Why does Jesus hate Freedom? by Succatash

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Why does Jesus hate Freedom?

POSTED BY: SUCCATASH
UPDATED: Monday, December 1, 2008 09:24
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2205
PAGE 1 of 2

Monday, October 04, 2004 6:23 AM

SUCCATASH

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 6:24 AM

GHOULMAN

lol! You are just too much my brotha... HA!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 6:34 AM

FIREFLEW

Very nice :biggrin:.

___________________________________ Jayne: "Know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I beat you with till you understand who's in command."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 7:07 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Ok even *I* found that funny...

Never change, 'Tash, we all luv ya....

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 7:17 AM

NAKEDANDARTICULATE

very funny.

Jayne-"Bush is scary."

"Hamsters is nice."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 7:29 AM

SUCCATASH

Glad ya'll think this is funny. Disclaimer: I didn't make it. It was emailed to me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 7:35 AM

CHANNAIN

i DO aim to misbehave

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it's ALL in the interpretation.

Nice, Tash:kiss: - thanks for sharing that!

We have art so as not to die of truth ~ Neitzsche http://www.mnartists.org/artistHome.do?rid=7922

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 7:45 AM

SIGNYM

HAHAHAHA..... (gasp!).... HAHAHAHA!!!

Best grafitti ever seen:

"Jesus was killed by preachers and politicians"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 7:51 AM

MANIACNUMBERONE

*gasp* Can't. ha haha ha ahaha ...stop.. ha haha ha ahaha ...laughing.

AAAAAAAAAhhhhhh ha ha ha haha ha ahaha ha hahahhaahahhaahaaaoooooooh oooooh ooooh oh oh ah. whew. That was good. Damn, I needed that today. Thanks ole buddy.

------------------------------------------- Inara: Who's winning? Simon: I can't really tell, they don't seem to be playing by any civilized rules that I know. -------------------------------------------

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 8:34 AM

THEGREYJEDI

This is Jack's restraint from posting a reply.

but just to be safe, when the lightning strikes the author of that image, I'll be over not near them.

-------------------------------------------------- http://tomeofgrey.blogspot.com

http://www.jed-soft.com Gamer Rigs, Budget Prices

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 9:07 AM

RUE

Just some general thoughts: did you all ever notice there are only nine commandments? (The Catholics and Christians each split up a different one to make 10. So when I read debates about public posting of 'the' 10 commandments, I wonder which 10 do they mean.) I always wondered about the Christian emphasis on the Old Testament. I thought Jesus came to replace that with a new teaching - the New Testament. Anyway, according to him, there are really only two commandments 1) love God with all your heart, and 2) love your neighbor as yourself. I never saw the word 'smite' in any commandment. Maybe my religious teaching was lax.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 9:29 AM

THEGREYJEDI

Well, God once smote the blaspemous. In just in case He's inclined to do it again, I like to avoid them.

I know full well the difference in the OT and NT. I dislike those who call themselves Christians, but adhere to the laws if Leviticus and the other OT laws. However, there are side-effects of the two commandments that Jesus spake. If you love God truly, then you will automatically do what is pleasing in His sight.

But still. Just in case lightning becomes particularly attacted to the blasphemous and irreverent, I will stay over there where they aren't.

-------------------------------------------------- http://tomeofgrey.blogspot.com

http://www.jed-soft.com Gamer Rigs, Budget Prices

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 9:39 AM

SHOEFLY

I hope I am not hijacking this thread (funny image btw 'Tash, ty for sharing) just want to respond to Rue's thinking that Jesus was supposed to replace the old testement. This is one way of thinking, but the one that I believe is that Jesus' teachings were mainly to bring the old testement law into a better perspective, not replace them. For example the two commandments that you stated (love God and love your nieghbor) can really only be done by following the 10 commandmens. Jesus I think is giving us the reason we have the 10 commandments by sort of summarizing them in the 2 he gives (love God, love neighbor)

Hope this wasn't offensive and again it doesn't hijack 'Tashes thread

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 10:04 AM

CREVANREAVER

JESUS WAS A LIBERTARIAN!!!

http://vote4rmp.rmpcp.com/christian.shtml

http://www.t2s2.org/tfpo2602.html

:biggrin:

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 10:14 AM

SIGNYM

NAHHH ... render unto Caesar and all that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 11:01 AM

CAPNRAHN

Why is it blasphemous? It doesn't attack or defame Jesus or Christians.

