|
Post by Lykos Packleader on Jan 13, 2011 7:32:07 GMT 10
Heyla,
Simply put, and for the record: Eeewwww! (Buries offended nose into fresh manure, whines and then rubs further offended nostrils against steel wool ... there! That's better!)
At the risk of appearing an idiot from asking an obvious question, must we claim it simply because it's there? Should we not, instead, find some way to rid the Earth of this eyesore, instead of claiming it as some sort of macabre continent?
Lykosha, for one, will not join the pitiful number of micro-(brained) nations intent on claiming anything simply because it's there.... we'd rather claim land that isn't there, in some sort of fantasy planet, co-existing on some fantasy continent, than live on plastic shopping bagsand etcetera.
I mean, no offense, but this goes beyond common sense.... really!
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 16, 2011 14:22:17 GMT 10
Heyla, Simply put, and for the record: Eeewwww! (Buries offended nose into fresh manure, whines and then rubs further offended nostrils against steel wool ... there! That's better!) At the risk of appearing an idiot from asking an obvious question, must we claim it simply because it's there? Should we not, instead, find some way to rid the Earth of this eyesore, instead of claiming it as some sort of macabre continent? Lykosha, for one, will not join the pitiful number of micro-(brained) nations intent on claiming anything simply because it's there.... we'd rather claim land that isn't there, in some sort of fantasy planet, co-existing on some fantasy continent, than live on plastic shopping bagsand etcetera. I mean, no offense, but this goes beyond common sense.... really! Currently commercialised GM crops in the US: - Soy (91%)
- Cotton (88%)
- Canola (80-85%)
- Corn (85%)
- Hawaiian papaya (more than 50%)
Other sources of GMOs: - Dairy products from cows injected with rbGH
- Food additives, flavorings, including the sweetener aspartame (NutraSweet®)
- Meat, eggs, and dairy products from animals that have eaten GM feed
- Honey and bee pollen that may have GM sources of pollen
- Contamination or pollination caused by GM seeds or pollen
Some of the ingredients that may be GM: vegetable oil, vegetable fat and margarines (made with soy, corn, cottonseed, and/or canola) Ingredients derived from soybeans: soy flour, soy protein, soy isolates, soy isoflavones, soy lecithin, vegetable proteins, textured vegetable protein (TVP), tofu, tamari, tempeh, and soy protein supplements Ingredients derived from corn: corn flour, corn gluten, corn masa, corn starch, corn syrup, cornmeal, and high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) Some food additives may also be derived from GM sources: ascorbic acid/ascorbate (Vitamin C), citric acid, cobalamin (vitamin B12), fructose (especially crystalline fructose), inositol, lecithin, maltose, maltitol, maltodextrin, mannitol, modified food starch, monosodium glutamate (MSG), oleic acid, phenylalanine, riboflavin (Vitamin B2), sorbitol, stearic acid, tocopherol (Vitamin E), xanthan gum Some of the foods that may contain GM ingredients: salad dressing, bread, cereal, hamburgers and hotdogs, margarine, mayonnaise, crackers, cookies, chocolate, candy, fried food, chips, veggie burgers, ice cream, frozen yogurt, tofu, tamari, soy sauce, soy cheese, tomato sauce, protein powder, baking powder (sometimes contains corn starch), powdered/confectioner's sugar (often contains corn starch), confectioner's glaze, alcohol, vanilla, powdered sugar, peanut butter, enriched flour, vanilla extract (sometimes contains corn syrup), pasta, malt, white vinegar Non-food items that may contain GM ingredients: cosmetics, soaps, detergents, shampoo, bubble bath Okay, now a micro-brained question: which GM product the very intelligent citizens of Lykosha did not eat or drink, directly or indirectly, or did not wash with, or did not wash the clothes they are wearing right now with? Second micro-brained question: what do all these products have in common with the icky Great Pacific Garbage Patch (GPGP)? Third micro-brained question: which of the GM products above did you claim while you ate them, drank them, or washed with them? Fourth micro-brained question: which of the GM products above did you avoid eating, drinking, or washing with? Fifth micro-brained question: how come you think you are smarter than those who did sign the Great Pacific Garbage Patch Treaty (GPGPT), and yet you can't really prove it in any way, to anybody's satisfaction, because you think that claiming icky stuff is not intelligent, but somehow eating it, drinking it, washing with it is intelligent?
|
|
|
Post by Lykos Packleader on Jan 18, 2011 3:53:38 GMT 10
Let's try again:
#1: What do Genetically Modified substances (whether or not eaten, worn, or floating all over the ocean, etc.) have to do with _getting rid of_ the trash infesting Mother Earth? And what does Monsanto (etc.) have to do with micronationalism in general (Monsanto = GMs)?
