say that I see God in the beauty of nature and the interconnectedness of all things. I can hear God in a beautiful song or the call of a bird, but these things are subjective, I realize.


Yes, this is known as "arguemtum ad formam" or more colloquially as the "look at the trees argument" and is a pretty poor justification. Firstly it is as you say subjective; the perception of beauty is a psychological phenomenon and there are far better explanations for it than the work of an unproven supernatural entity. Evolutionary theory provides one such far more reasonable explanation in that we as human beings have evolved to find beauty in our surroundings rather than the idea that the surroundings have been created with beauty inherent in it. It also demonstrates selection bias by focusing on the beautiful while ignoring things like tapeworms and other frankly horrible things found throughout nature.

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 14.Jan.2019, 09:31 PM) *
Still, you ask why I believe and the answer is that I have seen the work of His hand is my life. Of course, some would dismiss these personal occurrences as mere coincidence, but to me they are evidence of God guiding my life.


I understand that, but how are you able to differentiate between coincidence which one can demonstrate exists and a God which you can't? Surely, in order to reasonably attribute these occurrences to divine intervention, one must first rule out the possibility of coincidence?

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 14.Jan.2019, 09:31 PM) *
I don't know why God's word resonates with some and not others.


Perhaps because some of us are less ready to accept these writings as the word of God. Furthermore, the God portrayed in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament is a pretty hideous figure outrightly demanding genocide (specifically the murder of children) and the keeping of sex slaves:

"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." - Numbers 31:17-18

Remember that is the same God is the very same one in the New Testament who is claimed to be omnibenevolent. So my question would be why does this kind of thing resonate with anyone with a functioning moral compass?

Now whilst the above verses definitively falsify the claim of omnibenevolence and thus disprove the claim of the Christian God possessing this attribute, it doesn't prove the non-existance of one that doesn't. However who could ever worship such an entity? Imagine that such an entity's existence was in some way demonstrated, I would then have no option than to become a theist. Yet I still could never, ever worship or revere such a god as I am morally superior to it as are 99.99% of humankind.
  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938743 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Jan.2019, 08:31 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Gamla H?lsingebock @ 14.Jan.2019, 07:41 PM) *
About the Bible:

I have always been interested in its origin which I believe to be a compilation of folklore tales cataloged and written down at some time and then translated, interpreted, changed, etc by many different peoples over a long time frame and have wondered what the world would be like today if an original manuscript written in it's original language had been used to create what we accept today as the "Gospel"...


I also have been fascinated by the Bible and indeed have read it in its entirety (well perhaps skipping some of the begats) several times over the years. In fact, it is quite true to say that reading the Bible and being appalled by its contents (in both Testaments) set me on the path to renounce the faith of my childhood and to my eventual atheism.
  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938739 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Jan.2019, 08:23 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Thanks for the kind words Bsmith and the welcome intrepidfox.

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 14.Jan.2019, 01:39 PM) *
Again, each person is entitled to their own beliefs. Not everyone is attentive to God's word...especially in secular Sweden. Zechariah 7:11:"But they refused to pay attention and turned a stubborn shoulder and stopped their ears from hearing."


As I mentioned previously, thanks to the secular society that we have the great fortune to live in we are indeed (and quite rightly) entitled to our own beliefs. History tells us what happens under the rule of authoritarian theocracies and we need look no further than other parts of the world to see the same lack of freedoms today. This freedom of belief does not mean however that all beliefs are of equal validity or justification. David Ike believes for example that Tony Blair is a reptilian shapeshifter from another planet he does this despite the lack of evidence for his position and in spite of plenty of evidence countering it. Whilst it might be that not everyone is attentive to God's word, in order to justify this assertion, one would first have to demonstrate that there exists a God and then that the word is his. Without such a justification then the assertion is no different than asserting that not everyone is attentive to the word of David Ike's reptilian overlords.

Please rest assured that I am not trying to be offensive here it is just that the two statements are procedurally identical. Without adequate justification, the claim of God's word is logically no more persuasive than that of David Ike's reptilian's.

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 14.Jan.2019, 01:39 PM) *
I, of course, believe differently than you, Jamtjim. I believe that God is perfect and the source of all good and that Jesus Christ was and is his emissary to the world.