:evil: Its 'shot' is taken at George Bush and his cronies. Unless you consider THAT blashphomous.:biggrin:

If you do, Wow!

Off-Topic: Bush truly reminds me of the President as portrayed in "Escape from L.A." ... ewww - George Bush Jr. - Prezzie fer life!

"Remember, there is only ONE absolute - There ARE NO absolutes!!!"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 11:54 AM

IAMJACKSUSERNAME

"Well, I'm all right." - Mal

Who would Jesus bomb?

Jesus the socialist pacifist:

"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;" Matthew 5:44

The "lilies of the field" analogy, Matthew 6:28-34

"And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." Matthew 22:39

"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." Matthew 26:52

"One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor" Mark 10:21

"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these." Mark 12:31

"And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages." Luke 3:14

"Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." Luke 6:28-31

"And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again;" Luke 6:34-35

"Be ye therefore merciful [...] Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven" Luke 6:36-37

"And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all" Luke 21:2-3 (progressive taxation)

"He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." John 8:7

"That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another." John 13:34

"remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive." Acts 20:35 -- I am Jack's username FTL in Firefly? < http://jack.p5.org.uk/about-fiction/ftl-firefly.en.html>

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 12:28 PM

SHINY

Quote:
Originally posted by IamJacksUsername: Who would Jesus bomb?

Or more importantly, as an apocalyptic prophet who saw the coming of the end of the world, why would he even bother?

Jayne, your mouth is talkin. Might want to look into that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 12:30 PM

RUE

also:

"'How hard it will be for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God!' And the disciples were amazed at His words." "'It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.' And they were even more astonished and said to Him, 'Then who can be saved?'" Matthew 6:24: "No one can serve two masters."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 4:05 PM

MELEAUX

Kerry recently stated that his favorite scripture was John 16:3. It was assumed he must have meant John 3:16 " For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have ever lasting life". That is a pretty standard scripture so that would seem appropriate. However, the faux pas of saying John 16:3 is ironic in that, that scriptue goes " They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me"

I love my captain

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 4:45 PM

SOUPCATCHER

The John 16:3 story (or other versions with Bush or Gore as the main character) has been debunked by Snopes.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/bibleverse.asp

There are three kinds of people: fighters, lovers, and screamers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 4:47 PM

MELEAUX

ah well, thanks for letting me know how gullible I am. I shaved off my beard ya know.

She understands, she doesn't comprehend

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 4:55 PM

SOUPCATCHER

It happens to all of us. The reason I picked up on it was because I just had a conversation with my mom about all the urban legends she has been sending me and one of the e-mails was this story. Kind of reminds me of the time almost 10 years ago when I sent an e-mail to a class distribution list asking for support for a little boy in Florida with terminal cancer who just wanted to get postcards from people. My professor's admin reamed me out good for that one. The lecture stuck.

There are three kinds of people: fighters, lovers, and screamers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 4:57 PM

GOJIRO

Quote:
Originally posted by CapnRahn: Why is it blasphemous? It doesn't attack or defame Jesus or Christians.

:evil: Its 'shot' is taken at George Bush and his cronies. Unless you consider THAT blashphomous.:biggrin:

Actually, it's not even a shot at Bush. Both campaigns run these kinds of ads. So it's more a shot at this type of stupid campaign ad strategy. And as such, it's hi-larious.