#2: What I eat, or wear, or use, etc. has nothing to do with actual garbage, until the day I buy one of those recycled-trashbag jackets I've seen online... period. And that doesn't tell me, at all, what the two have to do with one another.
I repeat: why don't we get together, like we do on Kiva (http://www.kiva.org), and get some kind of campaign started. Can you only imagine the amount of P.R. we could generate with such a project? Much more good than "claiming" this "land."
Since there doesn't seem to be any such project started, I guess I'll do some research on the subject.... bye!
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jan 18, 2011 5:08:27 GMT 10
I gotta say, the idea of a micronational oceanic garbage treaty does seem a rather silly notion.
Almost as silly as micronational Antarctic treaties.
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 18, 2011 5:50:41 GMT 10
Let's try again: #1: What do Genetically Modified substances (whether or not eaten, worn, or floating all over the ocean, etc.) have to do with _getting rid of_ the trash infesting Mother Earth? And what does Monsanto (etc.) have to do with micronationalism in general (Monsanto = GMs)? #2: What I eat, or wear, or use, etc. has nothing to do with actual garbage, until the day I buy one of those recycled-trashbag jackets I've seen online... period. And that doesn't tell me, at all, what the two have to do with one another. I repeat: why don't we get together, like we do on Kiva (http://www.kiva.org), and get some kind of campaign started. Can you only imagine the amount of P.R. we could generate with such a project? Much more good than "claiming" this "land." Since there doesn't seem to be any such project started, I guess I'll do some research on the subject.... bye! Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have EVERYTHING to do with the trash-infested Mother Earth. Can you call the trash of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch (GPGP) biodegradable? No. If the waste were biodegradable, it would be a problem, but only a temporary one. In the same way you cannot call genetically modified organisms (GMOs) natural organisms. Not only they are not natural organisms, but nobody can prove they are at all beneficial except to Monsanto's bottom line, and these organisms don't simply die out but contaminate other organic stuff, in the same way the garbage in GPGP contaminates the Pacific Ocean. Both the garbage of the GPGP and GMs are biohazards, the first a well-known one, and the second a less-known one. Caring about the earth and its natural ecosystems isn't just about reducing waste, although that certainly helps. It is also about reducing the dependence on the industrial system that produces all of the waste in the first place. When you go to a holistic practitioner, instead of going to a conventional doctor, you are not adding pollution to your body in the form of drugs, nor are you adding pollution to the external environment in the form of medical waste. When you eat foods that are as natural and organic as possible, you are also limiting the pollution on the earth in the form of synthetic fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides, and GMOs. Many GMOs were in fact created so farmers could use MORE herbicides or pesticides on their plants, not less. So GMOs pollute the environment more directly and indirectly. When you drink water from a spring, not only you are not drinking all that extra chlorine and fluoride that is added to water in municipal water systems, but you also avoid littering the environment with all those plastic bottles. Plastic bottles are either not recycled at all, and contribute to the pollution problem, or they are not recycled into the same type of plastic, and products made from recycled plastics are often not recyclable themselves ( source). So once plastic is introduced to the environment, you really can't get rid of it, just as you can't get rid of GMOs once they are introduced into the environment. When you eat too much meat instead of too many fruits and vegetables, not only you put yourself at risk for many kinds of cardiovascular diseases, but you also further contribute to the pollution problem. Every choice you make has a consequence, and the consequences can be environmentally devastating even when it is not completely apparent. We can get rid of the garbage by claiming it, just like the UN and UN members claim all that isn't garbage. The act of claiming it, with a little help from the media, would also point to the hypocrisy of those who claim that their jurisdiction over us is a "lawful" one, but while they control your every move, and tax your every dollar, they do nothing at all about all that garbage in the GPGP. Yet they are the ones that are ultimately responsible for it, since all that garbage was made by legal corporations. Not one of those plastic bottles was made by the hands of a "sinful" human being. So while governments like to make us all feel guilty about the state of the environment, in truth (tyrannical, illegitimate, and immoral) governments are at least responsible for 90% of the pollution on this earth. There is a reason that I call all of the GPGP garbage jetsam, and not flotsam. Jetsam describes something that has been voluntarily cast into the sea (jettisoned), while flotsam describes goods that are floating on the water without having been thrown in deliberately. Also, jetsam is the property of the finder (it can be thus claimed, just as the earth and the seas have been claimed), while flotsam remains the property of its original owner. So the UN and UN members also do nothing about all that garbage because it is entirely treated as flotsam, which cannot be claimed, and whose original owners have either gone missing in action for all practical purposes (ie corporations), or who have taxed the bottle (eg, bottle or plastic bottle tax), but have not taken responsibility for its proper disposal (ie governments). There is also another benefit: the Great Pacific Garbage Patch Treaty (GPGPT) doesn't cost any dollars to signatory nations, costs few dollars even to the activist nation who pioneered the campaign, while the Kiva campaign you favour does cost real money, and involves many more multinational corporations, than micronations. The latter corporations are also some of the same corporations who turned away from wikileaks.org (NB: this link only works in the micronational Cesidian Root, not the multinational ICANN), or who are part of the environmental problem, not the environmental solution.