Well, I guess my question would be what reason do you have to think that this God actually exists? How have you arrived at the conclusion he is perfect and the source of all good (being the creator of everything surely he is ultimately also the creator of all evil)? And what justification have you for thinking that JC was his emissary?

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 14.Jan.2019, 01:39 PM) *
The problem with religious debates is that neither side's case can be proven or dis-proven. Lee Strobel wrote an interesting book, "The Case for Christ", in which he uses his journalistic prowess to "prove" the existence and omnipotence of Christ. He makes some very compelling arguments but the "case" can never really be proven. It will always fall to a matter of faith.


This is not strictly true I am afraid. Depending on what claims are being made for any chosen god, then they absolutely can be at least disproven. Indeed the concept of omnipotence (at least in the classical description of being able to do literally anything ... or alternatively that there is literally nothing that he/she could not do)is a very good example as it is a rather trivial exercise to show this a logical impossibility, and a claim for a God with this property is by definition also impossible. Check out the "Omnipotence Paradox" if you are unsure why this is the case.

On a side note, today's more sophisticated theologians are wont to redefine the term omnipotence in order to still claim it for their God This often results in little more than a circular tautology ("God can do all that is in his nature" or the even more asinine "God can do everything that he can do"). No matter, any limitation to his power is by definition something he/she cannot do. However, this is certainly not what I was taught growing up in mainstream Christianity. Indeed that God cannot possibly exist due to the logically impossible omnipotence it was claimed he possessed.

If one's goal is to believe things that are true (an avoid believing in things that are not), then the time to believe something is when it has been demonstrated to be true rather than not been demonstrated to be false. This is not preaching or asserting a moral viewpoint, it is a statement of reason. I, for example, cannot prove that there are not invisible fairies living at the end of my garden. This doesn't mean that I am in any way justified in believing that there are and to do so would be ludicrous. And whilst it is not strictly true that one cannot prove a negative, not being able to prove provides absolutely no justification for the positive.

Finally, I would point out that faith is an incredibly unsound basis for belief. "Faith" is the excuse people give for believing something when they don't have any evidence. If you have evidence, then you don't need faith. The problem is that without evidence then one has no means of decerning whether a claim is true or not thus rendering true and false claims indistinguishable from each other... one literally has no way of telling between the two. Let me put it another way, is there anything that one could not believe on faith? On faith one is equally able to believe false things as one is true ones. It is not a pathway to the truth it is a barrier to it. This is why we don't, for example, allow Airbus to build their aircraft "on faith", we ask for stringent checks to provide evidence of safety. You wouldn't get on a new A380 if you knew that the aircraft had been build on faith as you wouldn't want to find yourself spread like jam over a local field, yet faith is the reason given for what is potentially the most important decision of our lives if the claims of religion are to be believed.
  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938738 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 13.Jan.2019, 10:26 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Bsmith @ 13.Jan.2019, 09:22 PM) *
Perhaps he was and this aspect of his message was never recorded...or deleted. One must remember that the Bible is a collection of scripts written by different authors, over time and has been abridged by different authorities. Also, the Bible is somewhat cryptic and subject to individual interpretation.


Yes, that could be quite a plausible explaination... had Jesus been simply a man. But that is not the claim that Christians make. They claim that he was divine and either was a mouthpiece for God or even a manifestation of God himself.

Now imagine you are God and have an important message to get across to humankind regarding how you want them to treat each other. Would you trust it to "a collection of scripts written by different authors over time"? Would you make this vital information "cryptic and subject to individual interpretation"? What's more, the Christain God is claimed to be omniscient... he is supposed to know everything. Here is where it gets really quite troubling if you go down this line; the implication is that Jesus/God chose to share his will via a system that he would have known perfectly well would be edited and misunderstood so that pronouncements such as "slavery is wrong" or "being gay is fine" are completely and totally misunderstood as that "slavery is fine" and "gays should be killed".

What we are left with is either a fantastically incompetent God who wants to broadcast his message of anti-slavery and opposition to homophobia but instead gives his followers the exact opposite view of his will or you are left with an evil monster of a God whose views are completely at odds with what we would call moral.

