HAL9000

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely even most Christians do not believe that adulterers should be stoned to death The New Testament has Jesus himself nullifiying this one: Let him who is without sin cast the first stone. Actually, according to St. Paul, none of the Old Testament's moral codes or laws apply to Christians - he abrogated Mosaic Law in favour of simple Belief as the route to Salvation. However, according to the Talmud, gentiles are obliged to obey the Seven Noahide Laws, which most Orthodox rabbis interpret to include about 1/3 of the Rambam's 613 mitzvot.

Hail shurrrp and Starmix: the stuff evolution is made of. You're going to need every ounce of those balls to survive the future we have created for you. Good luck.

Lee B Wrote: > Indeed, but would you be able to cook this after 5 pints ... > There is a niche there that our esteemed Indian / Bangladeshi > / Pakistani bredren are and have filled for a number of years. After five pints I too could put up with the gloop served by most restaurants. I've even been known to demolish a large doner kebab after a good night's drinking. > Coconut rice btw...Oooh look at you pushing the boundaries. A bit OTT, you think? Oh, well, back to the boil-in-the-bag!

Son Of E-C Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > is it extra for anal? There are only a few certainties in life: death, taxes and extra for anal.

macroban Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think this is actually a specific class of > question. (Someone help me out here with the > technical term.) Gödel Undecidable? If so, you might find this interesting: Gödel's Ontological Proof

Starmix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Guize, guize, guize. Don't be all takeaway couch > potatoes, make it yourselves! Trust me, curries > are not that hard to make Quite right. On Friday I prepared a delicious chicken sag curry (with fresh spinach, mind) served with aromatic coconut rice, nan bread and mango chutney for four. It took about an hour to cook and cost around a tenner. One can't beat freshly toasted and ground spices or homemade curry pastes and aromatic seasonings. The only store bought items were the nan breads and wine (a nice Beaujolais-Villages). I would guess one wouldn't get much change out of ?100 for the same meal at a restaurant or around ?40 from a takeaway.

Santerme Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is hard to discern what your concern is. Lewishamman has explained his situation. Perhaps he is just seeking comfort and fellowship through sharing his concerns with this community. Tea and sympathy - that's all.

My flatmate of long ago was fluent in "butchers' backslang". He used to pick up girls with it - they couldn't resist! My father was fluent in a very similar conjugation of Greek used by rural bandits and rustlers at the turn of the last century.

You've dropped the first letter and added an ?a? to the end of each word? I can't be bothered to decipher it all now as lunch is about to be served and ma uta fa erea!

There may be a danger of confusing the message with the messenger here. If an eminent professor of psychology had spoken those words (as they well could have been), they would have been interpreted on an entirely different level. I think his message is, largely, correct. Modern technology has tended to depersonalise social relationships, which is probably a bad thing when that represents a young person's only experience of life beyond the family.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > HAL - tolerance is always a good thing. What would > you suggest - banning religious faith? No, I'm not for banning religion. I'm for freedom to criticise without falling foul of religious tolerance laws or allegations of various anti-isms. I'm for a secular government and state education system. I'm for disentangling church and state. I'm for secularising holidays. Etc, etc.

My cousins' husband decided to chase a thief who'd stolen a camera from a parked car. They ran into a blind alley. The thief struck him with the camera killing him instantly. My cousin is a widow. Her children are orphans. The thief has evaded capture. Was it worth it? I don't think so. It's a difficult question. Every case is different, of course. But unless a member of my family or someone close was under immediate threat, I'd think very hard before intervening these days ? and more so if outnumbered.

Isn?t it time to abandon religious tolerance? Especially for those religious ideas that are easily manipulated into powerful weapons of mass destruction: millions have already died on their account. Isn?t it time to say enough is enough? Shouldn?t rationalists take every opportunity to challenge, expose and ridicule the illogical and irrational nonsense being peddled by rabbis, priests and imams whenever the opportunity arises? Or should we pass on these ancient superstitions to our descendants for the foreseeable future?

Gimme Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > lost cat threads I didn't see an RFD about the changes; if I had I would have campaigned for a section exclusively for missing cats and dogs! Is the current epidemic a recent phenomenon or has it always been like this? I blame all those dodgy catflaps. Otherwise, the changes are excellent - well done.

macroban Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > You are a Scientologist > > I don't think the fictional Zenu is regarded as a > "god". He isn't. But MM's statement is Scientology in a nutshell: Survive!

Declan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If there is a heaven then how > could it be more amazing than our planet One possible interpretation of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic Scriptures is that a Messiah will inaugurate the Kingdom to Come on Earth.

Or as Bob Dylan once wrote: The answer is blowing in the wind.

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Our purpose in life is, like all living organisms, > to ensure the continuation of our particular life > form. You are a Scientologist and I claim my free personality test! :)

It's not possible to feed the world's billions without intensive mechanised farming. Ironically, while fertilisers and pesticides feed the majority it is only the richest and poorest who enjoy the privilege of eating organic produce.

There is no way forward for civilisation as we know it. We are just marking time before a transition to a completely different world with a much lower population. We might be able to influence whether the transition is smooth and controlled rather than violent and catastrophic, but that is all. IMHO.

The answer may be as simple as this: during the course of evolution man acquired the ability to foresee his own mortality and contemplate the meaningless of his existence. The only reason man survived and flourished despite that knowledge was because spirituality co-evolved as a counter measure against those self-destructive thoughts. Without it, we wouldn?t be here.

Today, science postulates a cosmos whose space-time continuum began expanding out of nothing 13.7 billion years ago, where the past, present and future co-exist within a time dimension and in which our perceptions are limited to one of an infinite series of alternative realities. And where the earth lies at the exact centre of the observable universe. At the very cutting edge, many have come to the scientifically derived conclusion that we exist within a simulation running on some kind of quantum supercomputer whose origin and nature we can never know. If they are right then science is now postulating that we are the dreams of a superior, omnipotent and omniscient agent that pervades the cosmos: science has reinvented God. Edited to add this link: Are we living in a simulation?

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I was trying to get across an idea of mixed inputs ... > It probably didn't work - but I was just having a bit of fun. It?s an interesting concept, though. OB: For my own consumption, I?ve never bought anything labelled organic in supermarkets. Rightly or wrongly, I've always felt that it was a scheme designed to boost their profit margins.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As a heterodyne empiricist... Heterodox, surely?

A couple of years ago an African bar/restaurant opened on Peckham High Road called "The Golden Stool", although not for long as the name was soon changed. The name was actually a translation of the Asante Sika 'dwa, the sacred Royal Throne of the legendary King Osei Tutu of the Gold Coast Empire of Ashanti.