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 18, 2011 6:21:17 GMT 10
I gotta say, the idea of a micronational oceanic garbage treaty does seem a rather silly notion. Almost as silly as micronational Antarctic treaties. It is a silly notion if you only intend to claim the garbage. But that is not the ultimate purpose. The ultimate purpose is to compel the UN and UN states to claim responsibility for the stuff, and to start to clean up the ocean. You cannot compel them to do that while the stuff is legally treated like flotsam, when in reality it is jetsam, and that is exactly why some decent micronations have begun to claim it.
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jan 18, 2011 15:31:31 GMT 10
Calsahara may be somewhat entertaining... but decent ? Surely you jest!
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 19, 2011 1:18:07 GMT 10
Calsahara may be somewhat entertaining... but decent ? Surely you jest! "Just because you can laugh doesn't mean you can't tell the truth. Truth is often the jester." — Source Unknown "Jesters do oft prove prophets" — William Shakespeare
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 19, 2011 1:51:06 GMT 10
Sometimes a picture is worth (more than) a thousand words. Sometimes when you don't understand something, its because a God in human form is tinkering with the laws of the universe... Again...
|
|
|
Post by Lykos Packleader on Jan 19, 2011 2:58:51 GMT 10
Heyla,
..... and "god" is only Dog spelled backwards (just ask the Navajo about Coyotl)!!
The first fourfoot to play beside Ancient Humans was the Dog.
Only dogs (and horses) serve because of Love (for their Human companions)
Dogs (wolves) have their spirit eyes clearly marked (so that Humans always know).
And:
From who else did Humans learn to act together as a (pack)group? Humans have it all backward....what we need is a Pack; what we've got is a Pride.
|
|
|
Post by Lykos Packleader on Jan 19, 2011 3:08:42 GMT 10
Sometimes a picture is worth (more than) a thousand words. .... but not to the blind. And if that's so, show me a picture describing the gist of the Declaration of Independence.... or "Romeo & Juliet" ... or even something simple like "Dick & Jane" It's sort of like speaking a foreign language in front of someone who doesn't (speak that language).... and just as rude. Shame on you....
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jan 19, 2011 5:23:16 GMT 10
Diaxenospitia (noun):
1. A chemical that was banned in the 1970s for causing birth defects ? 2. The wife of Socrates ? 3. An ingenious device for incinerating pairs of racists on a sort of large rotisserie ?
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 19, 2011 7:04:51 GMT 10
Heyla, ..... and "god" is only Dog spelled backwards (just ask the Navajo about Coyotl)!! The first fourfoot to play beside Ancient Humans was the Dog. Only dogs (and horses) serve because of Love (for their Human companions) Dogs (wolves) have their spirit eyes clearly marked (so that Humans always know). And: From who else did Humans learn to act together as a (pack)group? Humans have it all backward....what we need is a Pack; what we've got is a Pride. Some scientists have recently speculated that it was the pack behaviour of Cro-Magnons that was the death spell of the Neanderthals (who did not live in packs, but in isolated groups/clans). Was that destruction/invasion also about love? Too bad I can't wag the tail I don't have! We also notice the "sophisticated" pack behaviour in white Europeans, who almost equally destroyed the Native Americans through the same canine trait. I prefer the peaceful pride and spirituality of the Neanderthals and Native Americans to a dog's behaviour any day, thank you. Besides that, I also believe in God, I am actually a child of God, but I usually equate him with a higher being, a master, not with a being that usually needs a master (a dog). You can have your beliefs, of course, but if you don't mind, I'll stick with mine.