Yes, these important proclamations could have been excluded from the scriptorial record, but only if Jesus lacked divinity or else if the Christian God had deemed it so... knowing full well that this omission would lead to the horrors of slavery and the hideous deaths of countless gay people, people deemed to be "witches" and raped women just to scrape the surface. Simple logical deduction shows that he/she must be either non-existent, incompetent or a monster. I know which one I'm going for!
  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938709 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 13.Jan.2019, 06:37 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938698 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 13.Jan.2019, 05:54 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Gamla H?lsingebock @ 13.Jan.2019, 05:39 PM) *
Welcome home!!!


Thanks Gamla, but to be fair I don't really regard The Local as home... it's more like a Travel Lodge where I stay when all the decent hotels are booked up!
  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938693 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 13.Jan.2019, 03:38 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Hi Bsmith and thanks for the kind welcome back.

There are a couple of problems with that. Firstly Jesus's condonation of slavery is New Testament. Instead of instructing slaves to obey their masters (Colossians 3:22) perhaps the conduit of God's will should have instead said "Look guys, owning people as property is wrong". But he didn't. Perhaps Jesus should have preached that homosexuality was not a sin punishable by death. But he didn't.

Contrary to what you have claimed that Jesus came to earth to correct religious laws, he himself said that the opposite is the case:

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." - Matthew 5:17

Jesus's position is unequivocally that the barbaric laws of the Old Testament with all the evil they entailed would remain unchanged. Just think how much human suffering could have been avoided had Jesus said that homosexuality was ok, or that contraception was not a sin or that witches did not exist but he didn't do any of this. If the will of God was in line with our modern, more enlightened views of fairness and reason, then why did Jesus not say as much.

In truth, Jesus refected the very human views of the people in the cultural backwater where he lived. Whilst it might be argued that he may have been slightly more liberal than those around him, he was far from it when compared to a modern-day morality. The question is therefore, why didn't he, being divine and all that, preach an ultimate morality, forbidding slavery, dispelling ignorant prejudice against gays and allowing potentially life-saving contraception. He was God after all if this was his opinion why did he preach the exact opposite?

Yes these days we have the right to have our own beliefs but again this is in spite of religious teachings which state the exact opposite with the old laws as condoned by Jesus demanding the death penalty for apostasy for example:

"If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people." - Deuteronomy 13:6-9

Even in mainstream Christianity, belief rather than conduct is the only prerequisite for entry to Heaven with all non-believers being tortured for eternity... simply for not sharing the same belief. So yes, we all have a right to our own beliefs thanks to reasoned, secular legislature rather than religious commandment.
  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938682 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 13.Jan.2019, 01:48 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Bsmith @ 12.Jan.2019, 03:57 PM) *
I remember reading somewhere that Einstein, in his later years, came to be a believer of God.


Yeah, this was a lie put about by certain religious groups similar to the smears against people like Darwin who was erroneously said to have renounced his theory of Evolution on his death bed and even more recently with the late, great Christopher Hitchens who also had his beliefs egregiously misrepresented once his death meant that he could no longer counter the mistruths. You see, whilst lying is seen as a sin, for some fundamentalists lying for Jesus is a virtue.

In truth, Einstein did not believe in a god or gods he instead used the term in a kind of pantheistic way as a short cut for the rules of nature. He did not have religious beliefs; he was what is known as an "agnostic atheist" although it is true that he prefered to describe himself as simply "agnostic". Etymologically speaking "atheism" is a response to the position of "theism". A theist is someone that holds the belief that a god or gods exist. Anyone who is not a theist is an atheist; the "a" at the beginning of the word meaning "not". The atheist position is not the counter position that a god or gods do not exist just as a court verdict of "not guilty" does not imply that a defendant is innocent but rather that he has not been demonstrated to have been guilty.