Of course, it's even more fun that it's Bush...

gojiro

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 4:59 PM

THEGREYJEDI

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher: The John 16:3 story (or other versions with Bush or Gore as the main character) has been debunked by Snopes.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/bibleverse.asp

There are three kinds of people: fighters, lovers, and screamers.

Query: Is it not possible that his favorite bible verse is actually John 16:3? Having just read the Snopes page, I refer to former President Bush.

-------------------------------------------------- http://tomeofgrey.blogspot.com

http://www.jed-soft.com Gamer Rigs, Budget Prices

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 5:03 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Yeah. That's a possibility. But I'd like to read the speech GHWBush gave at the NRB where the author said he got this little bit from.

There are three kinds of people: fighters, lovers, and screamers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 6:22 PM

RANGRBOB

I wonder if someone could make a similar ad calling God a flip flopper.

In the OT God said "An eye for an eye" Yet in the NT his son (and third half) said "Turn the other cheak"

In the OT he was Vengefull (sp) In the NT he is a Pacifist

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 6:24 PM

SHINY

Quote:
Originally posted by gojiro: Actually, it's not even a shot at Bush. Both campaigns run these kinds of ads. So it's more a shot at this type of stupid campaign ad strategy. And as such, it's hi-larious.

Well, this specific one is more of a shot at Bush/the Republicans because it has the flier politicize the 'war' on terror, criticize Jesus for being pro-welfare, raising taxes, and being soft on crime -- all traditional Republican tactics. That's not to say someone couldn't make a similar parody of the Democratics, but this one wouldn't be it.

Jayne, your mouth is talkin. Might want to look into that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 04, 2004 7:30 PM

GORDONCOMSTOCK

Quote:
Originally posted by rue: Just some general thoughts: did you all ever notice there are only nine commandments? (The Catholics and Christians each split up a different one to make 10. So when I read debates about public posting of 'the' 10 commandments, I wonder which 10 do they mean.)

The passage in Exodus called the Decalogue ("ten words") actually contains 14 (if I'm remembering correctly; my Bible's packed in a box somewhere right now) distinct imperative statements. To keep the "10" from "decalogue", Christians have traditionally consolidated certain statements. Consolidated everything that's clearly a single idea results in nine; the standard practice therefore has been to keep the two "covet" statements as separate "commandments". Catholic Christians and Main-line Protestant Christians still do this, but more fundamentalist Protestants prefer to consolidate the "covet" statements and draw "You shall not make graven images" out of "You shall have no other gods besides me", even though a "graven image" is just a particular kind of other god one could choose -- and a dated one at that. You won't find many people in the Western world worshipping an object as a God.

To make matters worse, these same Protestants then claim that certain Catholic/main-line Protestant symbols (the crucifix, for example) are "graven images" (they aren't, since it is what is worshipped is what the objects depict, not the objects themselves) and that our enumeration of the commandments is a deliberate attempt to hide the existence of that commandment (sort of a silly claim, since it is in the Catholic Bible).

So, yes, this is an issue with the posting of the Decalogue in public places. I'm not sure what version is usually used when that is done, or how much controversy the choice has ever made, but I can certainly see how it could cause problems. Of course, it's usually fundamentalists who want to post the commandments in schools, etc., and their enumeration contains nothing objectionable to the rest of Christians, so maybe it's not an issue after all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 10:51 AM

GHOULMAN

There never was a Jesus.

Please... come to the truth. Religious dogma is insane. Don't let old Roman lies fool ya. :wink:

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 2:29 PM

SIGNYM

Actually, I prefer the old Roman lies to the current Christian fundamentalist ones.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 2:42 PM

SIGNYM

Quote:
Just in case lightning becomes particularly attacted to the blasphemous and irreverent, I will stay over there where they aren't.

The words are "yonder" and "ain't"! As in "I will stay over yonder where they ain't." :smile:

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 3:37 PM

DUEY

1) Love this, don't find it blasphemous in the slightest.