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 19, 2011 7:20:23 GMT 10
Sometimes a picture is worth (more than) a thousand words. .... but not to the blind. And if that's so, show me a picture describing the gist of the Declaration of Independence.... or "Romeo & Juliet" ... or even something simple like "Dick & Jane" It's sort of like speaking a foreign language in front of someone who doesn't (speak that language).... and just as rude. Shame on you.... I'll make it easier for you: show me a picture of those who have kept the spirit of the Declaration of Independence. Besides that, the picture above was not meant for you, as even those who can see it can't understand the picture, and they keep talking not about diaxenospitia(s) that do exist, but things that are less material than that, and yet not part of any metaphysical study I can think of. As for what a diaxenospitia actually is, the definition is on this page, and you cannot find it even in the latest dictionary because it is a neologism: 5wc.orgNot that that will change anybody's opinion here, and that is all they seem to have here, opinions, not facts. I'm interested in empirical facts which can be converted into equations, or in some neat mathematical/geometric representation, or in theories which can be materialised. And that is what a diaxenospitia is: a theory that has materialised (because the theory is not irrational).
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 19, 2011 8:00:10 GMT 10
Let me describe the picture above for those who are not blessed with eyesight. I was not trying to hide my thoughts, nor was I trying to be rude. It is just very hard to show these things, and even harder without a good graph. The picture above is a Cartesian plane. Instead of the X and Y axes, we have eQ and Q axes respectively. The eQ stands for the word eQuality, while the Q stands for the word Quality. As for straightforward concepts, eQ stands for the Distribution, while Q stands for Concentration. The Cartesian plane also has something in each of its 4 quadrants, and each of these things are pertinent to these quadrants according to the discoveries of Analytic theology: positive eQ and postive Q quadrant: Many Diaxenospitias (like 5WC + GPGP + ...) positive eQ and negative Q quadrant: Diaxenospitia (like 5WC) negative eQ and positive Q quadrant: State (like Germany) negative eQ and negative Q quadrant: City (like Rome) Additional observations. The acronym "5WC" stands for Fifth World Community, the world's first diaxenospitia. I'll repeat again that a diaxenospitia is "a collection of houses or buildings scattered around the world, and treated like a distributed town or city". The acronym "GPGP" stands for Great Pacific Garbage Patch, which is not a diaxenospitia of buildings, but of garbage. The picture above shows a completely verified application of Analytic theology, besides two new things whose existence Analytic theology predicted: single diaxenospitias, and multiple, even multiple form diaxenospitias.
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jan 19, 2011 11:16:59 GMT 10
I'd suggest that the only prophetic message that might be drawn from the above is that Travis McHenry may quite possibly one day be recognised as King of the Thespians. ;D "Just because you can laugh doesn't mean you can't tell the truth. Truth is often the jester." — Source Unknown "Jesters do oft prove prophets" — William Shakespeare
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 19, 2011 14:01:46 GMT 10
I'd suggest that the only prophetic message that might be drawn from the above is that Travis McHenry may quite possibly one day be recognised as King of the Thespians. ;D You know something George? According to the Jews, the greatest prophet is Moses. According to Muslims, the greatest and the last prophet in Muhammad. Jesus stated, "I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist;" (Matthew 11:11). Apparently Jesus thought someone was greater yet. However, Jesus said an ever deeper truth in the continuation of the verse above: "yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he [John the Baptist]." Isn't Jesus saying, in essence, that the Greatest Prophets are the ones who shall survive Judgement Day, and actually the lowest of the low among them shall be greater than even John the Baptist? As my book states on page 41: [/i] shall be the guy or gal in the future with this message on their t-shirt: Judgement Day/Yom HaDin/Yawm Ad-Din 20XY I Was There! Anyone else, either not wearing a similar t-shirt, or not reading the message on the t-shirt and laughing, not only isn't a prophet; he/she actually doesn't exist any more.[/ul]Just think about it George. All the King's men shall be greater than John the Baptist, even the King's jester! And you thought you knew it all George, didn't you?! George, Jesus said it in many ways: "Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
|
|
|
Post by Lykos Packleader on Jan 20, 2011 2:11:23 GMT 10
Tallini ----
If you’re really only into “analytic theology,” and equations and actions, let’s see you do something about the subject of this thread (which has now disintegrated onto religiosity’s slippery slope, and off the ridding of the trash out of Great Mother’s originally pristine depths).