The term "agnostic" simply means not knowing deriving as it does from the Greek word "gnosis" meaning knowledge. Used on its own, it doesn't mean anything as it lacks a subject but coupled with atheism (or indeed theism) it denotes an existential belief position regarding a god or gods but without a claim of knowledge; a subset of belief. Therefore an agnostic atheist is a person who doesn't believe in a god or gods but does not claim to know this as fact. An agnostic theist would be someone who does believe in a god or gods but doesn't claim this as fact. Agnosticism can be used in various other fields too. I am agnostic with regards to life on other planets for example or whether the number of needles on the pine tree that I can see from my window is odd or even. In my line of work, you hear the terms "format" or "platform" agnostic meaning that the data format or native platform is not known.

Personally, I would describe my general position also as being an agnostic atheist as whilst I do not believe in a deity of any form, I do not claim to know that such an entity does not exist. However with regard to certain god claims such as the classical theism ones foisted upon me as a child sent to Sunday School I would claim knowledge that these do not exist based upon the paradoxical nature of some of the claims made about such a deity. For example, any god that is claimed to be omnipotent cannot possibly exist as omnipotence is a logical impossibility.



QUOTE (Bsmith @ 12.Jan.2019, 03:57 PM) *
Also I think that the Bible is more than just a collection of stories. It is a blueprint for a successful society.


Not sure about that. The bible is a pretty horrific book if you actually read it. Jesus himself is clearly supportive of slavery instructing slaves to submit to their masters rather than decreeing slavery to be a sin. It demands the burning of witches and the killing of homosexuals. It says that a raped woman should marry her rapist, that a woman who cannot prove her virginity on her wedding night should be stoned and that a woman who doesn't cry for help loud enough while being rape should also be killed. It is a horrible book full to the brim with barbarism and inhumanity. Although cherry-picked quotes from the Bible are used to create the illusion that Christianity is all love and peace, this is totally at odds with the book at large and even Jesus who is supposed to have himself said that he did not "come to bring peace but a sword". Society is successful in spite of the Bible rather than because of it.

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 12.Jan.2019, 03:57 PM) *
And, of course, there is the Golden Rule: do onto others as you would have done to yourself. You really can't do much better than that for a standard to follow.


Cherry-picked quotes such as this one. Sure it is not a bad standard to follow but it is one that predates Jesus by hundreds if not thousands of years at least back to Babylonian times 1700 years before. It is not an original biblical concept but was a well established and widespread principle long before biblical times. Of course, it doesn't apply if the other person is gay... coz then you should kill them and I'm pretty sure that anyone would want that done unto them!

  Forum: Miscellaneous · Post Preview: #938674 · Replies: 41 · Views: 24,931

Jamtjim
Posted on: 18.Jun.2016, 03:12 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Bsmith @ 17.Jun.2016, 09:57 PM) *
When I was a kid, you could make a cross bow in shop class and no one would have a hissy over it.


How did you make it cross? wink.gif

QUOTE (Model T Ford @ 16.Jun.2016, 07:45 PM) *
I am not Obama or Osama, for that matter, and Gamla called for the death by the West of those who espouse Islam in his opening post.


Death of the West? Hahaha... MTF should really try reading peoples posts before lying about them...

QUOTE (Gamla H?lsingebock @ 16.Jun.2016, 06:31 PM) *
P/S: Yes, I am glad that JJ is back...you two provide a lot of fun reading and are considered by a lot of us twin pleasures on this forum...the back and forth, coupled by brilliant "one-up-manship" provides us with a plethora of fun words to decipher...no pun there laugh.gif


Steady on there Citizen Gamla, no one said I was "back"... at least on a permanent basis. I look in now and again to see what is going on but this place hasn't been the same since Trow left / died / got straight jacketed. He was a delusional and funny old bugger, mad as a box of frogs, but at least he was entertaining to read (well at least the first hundred words which one could decipher before it turned into total, made-up, gibberish). Even back in the good ole days, I was selective about which posts I responded to and I enjoyed Trows particular blend of pomposity, misplaced arrogance and utter cretiny but sadly these days are gone and there is little here which I can be bothered with.

That said I have rather enjoyed this thread so who knows... Many thanks for the kind word. I very much doubt that this is a popular opinion... but then again argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy. It's what keeps me going..
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894249 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 16.Jun.2016, 05:28 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Right, so absolutely no attempt made to justify your cretinous allegation... That figures!

I repeat the question. How is it that we give encouragement to Gamla?

