those that know, dont say. those that say, dont know.
Written by: andrealee
Coleman, surprisingly, lots of religions have **much*** in common regarding definitions of good and bad! Like, Lots! I am not going to list them all, since I dont have time, but one book that does list many is the " Worldwide Laws of Life" by John Templeton. It lists 200 spiritual values that are commonly held by the major religions. Though I think the author is Christian he used examples from the Koran, and many many other sources to support his choice of these laws as universal principles. I don't agree with it all , but it is interesting!
That said, the practice of any religion may diverge from the principles in any number of ways...
***So can I have a cookie now please?( And did Andy get you your Salmon Pate?)***
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
Written by:
absolutism has no place in ethical discussions. Ever. Absolutely
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Nietzsche
Written by: Sethis
I'd reject andrealee's idea that we all have some kind of guiding spirit inside us to tell us what is right and wrong. It comes to close to "Human beings are different from animals" which is IMO wrong. Sorry.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Written by: Office of the High Commisioner for Human Rights
Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
Written by: Media Monitors Network
in order for the criminal charge to stick, the accused must have inflicted the pain with “specific intent” to accomplish the precise act for which they are being charged (e.g. “torture”). In this instance, it would be easy for the accused to plead not guilty along the following lines: “Although I knew that handcuffing naked Ahmed to the cell, and having Eatem my raging bulldog standing before Ahmed would result in severe pain, it was not my intention or objective to inflict severe pain.”.
Not guilty! (Says Condi)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Using the keywords [good guy *] we found the following existing topics.