As for your rather amusing depiction of canine philosophy, that’s about what it is: amusing. It’s also obvious that you know nothing of humankind’s beginnings, and cannot reasonably prove otherwise. Unfortunately Cro Magnon humans did not only emulate the wolf, but other animals as well (that is both their strength as well as their weakness). And, obviously, you have never spent time in the company of humankind’s First Friend, so you truly know nothing of their Ways and spirit. That’s sad; even you would be a better individual for it. I’ve been studying the wolf since I was five years old; I know them better than I know humans … science hasn’t even scratched the surface dust off the depths of the wolf, and even that's more than your above comments. You can have your own beliefs on the subject, but that’s not fact, just theology. And that’s sad, too.
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jan 20, 2011 7:29:46 GMT 10
And let's not forget Muhammad Ali, who declared "I am the greatest!"...
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 20, 2011 7:55:12 GMT 10
Tallini ---- If you’re really only into “analytic theology,” and equations and actions, let’s see you do something about the subject of this thread (which has now disintegrated onto religiosity’s slippery slope, and off the ridding of the trash out of Great Mother’s originally pristine depths). You don't seem to understand that Analytic theology has everything to do with the GPGP, and if you think that Analytic theology is about a religious slippery slope, I suggest you study calculus, and check out just how religious that is. Analytic theology also provides religious interpretation/application, but it is a lot more than religious. It is more like a genuine Theory of Everything (TOE). As for your rather amusing depiction of canine philosophy, that’s about what it is: amusing. It’s also obvious that you know nothing of humankind’s beginnings, and cannot reasonably prove otherwise. Unfortunately Cro Magnon humans did not only emulate the wolf, but other animals as well (that is both their strength as well as their weakness). And, obviously, you have never spent time in the company of humankind’s First Friend, so you truly know nothing of their Ways and spirit. That’s sad; even you would be a better individual for it. I’ve been studying the wolf since I was five years old; I know them better than I know humans … science hasn’t even scratched the surface dust off the depths of the wolf, and even that's more than your above comments. You can have your own beliefs on the subject, but that’s not fact, just theology. And that’s sad, too. I can back every one of my principle beliefs with some good geometry or mathematics; you can't. That doesn't mean I don't have beliefs about things I cannot make a mathematical model of. For example, I also believe in the existence of UFOs, but I've actually seen them twice, so even my belief here has something of a rational basis. You also seem to have a backward view about what a true religion is about, a view that is so 20th century. However, true religion is not a superstition. False religion is a superstition. I can tell one from the other quite easily, and in fact I wrote a whole book about that. I will not pretend to know everything about wild dogs or wolves, but I really don't care for the Canis familiaris, the domestic dog. German Shepherds are supposed to be so intelligent, but I pass by one almost every other day, and she acts like I either don't live in the neighbourhood, or she has not figured out that I do yet. I also don't understand why she keeps on barking at me (it's not like a respond to her for doing that, or that I even give her the impression that I like her for barking at me), but if she were a human being, I would have her put in jail for violating my indisputable rights as master species of this planet. Unlike a lot of humans, I really don't delegate that right to other species, because it doesn't belong to other species, yet dogs act like they are some kind of royalty of the animal kingdom, and they clearly aren't, they act like they will be allowed to walk on the highway of the future that will go from Cairo to Jerusalem — they won't, the Bible assures us, not even with a licence. Only Gods will be allowed to walk/drive on that road, and I think I understand why. So I not only find dogs reprehensible, but I also find them delusional beyond compare. I suppose my opinion of dogs is much more positive with regard to real shepherd dogs, with regard to dogs who help the legally blind, since these dogs perform an admirable service, and for little more than food and hugs, but these seem like the minority in the genus Canis, the minority that serves man, and not the majority that for some strange reason wishes to be served by man.