Remind me who the "idiot" is again?
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894147 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 16.Jun.2016, 05:09 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


And how do we do that pray tell? Sounds like the kind of thing only an "idiot" would allege!
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894144 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 16.Jun.2016, 04:48 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Well for once I fully agree with you ... well at least with the first two paragraphs.

In addition I also fear that there may be future mass shootings like the ones in Orlando yet I can't really see why that would be thanks to "idiots" like us, sitting in countries other than the US and with absolutely no control or influence over their laws regarding gun ownership or anything else...

In fact as far as I can see, only an "idiot" could say that we do.
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894142 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 16.Jun.2016, 08:48 AM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Ok, I concede. The "faces ripped off" was somewhat hyperbolic...

Therefore I will not only withdraw my previous comment but refine it post-hoc it to "suffer horrific injuries" which would encompass not just face ripping but amputation of limbs, permanent scaring and other life-changing injuries..

You know what? I'll go even further and change "children" to "people" after all (and I hope that you will forgive the blatant and jarring tautology) people are people too...

My comment would now be (had I not withdrawn it):

"Back in Blighty, it doesn't seem to matter how many toddlers are mauled to death nor how many people have suffer horrific injuries by dangerous dogs, there has always been massive resistance to controls on breeds or attempts at licensing."

Which of course completely alters the essence of the point I was making regarding hazardous canines does it not?

This is the new and improved Jamtjim, always keen to appease my opponent, keen to correct any mistakes or inaccuracies and always vastly overjoyed to do so...

Now we are both content! Happy days!!

Anyway, can't stop. I have my MG-42 to polish and I need to take my T-rex out for a walk down to the kindergarten and back... Perhaps I should feed him first, he gets a bit bitey when he's hungry...
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894116 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 15.Jun.2016, 08:31 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Hallander @ 15.Jun.2016, 08:57 PM) *
You can count the number of children injured in the way he describes on one hand in a year.


7,227 people were admitted into hospital because of dog bites and strikes in the UK between March 2014 and February 2015.

Children under the age of nine accounted for 1,159 of the recent cases.

The number of dog attacks, official hospital figures show, a 76 per cent rise over the past decade.

The statistics showed that 123 people were given a primary diagnosis of "traumatic amputation of wrist and hand" - including one child.

At least 21 people, including 13 children, have died in England and Wales in the past 10 years from dog attacks.

Source: Heath and Social Care Information Centre


Three per cent of dogs are showing aggression to people on a weekly basis, equating to nearly 250 incidents every seven days.

Source: PDSA


You must have very big hands Hallander!

Anyway seeing that Gamla is correct (as was my prediction) I therefore retract my comment about psychotic pooches so that we may continue on bashing the stupidity of religion!
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894104 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 15.Jun.2016, 08:09 AM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Hek makes a reasonable point. However in our defence, I would point out that the theme of this tread was "A religion out of control" and as such it should come as no surprise that the religious aspect of this latest mass shooting comes under discussion.

It occurs to me that the American obsession with the ownership of firearms is somewhat akin to the British obsession with dog albeit on a far grander scale. Back in Blighty, it doesn't seem to matter how many toddlers are mauled to death nor how many children have their faces ripped off by dangerous dogs, there has always been massive resistance to controls on breeds or attempts at licensing. It seem that a British man's right to own a Pittbull or a Rottweiler is more important than the safety of the people around him including sadly his own family. (I believe that there has been progress in this area of late with legislation on micro-chipping. I'm sure someone will inform me. I know form experience the backlash one gets for anything less than sycophancy for dogs.)

In the US it seems that it doesn't matter how many kids are murdered in school shootings, nor student in campus shootings. The tens of thousands of incidents and the thousands of dead is evidently an acceptable price for the right to be able to buy an assault rifle with thousands of rounds of ammunition without a waiting period, possession of a licence or indeed any state interference.