2) Love all the Jesus as pacifist/socialist quotes. Agree with them.

3) Historically, there was a person named Jesus Christ. Whether you believe the Christian faith or not (and I personally do, very much- it is my life's goal to keep my Christianity is at the core of my person for the very reasons set forth in the aforementioned pacifist/socialist quotes, among others), his existence is well documented.

4) There is a huge difference between Christianity and what most people think of as Christian fundamentalists, which often is very contrary to the very message of love and peace which Christianity is all about.

"Peace I leave with you, my peace I give you. Not as the world tives, give I unto you. Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not be afraid." John 14:27

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 4:24 PM

SUCCATASH

Thought I might re-post this Firefly Lord's Prayer I made a while back.

http://www.strangefinger.com/Firefly-Prayer.mp3

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 06, 2004 10:26 AM

ARAWAEN

Quote:
Originally posted by rangrbob: I wonder if someone could make a similar ad calling God a flip flopper.

In the OT God said "An eye for an eye" Yet in the NT his son (and third half) said "Turn the other cheak"

In the OT he was Vengefull (sp) In the NT he is a Pacifist

In the NT he is telling us to be pacifists. He still says vengeance is his (Rom 12:19). Could call him a hypocrite I guess.:biggrin:

Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 06, 2004 10:33 AM

ARAWAEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Duey: 4) There is a huge difference between Christianity and what most people think of as Christian fundamentalists, which often is very contrary to the very message of love and peace which Christianity is all about.

Unfortunately many people confuse Evangelical with fundamentalism, even some within the Evangelical and fundamentalist movement.

I think fundamentalism regardless of religion is more of a counter cultural movement than it is a religious denomination.

Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 06, 2004 5:42 PM

RUE

Just some personal thoughts: I'm not religious, but I find meaning in different teachings. "The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name." from the Laozi "When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty." from the Gospel of Thomas Many people achieved deep insight into how do we get along in the world, and with each other. Over two decades ago I listened to an (I think) 6 part series on CBC radio about the explosion of religious thought around the globe that accompanied agriculture and settlement. It occurred to me that these teachings tell us something about our inner workings and about the societies we create. Not that I have made a serious study, but I try not to turn away insights, though I have not a lot of tolerance for dogma. I also have become interested in game theory (due to the thoughts of someone much smarter and more deeply curious than I), and the idea that our societies may be driven by vaster and more subtle mechanisms than we have discovered to date (same person). So I was primed to hear an interview of Jane Goodall when she described how she wanted to observe chimps (P troglodytes), put fruit in a big pile and spent months observing domination beahvior before she realized it was a pathological situation. Perhaps the societies we form due to our technology are like Goodall's chimps. Anyway, I do enjoy these topics.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 07, 2004 4:11 AM

ARAWAEN

I definitely agree that there is something pathological about human behavior. :biggrin:

Biologicaly speaking, I think it stems from the fact that the 'I' a person uses to refer to himself is the product of a dynamic interaction of multiple (often conflicting) elements. I hold that a person's brain and body is made of interacting systems and that consciousness is the product of those interactions not one system in particular. A person is greater than the sum of his parts, but neither is he in harmony with himself.

Religion being an attempt to understand the universe the person finds himself in and his place in it (to find harmony both internally and externally). Some people think this means it is a copout, a simple solution to unanswerable questions, but I don't think so. Any religion can be reduced to ritual or worse superstition, there is an unfortunate tendency among people to simplify religions down to a list of actions that can be done to create that harmony. I am not knocking ritual, it is a valuable part of any religion, provided it is still connected to the concepts it represents.

I find that technology treats symptoms rather than root problems. Far too large a topic to go into here in this thread.

Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 07, 2004 9:11 AM

RUE

Just a few comments for now: Scientists who study these things say chimps and dolphins have some level of personal identity and consciousness. On the other hand, another person I know (who is also very astute) believes that it is exclusive to humans b/c we have speech, which provides an 'external' framework for our thoughts that reflects back to us from an 'outside' perspective. (I'm lucky to know many smart, thoughtful, curious people, from whom I've learned almost everything I know.) Books I have read have largely punted on the question of where DOES it reside in the human brain and how does it function. I don't really have a conclusion, largely because I don't know enough to resolve the issue or come up with a viable alternative. (As I've said about other topics, better minds than mine will have to put it together.) But to get to the issue of technology and pathological societies: I am convinced humans evolved semi-aquatically, in a challenging, but safe (no predators), environment. We had to think for our food and water - how to carry water over distances, how to dig up clams, break mussels off rocks, catch little fish and other small critters etc. I'm guessing food was widely distributed and available year-round to those who could manage to get it. That would be similar to chimps, who live in tropical areas where trees fruit sporadically throughout the year, in other words, where food is widely available. By piling it up into one spot, Goodall presented them with a condition they didn't evolve resolutions for. Perhaps agriculture is the same way for humans. It puts the necessities of life in one concentrated spot, capable of being dominated by individuals. From thence, social interactions based on hierarchies (and appeasement of dominant individuals) arose, and on from there to our present-day societies. It's just my thought that this (the technology of agriculture) could be one of those vast yet subtle drivers of human behaviour we haven't yet accounted for. Another one that was explained to me was based on the observation that males not involved in care for offspring are destructive competitors against females and young for resources. And so behaviors to take care of that evolve, for example bachelor herds that live on the margins or completely away from females and young.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 09, 2004 3:49 AM

FIREFLEW

Quote:
Originally posted by rue: Just a few comments for now: Scientists who study these things say chimps and dolphins have some level of personal identity and consciousness.

Chimps can recognise themselves in mirrors :smile:.

That little nugget of info was brought to you by The Great Apes Project - those who want to give the 'great-apes' human rights.

Note: Not part of the Great Apes Project - just a strange thing I found.

___________________________________ Jayne: "Know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I beat you with till you understand who's in command."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:09 PM

ROCKETJOCK

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM: HAHAHAHA..... (gasp!).... HAHAHAHA!!!

Best grafitti ever seen:

"Jesus was killed by preachers and politicians"

Second Best:

"Jesus is coming. And Mary Magdaline couldn't be happier."

"Hermanos! The Devil has built a robot! Andale!" -- Numero Cinco

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:10 PM

HKCAVALIER

I think the other great trigger for species-wide pathology is catastrophic over-population (made possible, of course, by agriculture). I agree with you, a lot of what people take for granted about "human nature," particularly the notion that we are basically aggressive and warlike, is just sickness so pandemic that it passes for reality.

I'm glad to see the semi-aquatic theory of protohuman developement getting some airplay. A model of developement based upon curiosity and relative ease (conditions ideal for the flowering of creativity) to counter the predominant "naked ape" version of reality where everything which science uses to define us--tool use, language and socialization--is assumed to arise from the need to kill or be killed.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 14, 2004 4:44 PM