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 20, 2011 8:21:38 GMT 10
News About the TreatyThe Free Republic of Alcatraz (Italian: Libera Repubblica di Alcatraz), the Italophone micronation founded on poetry, and which according to its leader would like to help the UMMOA " y bringing the overload of poetry and laughter emanated daily by our citizens", has set up a poll for its citizens to vote for support of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch Treaty (GPGPT).
They also joined the UMMOA as a member nation:
ummoa.net/nations.html
|
|
|
Post by Lykos Packleader on Jan 20, 2011 10:11:21 GMT 10
Heyla to all ----
Okay, okay, that’s it… I get it. Sometimes, it takes a moment before I understand what the Packgroup’s spirit is telling me … I thereby apologize to the Forum for being stubborn. As quoted from “Each Sparrow That Falls…”
ON DEALING WITH PEOPLE OF OTHER RELIGIONS
It is certainly true enough that there are those (conventional, mainstream religions) who consider such "free-soul" faiths (like our own) "dangerous" (and the work of "devils," and want such "wiped off the face of the Earth"). It is also true that many (of these religions) have fetters that would bind the soul forever --- rather than set it free.
“BUT NEVER INSULT THEIR BELIEFS. For such comforts them, and what might seem fetters to the free-soul are hallmarks of safety and security to the "true believer" ---- from a religion that they have chosen to rule their lives for them, rather than choosing to rule themselves. This is an option that all of us must choose, but one that most people surrender up by default, for they accept, without question, the hidden lessons of parents and teachers from before (whether formal and informal). Wolves rule themselves and reserve the right to disagree with the packleader.
“Therefore, listen to me carefully: NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER BELITTLE ANOTHER'S FAITH OR RELIGION. NOT EVEN ONCE. NOT EVER. NOT EVEN A TINY LITTLE BIT. NOT EVEN IN JEST.
“That you may disagree or fail to comprehend is one thing, but there is no excuse for (nor purpose in) ridicule or insult by word or deed. That others around you may do so (to you and/or to others) never justifies such condemnation ---- for it reduces your worth among others and dishonors your self. And you simply cannot EVER afford that. Even when you find what they say or do objectionable in the (so-called) name of their beliefs, it is not their faith that does this, but their own opinion of their beliefs. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION.
“Believe this: any and all systems of belief (religions, philosophies, etc.) share a common, much-needed purpose: to raise power: to heal, guide and strengthen the soul and spirit. In doing so, they serve the community at large by attempting to create (and celebrate) a world where each individual may live with others in such a way so as to help these others, and each system (or religion) has certain (sometimes similar) guiding principles to aid in this effort.
“ONLY WHEN YOU YOURSELF (OR YOUR PACK) IS DIRECTLY AND SPECIFICALLY ATTACKED SHOULD YOU EVER RESPOND IN SELF-DEFENSE --- and only when you are ready and able to accept the consequences for having done so. Yet, even when made necessary, such is seldom likely to produce any beneficial results. Keep this in mind: a debate with a closed mind is useless.
And also: it is very natural to (want to) vent your spleen when answering the allegations, taunts, or the words and deeds of certain malcontents "with an agenda" --- but you must remember that you have only succeeded in lowering yourself to the level of the lowest "common" denominator and accomplish nothing. Simply refuse to react and respond instead, by gearing your responses to the "audience" --- those who are secretly or openly listening (for nothing you do or say will ever sway or convince your harasser). Let yourself keep a cool and calm exterior --- even in your passion (let your attacker be the one who becomes rabid and fanatical). Instead, let your knowledge move you to a quiet, inner strength that will surely manifest as you defend yourself.”
On that note, this is my last post on this thread; I will not argue religion with [another] Priest. In my opinion, the Treaty discussed herein, to whatever degree, is counterproductive and useless, until the day that it deals concretely and with finality, the massive (!!) filth of this problem. As Bussy d’Ambois once said, “I’m for honest actions, not great.”.
And, by the way, just because you’ve written a book on a subject, it doesn’t mean you know anything of it --- in the same way that someone said something of monkeys, typewriters (computer keyboards), and sense… again, it’s sad.
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Jan 20, 2011 11:51:45 GMT 10
I'm not a specialist of "wolf theology", and in my book I don't make fun of any major religion. Don't argue with me, because it is not scholarly. Read my book if you want to understand how I genuinely feel about all major, and some minor religions.
I cannot rewrite my book here. It completely defeats the purpose of my book. It is also disrespectful, because if you genuinely care about what my religious thinking is, then you go to the source, where I don't just discuss things, I also explain things, and in a scholarly manner. If you don't like something, then like a real scholar you can refer to page such and such, and that would give a discussion context. Over here any deep religious discussion is both out of place and without context.
I also don't have the time to rewrite my book here, even if someone wished to pay for my lecturing, and nobody is paying for my keeps here. All I just keep hearing here and elsewhere is people attacking religion for whatever reason all the time, but I find all such reasoning to be BS (Bovine eSchatology), unless you can prove your thoughts have any validity. My book proves, once and for all, that religion is meant to be rational, otherwise it is a false religion. You can either accept that statement as a sincere statement of fact, or you can read my book for yourself. Arguing about it here serves no purpose.
I also invite you to write a book, about your religious beliefs. Most people won't buy my book, even though they might actually learn a thing or two, but you can ask Amazon just how many books from other people I buy. Quite a few each month, not each year! I will also buy your book, but you need to write it. Without presenting a good case, backed with your experience over the years, and the thoughts of other scholars, I really cannot judge, and I usually don't judge what I know little or nothing about. No scholar will discuss what he knows nothing about, and without a good book everything is arbitrary, fleeting, and insignificant, even religiously-speaking.
The only religion I put down in my book is a false religion, Satanism, and I put it down because I can prove it is a false religion. I will not say, all of a sudden, that the value of ratio of the diameter of a circle to its circumference is 3. That is false, as I show in my book, it is false even when the Bible states that as truth, and only a false religion can base itself entirely on ideas that have been proven false.
I really don't care about beliefs which cannot be rationally justified. Freedom of religion means freedom to practice a religion, not necessarily agreeing with someone else's religious beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by sogoln on Feb 2, 2011 4:58:18 GMT 10
Bold fonts! Bold fonts!
(sorry)
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Feb 2, 2011 5:19:13 GMT 10
Yes, but no meaningless ALLCAPS acronyms... yet!
|
|
|
Post by Zandrovia on Feb 7, 2011 9:48:48 GMT 10
I realize that I am coming into this conversation a bit late but....did I just read (a few posts up) that someone is declaring themselves to be a god in human form? Tell me I misread that.
As far as the ocean and the garbage goes, given that Zandrovia is an EXTREMELY pro-environment nation we are always looking for ways to improve the environment, clean up the problems created by the captialist machine, and encourage others to get involved....after all, we can not survive without our oceans.
|
|
|
Post by rareearth on Feb 17, 2011 11:42:56 GMT 10
I realize that I am coming into this conversation a bit late but....did I just read (a few posts up) that someone is declaring themselves to be a god in human form? Tell me I misread that. For the enlightenment of all micronationalists: All Cesidians, all Ummoagians, all Cyberterrestrials, all Fifth World Community domiciles are Gods in human form. Cesidian law doesn't apply to 'human beings'; it never did! Cesidian law doesn't apply to the pets of human beings (sorry PETA members, but that is the truth). Cesidian law applies to the Elohim and Elohim alone, as should be fairly obvious when reading the 14 Cesidian Commandments: xiv.cesidio.netThe Elohim do not worship anything inferior to themselves, and they (rightly) consider most human beings slime. This is why: We do not worship money. We do not worship corporations. We do not worship the governments of (obviously) inferior humans. We do not worship popes. We do not admire most saints. We do not worship books, even the book of books called the Bible. We do not worship calves, or even calves made of gold. We do not worship science, or hold scientistic philosophies. We honour the right of all natural, non threatening life forms to exist, but we don't worship any being lower than ourselves. We love Adam, the Buddha, and the Christ, for he is but One Soul. He was also named Pythagoras and René Descartes in other lives, believe it or not. Oh yes, we also don't believe that once we die we become dirt. Maybe you do, not us! We always were, we are today, and we shall always be, because we love someone special. There are no such thing as a 'legal person' who is a Cesidian, an Ummoagian, a Cyberterrestrial, or a Fifth World Community domicile. Also, 'citizens' of the UMMOA don't exist, because there is essentially no difference today between the words 'citizen' and 'subject', and Cesidians and/or Ummoagians are neither. As I often put it, there is no such thing as men who happen to be Gods; there are only Gods who happen to be men. Put in a different, but similar way: I am not a human being having a spiritual experience; I am a spiritual being having a human one. End of lecture (I hope).
|
|