And just to head this one off at the pass, I should point out that I am not anti-gun, in fact I am a gun owner who has used firearms all of my life. The thing is that my weapons are licensed, controlled and monitored and that only guns necessary for a specific purpose (in my case hunting) are allowed. Any sign of mental instability or criminality and my guns are confiscated in a shot (please excuse the pun). It is not a perfect system as perfect systems tend not to exist in reality, but it does seem to work and this balance between freedom of ownership and restriction on firearm ownership results in very few casualties from legally owned weapons

The fact is that no one needs an AR-15 (the rifle used in the latest shooting and of which there are 3.3 million floating around the US) in a modern, civilised society (or even America - just kidding) and the consequences of having them so freely available are obvious in the all too regular bloodbaths.

America needs to do something about it's gun laws, but I doubt this will ever happen. A nation noted for it's narcissism and self-interest as well as rights of the individual at the expense of society as a whole is unlikely to be swayed by yet another mass shooting. After all if the shooting of the 20 six and seven year old children in Sandy Hook could not sway public opinion, I doubt that the gunning down of 49 people in a gay club in the famously right wing, conservative and religiously indoctrinated US is going to change much.

Sadly people will continue to be murdered in mass shootings in the US just as people will continue to be attacked by four legged killing machines in the UK. Perhaps I am being pessimistic here, but I simply cant see where the change is going to come from...

In the mean time, I'll board up my windows, bar the doors and reach for my AK-47...
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894066 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Jun.2016, 04:25 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Hahahaha!! "SIS agent"? Hahahaha... Can't breathe... Sides hurt...

Nothing ever changes on The Local!
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894038 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Jun.2016, 04:00 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


The Red Cross in Kalmar:

http://kommun.redcross.se/kalmar/
  Forum: Life in Sweden · Post Preview: #894034 · Replies: 7 · Views: 4,118

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Jun.2016, 03:56 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


It is clearly far too early to come to have reached that conclusion. Part of critical thinking is remaining sceptical and not jumping to conclusions with insufficient evidence. Whilst Mateen had allegedly visited the night club in question, there is as just no evidence that rejection issues where behind any of his actions, just supposition.

On the other hand, he did pledge allegiance to extremest Islam and, even if he was repressing his homosexuality there is a clear religious basis for that too. The are also accounts of the guy becoming radicalised prior to this incident. At this stage we simply do not know and possibly may never know his exact motivations. We do know that the Koran calls for the murder of homosexuals as does the Bible so even if this particular incident turns out to be motivated by rejection rather than ideology, all the points I made still stand despite not being relevant in this particular case.
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894031 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Jun.2016, 03:24 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


The problem is less one of a single religion in my opinion, but of religion in general. Hitchens perhaps said it best when he pointed out that "Religion poisons everything". He was right. Adherence to the backward, demeaning, barbaric and vacuously superstitious ideologies of religious belief propagate, infect and debase human existence on a massive scale, holding us back form social, and in many case technical advancement and sullying the lives of billions.

And it is not just the flying bullets and firey explosions of modern day extremist Islam. It is the rampant sex abuse in various religious institutions covered up to avoid "embarrassment". It is the deliberate spreading of odious lies regarding contraception by the Catholic Church in AIDS riddled Africa. It is the spreading of hate against gays and transgender people by evangelical protestants or the meddling of the Church of England to ensure that people in chronic, terminal pain are forced to undergo prolonged suffering rather than being able to end their own lives.

Illogical, unreasoned beliefs lead to illogical, unreasoned actions. They lead otherwise decent people to do hideously evil things and give the justification for less decent people to do the same. The world has changed radically in the last few decades. The means to murder many people by an individual have never been more available whilst modern communication now allows extremists of every denomination to converse and egg each other on. But as the world has changed, we as a species have failed to keep up, the majority of us stubbornly clinging on to asinine and ludicrous beliefs in a supremely powerful sky pixie.

Some human beings will undoubtedly continue to do horrible things but it is high time that we deal with the causes and religion is undoubtedly one of these. The only way to do this is by education and the teaching of critical thinking over dogmatic indoctrination. And this is a double edged sword, we in the west cannot go around telling Muslims that they should not believe in the commandments their version of the Abrahamic imaginary friend whilst holding a similar beliefs in the more familiar one of Jesus. They are both equally untrue and potentially dangerous and it would be hypocritical to pretend otherwise.

Finally, to address the previous post, a fear of Islam is not a phobia. A phobia is an irrational fear where as it is entirely rational to fear Islam just as it is rational to fear any religion. We should be afraid of a theology that advocates the beheading of the infidel just as we should fear the one that advocates the murder of homosexuals and witches, the forced marriage of a rape victim to her attacker or encourages the wilful subjugation of slaves. We should fear these irrational, bronze-age ideologies and we should do what we can to reduce them.
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #894025 · Replies: 58 · Views: 26,613

Jamtjim
Posted on: 16.Feb.2016, 09:04 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


In the end seventy nine year old with known heart problems died in his sleep. Nothing so unusual in that.

What is somewhat distasteful is how the conservative right wingnuts like Trump and Michael Savage will try absolutely anything, no matter now far fetched and unlikely to try and make political gains out of it.

Scalia was extremely unpopular in many circles. His position gave him the opportunity to inflict his bigotry on and retard the progress of an entire nation for thirty years. I certainly won't be mourning his passing out of office even if I sympathise with his passing out of life. Unpopular as he was, there is unlikely to be anything nefarious with his death as indeed there is no evidence of such... But that won't let unscrupulous, unethical nutjobs try to utilise this for their own ends... political or conspiratorial.
  Forum: International affairs · Post Preview: #884419 · Replies: 13 · Views: 3,937

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Feb.2016, 07:31 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Replace the name Lazarzero with "moron" and same shit... no difference!
  Forum: Life in Sweden · Post Preview: #884266 · Replies: 361 · Views: 76,817

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Feb.2016, 07:16 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


QUOTE (Lazarzero @ 14.Feb.2016, 07:03 PM) *
How about you speculate on this: it's possible people have professions that make them keep irregular hours. Jobs like cab driver, bus driver, working in a restaurant (particularly a manager or bartender), janitor, working in a hospital, live-in caregiver, truck driver, working in general labor, etc. These jobs and more can make people keep irregular hours. It's also possible that people can work from home and keep irregular hours (like being a graphic designer)


Indeed that is possible. But given your overwhelmingly evident lack of real life experience of Sweden and reliance on clich?d stereotypes... plus your US spelling of certain words.. makes me wonder if you have actually ever been here.

As your general description of the country where I have lived for the last decade and a half is completely at odds with the reality I have experienced, I judge your nonsensical bile as just that..

You're no Westbro Baptist are you? You know "God hates Sweden" and all that gibberish? I mean, if I was that kind of redneck moron, that is the kind of inept thing I would do...
  Forum: Life in Sweden · Post Preview: #884262 · Replies: 361 · Views: 76,817

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Feb.2016, 06:10 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


"People assume I've never learned the language. People assume I'm a European. People assume I'm American. People assume English is my first language. People assume I'm a he/she/it. People come to these assumptions with never bothering to ask me."

To be fair, I ASSUME nothing.

However I SPECULATE that you are no more than a disgruntled ne'er-do-well. This is a speculation more than justified by the masses of confirming evidence.
  Forum: Life in Sweden · Post Preview: #884254 · Replies: 361 · Views: 76,817

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Feb.2016, 05:44 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


Gamla... He is not in Sweden! Look at the timings of his posts... always in the early mornings or late afternoon /early evening. He is just a disgruntled American troll whose ego cannot cope with the fact he can't get it on with his Swedish babysitter.
  Forum: Life in Sweden · Post Preview: #884244 · Replies: 361 · Views: 76,817

Jamtjim
Posted on: 14.Feb.2016, 02:01 PM





Group: Members
Posts: 2,797
Joined: 11.Sep.2006
Member No.: 10,378


As already mentioned by Gamla, I see nothing outrageous or scandalous in this story... with the emphasis on "story" coming as it does from an anonymous "friend" via an hitherto unknown new poster. It is not unusual for people accused of serious crimes to be held in custody while the allegation is investigated.

A couple of things did cause me some mirth however. The "strange and disturbing language" spoken by the flatmate put me in mind of the Black Speak of Mordor and the fact that the friend could not manage to go four hours without risk of unconsciousness makes me question the legitimacy of this particular tale.
  Forum: Life in Sweden · Post Preview: #884227 · Replies: 27 · Views: 12,926

112 Pages V   1 2 3 > »