RUE

There was a symposium in Toronto a couple of years ago (no, I didn't get to go and visit my favorite city - DRAT!) of physical anthropologists, biochemists, physiologists, MDs, chemists etc. They concluded that there was an extraordinarily large human dietary requirement for various fish oils for brain and eye development. They concluded the only situation in which humans could have evolved such a need was in a semi-aquatic environment. Did it get airplay?? Sadly, no. The only reason I noticed it was because it already was a topic of interest to me. BTW, my hobby at the time was matching human mineral dietary requirements to various biomes, to see if the semi-aquatic theory held up. Out of curiosity I also looked at the dietary requirements of chimps (P troglodytes) and gorillas. I looked at both ratios of minerals such as sodium/potassium, calcium/magnesium, copper/zinc (which are disparate terrestrially and aquatically) etc as well as absolute levels. I figured humans might have a higher requirement for iodine, and a higher tolerance for sodium. It also has implications for blood pressure. I assumed what was wrong with the current human diet was not too much salt (if we evolved semi aquatically, we've evolved to handle the salt load), but too little potassium relative to sodium, and it looks like this conjecture is slowly being borne out. Anyway, to make a long story short, I concluded that in terms of mineral ratios, either a fruit/nut diet (similar to the chimps) OR a diet of fish, seaweed etc would do OK. The telling difference is in absolute amounts of sodium tolerance (humans may have a better tolerance if potassium intake is sufficient), and iodine requirement, which seems to be higher in humans than chimps. The other thing I thought was interesting was that humans are to only species to have cystic fibrosis, which involves severe genetic instability in a (normally) highly conserved gene that controls chloride/sodium transport. The only reason to select for genetic instability is to alter sodium handling, as far as I can see. So anyways, I keep my eyes open for little bits of info like that. Can you say nerd? Whether or not you actually read this to the end, thanks for the chance to spout.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 28, 2008 10:50 AM

CHRISISALL

Down the centuries you have slurred the meaning of the words, WE THE PEOPLE...

I found this while exploring- I love to see FFF's past.

The archeologist Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 28, 2008 11:26 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

Matthew 10:34

"But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."

Luke 22:36

Hello,

After reading so many tranquil New Testament passages, I thought to provide a couple with possible alternative interpretations. There have been varying ways to understand these texts, and not all of them are daisies and unicorns, so to speak.

I have always felt that applying a singular, one-dimensional philosophy to Jesus is a flawed approach.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 28, 2008 11:50 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I always liked this aspect of him best.

Also liked Succotash's pic up there a bit - never understood why folks imagine their divinities lookin all grumpy and stuff, that don't make sense, does it ?

I honestly think it would have a positive impact on most theologies if they were to depict their prophet/divinity with a happy expression, mere human reaction to this would improve them immeasurably.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 28, 2008 1:29 PM

CHRISISALL

Down the centuries you have slurred the meaning of the words, WE THE PEOPLE...

THAT'S the JC I KNOW!!!!!!

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 28, 2008 9:39 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Gotta say one thing man, you got a lot of people to poke their head out in the RWED that I've rarely, if ever seen.

But people here know me.... I'm skeptical to the end. Even when I do manage to see positives, or just believe that positives are to come it's because I'm just predicting a positive side effect to come from a negative action. A "Prole Bonus", if you will....

I don't trust President Obama more than I trusted President Bush. Instead of painting the opposition as evil like Bush, Obama chose to go almost 100% the opposite way. Don't get me wrong, I love his enthusiasm and his ability to win the heart of 53% of the people, but I don't enjoy being mislead with optimism either.

But maybe my suspicious mind is out of line and here's hoping that we get our Prole Bonus this time and see stuff start going our way, Right?

But no matter who comes into our lives and changes things happening in the world, don't expect anyone to fix everything (or anything for that matter) while we sit around. We've all got to fix it, everything... ourselves.

$1.70 gas? Methinks it's a test. Either by our government or OPEC, as both of them are the only ones capable. What are you going to do now that gas is $1.70. How has your attitude about anything changed, if it all?

I'm enjoying the Prole Bonus, that much I can admit. I've driven around a bit more, but I still plan my route and I stock up on stuff when I go instead of just picking up dinner for one night at the grocery store.

Even used google maps today to map my route. Pretty useful site that Google.

......when it's used for good, of course. :evil:

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 28, 2008 10:22 PM

SIGNYM

Gotta say - it was funny!!

--------------------------------- Let's party like its 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 30, 2008 11:53 PM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma: I honestly think it would have a positive impact on most theologies if they were to depict their prophet/divinity with a happy expression

Venus and other goddess representations have also been depicted as smiling, when they're more than outlines of form, or symbols. (They're also depicted as serious, as is Gautama.) Just sprang to my mind.

(Also, original thread topic made me lol)

[/sig]

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE