Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Seagoon on December 27, 2006, 02:57:58 PM
-
Hi Guys,
I wonder if you could help me with a research project.
I need a control group for an ethics and personal religion poll I am doing. All I need is people willing to answer a few questions about their personal habits as honestly as they can. The poll is done online via Yahoo groups and is completely anonymous.
In order to take the poll, you'll need to join the seagoon yahoogroup (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/seagoon/) available at the link above.
Once you have joined, either click on polls, or follow this link (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/seagoon/surveys?id=12489919)
Thanks for your help, I'll post the results when the poll closes.
- SEAGOON
-
Done, did seem simplistic though.
-
Some of the questions are kinda tough to answer. The whole "and" conjuction throws me off sometimes. If you do one half, but not the other, do you answer "yes," or "no?"
And also, out of curiosity - what is an "innappropriate emotional relationship with someone other than your spouse?" :confused:
Also... What is a "family devotional?"
I don't have a problem checking you out, but I'll wait to participate until I know what I'm checking :)
-
You got it
I suspect that if everyone here were completely honest. You would have a high recurrence rate of the same answers LOL
-
Originally posted by Vudak
Some of the questions are kinda tough to answer. The whole "and" conjuction throws me off sometimes. If you do one half, but not the other, do you answer "yes," or "no?"
And also, out of curiosity - what is an "innappropriate emotional relationship with someone other than your spouse?" :confused:
Also... What is a "family devotional?"
I don't have a problem checking you out, but I'll wait to participate until I know what I'm checking :)
agreed. As is with most polls alot of the honest answers areant as clear cut as the choices given
But I answered as honestly as I could
-
i hate taking tests.
-
Sorry Seagoon,,, I'm not of your faith , so those questions would be null in my case . There about as honest as i can be without offending anyones Beliefs.
-
Hi Vudak,
Thanks very much for your help. I realize that several of the questions are framed in language that would be familiar to evangelicals, but less familiar to people outside that particular sub-culture. I've actually already changed the wording in some of them already.
Originally posted by Vudak
Some of the questions are kinda tough to answer. The whole "and" conjuction throws me off sometimes. If you do one half, but not the other, do you answer "yes," or "no?"
Can you give me an example of what you mean?
And also, out of curiosity - what is an "innappropriate emotional relationship with someone other than your spouse?" :confused:
Basically, it is when a married individual falls in love with someone other than their spouse and transfers their desires, attention, and affection to that person. It's an affair without the physical consumation component, actually surprisingly common in the internet age especially amongst women who feel neglected by their husbands.
Also... What is a "family devotional?"
[/b]
When a family gathers together to read from the bible, teach the kids what it means, and pray (and sometimes even sing a hymn or two). Used to be very common in Lutheran, Presbyterian, Congregational, Baptist, etc. households. TV and the general decline of Chrisitianity in the USA has largely killed the practice, now its generally only found in a few sub-sections of evangelicals.
I don't have a problem checking you out, but I'll wait to participate until I know what I'm checking :)
Thanks again Vudak, I sincerely appreciate it.
- SEAGOON
-
I did it
-
Hi Roscoroo,
Originally posted by Roscoroo
Sorry Seagoon,,, I'm not of your faith , so those questions would be null in my case . There about as honest as i can be without offending anyones Beliefs.
Actually, Roscoroo, the reason I asked here was that I was looking for a control group made up of mostly internet savvy males 21-65 who mostly weren't evangelical Christian types. I already have a large survey group that are evangelical types. The questions themselves are actually mostly questions about personal habits, getting drunk, watching pr0n etc. I guarantee you'll be able to tick at least one box for sure. ;)
And Laser, I know that they are irritatingly simple, but there are actually only 3 major question sets I'm looking for answers in. Technically, I'm looking to see the practical differences between males generally, and males in a particular professional area.
- SEAGOON
-
Sent you a PM Seagoon.
-
have voted, though i was a bit intrepid about giving honest answers to someone like yourself lol
they say drinking brings out the truth.... it seems so it did ;)
-
if your looking for a control group that isnt xtain based / beliefs.
then from my point of view /beliefs, you would need to do a major rewrite of the questions because they would /or could be seen as offensive to some.
Religion is a tricky subject/debate / ect .. no matter what you believe in as for none of them are totally correct and none of them are totally wrong .
Just for comparison example say there was one person who was raised and worshiped in the old Egyptian Beliefs (book of the dead , mummyfication,multiable gods/esses , having to past the tests and all that )
and on the other side of the coin we have a devote Catholic (mass,passover ,one god, and all that )
Now who has the right to judge which religion is correct ? .... or are they bolth correct ? kinda see my point ... If I was a caveman and I worshiped 3 rocks and a tree ... would it make my beliefs wrong ? or if the caveman worshiped Women in the nude, would it be right or wrong ?
So in conclusion ,I do respect what you believe in , but its not my beliefs ,so for a fair questionair it would have to be rewritten in more of a nonbiased form .
(this is why i ussually steer clear of the religous debates here )
-
That's more or less the same conclusion I came to Ros.
-
So what are you trying to prove?
That your type of religious people are more moral than the disbelievers?
Dude, you read the Bible the answer is right there.
Or the Quran. Answer is there too.
Just about any religious text will tell you that your kind are better more saved more aptly suited, morally superior and whatnot.
Don't need a poll to prove that.
I've already have Christians tell me I'm a bad person yadda yadda for living my life my way. They can take their moral superiority crap and stuff it somewhere the sun don't shine.
Organised religions seriously tend to twist and turn the original intentions of its sometimes divine sources.
Believe it or not the Bible will not solve all social ill and not all things put in that group by Christians are 'social ills'. Maybe the afterlife will but this *ain't* the afterlife yet.
-
A couple questions struck me as biased.
I have had inappropriate thoughts about minors (please only answer if you are over 18)
Who is to say what is inappropriate? If I was 18 and she was 17 am I going to Hell? The question should be "I am 45 and have the hots for that 15 year old blonde down at the A & P."
I have engaged in an inappropriate physical relationship with someone other than my spouse
I'm not married. Is any relationship I have inappropriate? The question should be "Have you ever cheated on your wife?"
I think I'll watch another episode of Moral Orel and get my head right.
-
done. :)
-
Originally posted by rpm
A couple questions struck me as biased.
Who is to say what is inappropriate? If I was 18 and she was 17 am I going to Hell? The question should be "I am 45 and have the hots for that 15 year old blonde down at the A & P."
I'm not married. Is any relationship I have inappropriate? The question should be "Have you ever cheated on your wife?"
I think I'll watch another episode of Moral Orel and get my head right.
I assumed that by minors it did mean below the age of 18.
-
rpm,
Why do you equate "inappropriate" with "going to hell"?
Can't it just be an "inappropriate relationship", just like that, without any other alarming implications? If you aren't sure what defines "inappropriate", you obviously have a few options for the definition:
1. Use the legal definition.
2. Use your own personal definition.
3. Use the definition you think the pollster is using
4. Use a definition your read in some book
5. Use a definition you think will piss off the pollster, and then complain about the poll :)
Seriously, I answered the questions using #2, because my personal definition of "inappropriate" is in general a superset of #1 and a subset of #3 and #4, although in some cases I think that some things that are illegal are perfectly appropriate (like shooting rapists on sight, etc). I didn't consider #5 because that's a stupid intardnet trick :)
-
Done Seagoon! For what its worth I do think a little rewrite might be in the future for this questionnaire but hey its your survey and you can do it however it fits your goals.
One thing though is I am a little unclear on the emotional relationship aspect.
For instance there is a woman that I have been friends with (non-sexually) for far longer than I have been with my wife. Its one of those things that we started out dating and then discovered we would be better off as friends. There are things that only she knows about me and vice versa for her husband. BUT again these go back over 15 years ago which was before I met my wife. Does still having that friendship and relationship constitute an inappropriate emotional relationship as far as your study goes?
-
Well, I did it.
My concern about the "and" was something along the lines of "do you pray and read the Bible" (at work, I know this wasn't the exact wording).
The question I had being, what if I do one and not the other?
I just answered "no" because I figured you were asking for both, and then whether I pray to God specifically (I tend to "pray" more to my buddies and family that's passed - figure God's already got his hands full :) )
-
I'm in too. Kinda made me sad over some of the honest answers I had to give. grarsch's response here makes me even sadder.
I am not a churchgoing self righteous type, but I am a Christian (no, not a "good" Christian, but none-the-less). I cannot fathom why anyone would look into a poll like this and then complain about there being a poll like this.
All in all its a pretty simple little poll, nothing to be afraid of, but I can see where it might give certain stereotypical results. I said "might", so maybe not. But then there are reasons that stereotypes exist.
I work with a Baptist preacher and occasionally show him some of the religious debate threads here. Usually leaves him dumbfounded.
-
Originally posted by eagl
rpm,
Why do you equate "inappropriate" with "going to hell"?
Can't it just be an "inappropriate relationship", just like that, without any other alarming implications? If you aren't sure what defines "inappropriate", you obviously have a few options for the definition:
1. Use the legal definition.
2. Use your own personal definition.
3. Use the definition you think the pollster is using
4. Use a definition your read in some book
5. Use a definition you think will piss off the pollster, and then complain about the poll :)
Seriously, I answered the questions using #2, because my personal definition of "inappropriate" is in general a superset of #1 and a subset of #3 and #4, although in some cases I think that some things that are illegal are perfectly appropriate (like shooting rapists on sight, etc). I didn't consider #5 because that's a stupid intardnet trick :)
Why did I equate inappropriate with going to Hell? This is a religious thread, right? That's kinda the whole religious thing (bad = going to hell).
I also answered using #2, but wanted to point out the question was rather poorly worded. I was not trying to antagonize the pollster.
-
Done.
-
Originally posted by BlkKnit
I'm in too. Kinda made me sad over some of the honest answers I had to give. grarsch's response here makes me even sadder.
My intention wasn't to ruffle any feathers but I'm a blunt kind of person. I've got some experience with creating polls and I cannot say strongly enough that how the questions are formulated have an enormous impact on the outcome of the poll.
This one has a serious bias and leans so heavily to one side that the authors intentions are just one abstraction away from the reader.
I can make a poll that'll have members of the Baath party look like angels and Mother Theresa look like a sadistic lady simply by using conjunctions, loaded questions, false/binary choices etc etc etc.
Seagoon said he's doing it for research. This poll is just too flawed to have any use in that regard unless he's trying to tell people on his own side exactly what he and they want to hear.
That's all. No Christian bashing. Just my opinion on the poll (which I took :D).
-
Hi Guys,
Forgive me for not getting to your replies/questions earlier. I'll try to answer most of them today, and I sincerely appreciate your taking the test and your patience. The water heater over our women's room rusted out and burst and the landlord is maintaining its our resposibility to replace his worn-out heater so I've got my hands full.
Originally posted by Roscoroo
if your looking for a control group that isnt xtain based / beliefs.
then from my point of view /beliefs, you would need to do a major rewrite of the questions because they would /or could be seen as offensive to some.
Religion is a tricky subject/debate / ect .. no matter what you believe in as for none of them are totally correct and none of them are totally wrong .
Roscoroo, the questions were already asked to the other group, changing them entirely would have eliminated the "control" aspect and would have simply created two different polls. Also, admittedly there is a "soft" assumption of a biblical worldview behind the questions but could you please point out to me which one's were "offensive?" In most cases were an action is described, a value judgment is not appended to the action, as in "I frequently view pornography" even when I ask about praying the question is value neutral. I do not ask, for instance, "I am a good little boy who says his prayers" or "I am a naughty boy who doesn't love God or talk to him in prayer." etc. The questions are do you or don't you pray and read the bible and how often. I realize three behaviors were labeled "inappropriate," but I'll tackle that when I answer RPM.
-
Hello Grarsch,
I don't believe we've met before, I'm Seagoon, the OCs token crazy evangelical pastor (at least until a more suitable replacement can be found.) Nice to meet you.
Originally posted by Grarsch
So what are you trying to prove?
That your type of religious people are more moral than the disbelievers?
Please don't let preconceived notions or prejudices about evangelicals drive your assumptions about this (or better, about most things). Also, please wait until you've interacted with me a few times before you label me and put me in the appropriate box, I'll try to accord you the same courtesy.
While it is bad methodology to tell the poll group what you are trying to ascertain before the poll closes, its actually closer to the exact opposite of your assumption. This is actually meant to be more of an examination and if necessary wake-up call for people in my particular profession. You guys are meant to represent the general population, hence the control aspect. I expect that in most of their habits AH players are about in the mainstream for middle class American male behavior.
Dude, you read the Bible the answer is right there.
Or the Quran. Answer is there too.
Just about any religious text will tell you that your kind are better more saved more aptly suited, morally superior and whatnot.
Actually, Grarsch, I'll freely admit to you that I am not a good man, quite the opposite, I know myself to be a sinner and a wretch and that far too often I have to admit with the Apostle Paul: " For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice." (Romans 7:19) But while I am not a good man, I do know the Good man, and live only to point others to Him saying with John the Baptist - "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29)
That's the message of the bible incidentally, not that believers are good and morally superior, but that they are sinners saved only by grace, burning sticks snatched from the fire as Zec. 3:2 puts it. So if you are looking for declarations of moral superiority from me, you are going to have to look elsewhere.
The Quran is a different matter entirely, it does ground salvation on the good works and righteousness of followers (defined by conformity to Quranic law - codified later as Sharia). So in that system you do go to heaven by becoming morally superior to the infidel by your conformity to the teachings of "the prophet". But I'd suggest you take up that conversation with the Muslims.
As for the bible solving the "social ills" of this present age, that really isn't possible or even the objective of the gospel. Whether you believe it or not, the gospel is designed to point the way of salvation to the lost, it also teaches them how to live their lives after they are saved in order that they might be conformed to the image of the savior. It is not designed to "save societies" or create an earthly kingdom, rather it is designed to save people out of those societies. There are rules (the decalogue) found in the word that should direct the civil magistrate as he fulfills his mandate to create laws and govern, and society should be improved by changed people doing what they can to be salt and light, but there is no mandate for a theocratic solution to "social ills" in the manner of say the aforementioned Quran. The bible is not a political guidebook for utopian government, for that you'll need to look into something like Mein Kampf, or the Communist Manifesto.
-
I went to take the poll, but it wouldn't let me answer "Gordo is a studmuffin" to every question.
So I'm answering here.
-
I thought "family devotional" was code for Gordo is a studmuffin... oops.
-
Originally posted by myelo
I went to take the poll, but it wouldn't let me answer "Gordo is a studmuffin" to every question.
So I'm answering here.
Are you ****tin' me? There's no Gordo is a studmuffin option?
Well thats stupid, this poll is obviously biased.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
This is actually meant to be more of an examination and if necessary wake-up call for people in my particular profession.
Ah, so it's an agenda riddled push poll, not a research project.
You guys are meant to represent the general population, hence the control aspect.
...I was looking for a control group made up of mostly internet savvy males 21-65 who mostly weren't evangelical Christian types.
Well which is it, the general population or internet savvy males 21-65 who mostly weren't evangelical Christian types? I'm going to guess it doesn't really matter, as long as the answers further your agenda.
I expect that in most of their habits AH players are about in the mainstream for middle class American male behavior.
But you really have now idea, in order to find out you would actually have to run a scientific poll.
Actually, Grarsch, I'll freely admit to you that I am not a good man,
Well, not masquerading a scheme to further your agenda as a research project might help you on your path to becoming a better one.
I got to tell you, if I presented my professional trade association with something like this and called it "research", they would kick me in the balls.
-
Hey Seagoon. I'm Grarsch, a relative newcomer. Sometimes I'm not as nice as I could be but that's my own burden to bear and handle the consequences of.
Not sure I understand what you mean with wakeup call and I'm not closer to understanding the real purpose behind the poll.
If it is to expose that humans are lying, cheating bastards primarily looking out for numero uno - no poll needed. We're all that, some more than others.
If it is to show that humans are generous loving and compassionate with a strong sense of moral right and wrong - no poll needed. We're that too.
I appreciate that you're answering me. What kind of wakeup call are you looking for? That the flock is in need of guidance - despite being Christians, they're behaving like the part-time Christians/non believers? If this is it I hope you can spread the word coz then we're in agreement. Humans are fallible and that's OK with me, it gets dealt with if it's appropriate.
I just react to people who say their crap don't smell. The hypocrites who say one thing but don't honestly try to adhere to it unless it's convenient.
You say you're not a good man. By your definition it seems no one is, it's an impossible thing to be. The phrase utterly loses meaning except on some abstract plane like 'a perfect circle' if the assumption is we're all evil sinners born that way through the sins of our forefathers. As negative as my views on people can be, yours are two steps worse. I mean no redemption possible in this life and in the afterlife only because Jesus died to pay your debt. Sounds harsh but the truth is whatever it is.
I don't agree with the view that humans are inherently good or evil. Not sure I even agree that good and evil exists, except on the same plane as the perfect circle or the good man in your case.
I mean I applaud you for doing the work of Sisyphus. Never ending ungrateful stuff. It's just that I don't agree with the base of it. Which is to be a little less bad than we potentially can be since the assumption is that we're bad sinners to start with and will remain so til the good Lord makes a decision on our lives.
If I come off as sort of anti-religious it's probably because I am a little anti-authoritarian. Been that way since I was a kid and have no idea how my parents managed to steer me clear of (most) trouble. Organised religions are authoritarian, the authorities are Da Man and I don't particular like Da Man. So nothing specific to religion there.
-
Seagoon, done.
Cheers,
asw
-
My gawd... the hand wringing over Seagoon's motives is laughable.
-
Hello RPM,
Originally posted by rpm
A couple questions struck me as biased.
Who is to say what is inappropriate? If I was 18 and she was 17 am I going to Hell? The question should be "I am 45 and have the hots for that 15 year old blonde down at the A & P."
Who is to say what is inappropriate? Well RPM, traditionally there are three competing arguments as to who determines "inappropriateness"; the first is that we determine it by a fixed and unchanging standard established by an absolute authority. At one time in Western society, that standard was the Bible. I would still argue that that is the only true and coherent standard for right and wrong, but obviously I'm in a decided minority in the modern world.
The transition that was initially made after the bible and still quite popular, is that government decides what is and is not appropriate. Occasionally this is done simply by dictat when an absolute ruler imposes his preferences on the people (as in the case of Stalin, Hitler, etc.) sometimes it is done by the consensus of an oligarchy (such as the Supreme Court in the USA) or sometimes it is done via a 51% vote of the people. Either way, what happens is that preferences of individuals are imposed and become the standard until the balance of power shifts or the preferences change.
The manner of decision that many people naturally prefer however, is that they decide what is inappropriate and what isn't according to their personal preferences and simply act in accordance with their decision. The problems with this are that no social compact is possible using this method and when widely applied it usually makes people scream for an authoritarian version of option #2. Let me give you an example, let us say that you are a hulking brute of a man and you decide that it is entirely "appropriate" for you to have a sexual relationship with your neighbors six year old son. Your neighbor is a single mom, and she cannot stop you herself, if she doesn't agree with your definition of "appropriate" she will need either outside help, either via clan or society or she'll have to kill you with a firearm. We might aplaud her decision to do so, but what if she decided to kill you for having a consensual sexual relationship with her 33 year old daughter, which she did not believe was "appropriate"? Obviously a uniform standard for where the general borders of appropriate and inappropriate lie needs to be set and agreed upon in any society lest we become a pack of wild dogs.
Personally, I am happy that even though our society has abandoned natural law and now makes up the rules as it goes along, the majority still feel that things like child porn, sexual fantasies involving children, and sexual relationships with children are "inappropriate." I am not looking forward to the day that NAMBLA fantasizes about when the age of consent is dropped to something like 11 or 12 and you and can no longer legally shield our children from adult predators. As for your scenario, the average age of most respondents here, like you and I, is well over 21, and in our age bracket we are talking about something a little more serious than high school seniors dating the sophmore girls.
I'm not married. Is any relationship I have inappropriate? The question should be "Have you ever cheated on your wife?"
RPM, even the word "cheating" is biased and implies that there is something wrong with that action. Heck, even the phrased "cheated on a test" implies a bias and moral stigma. Should I have said "harvested answers from other sources not approved by the test giver" to avoid that stigma? Where do we come to the end of all this "there is no right and wrong" babble? Do you really want to live in an entirely user defined society? "How dare you say flying a plane into the Twin Towers is 'inappropriate', that is because you have an infidel bias, it is a good and glorious thing to me, I demand you stop using the biased term "act of terrorism"!
- SEAGOON
-
Hello Thrawn,
Originally posted by Thrawn
Ah, so it's an agenda riddled push poll, not a research project. ... Well, not masquerading a scheme to further your agenda as a research project might help you on your path to becoming a better one.
Oy vey, this is becoming surreal. Thrawn, believe it or not, I don't know how people are going to answer, and my only agenda here and everywhere is extremely obvious and thoroughly above board. This is in no manner a "push-poll." Did I ask "In your opinion, when should the extremely stupid and evil president be impeached - now, or should we take the risk and wait till next year if we are still alive and not in a political reeducation camp by then?"
What I meant was that like the unexpected stats that show parents spend an average of 5 minutes talking to their children each day, the result might just be someone who was polled is disturbed or startled by the results. Also its just for an article to be published in an online magazine, not a major thesis or something that will be released to CNN. Sometimes I wonder if some serious lightening-up needs to happen around here. Not everything is part of an evil plan to strip you of some "right." I'm just an insignificant pastor dude in Fayetteville with a broken water heater.
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Grarsch
My intention wasn't to ruffle any feathers but I'm a blunt kind of person. I've got some experience with creating polls and I cannot say strongly enough that how the questions are formulated have an enormous impact on the outcome of the poll.
This one has a serious bias and leans so heavily to one side that the authors intentions are just one abstraction away from the reader.
I can make a poll that'll have members of the Baath party look like angels and Mother Theresa look like a sadistic lady simply by using conjunctions, loaded questions, false/binary choices etc etc etc.
Seagoon said he's doing it for research. This poll is just too flawed to have any use in that regard unless he's trying to tell people on his own side exactly what he and they want to hear.
That's all. No Christian bashing. Just my opinion on the poll (which I took :D).
See? I am over-reacting to something you said because of my own personal inadequacies. It wasn't you in particular I was on about, it was what you said, and my own idea that it was a generally common theme among many, many people. And the idea that I have been one of those people myself saddened me. Things like this are why I generally keep my faith on a personal level and out of the public light.
I took what you said wrong and I apologize for it.
Seagoon, your poll is biased toward making me look like an idiot ;)
-
We had a full semester at business school with stats and data analysis. One of the classes was dedicated to learning how to make polls and surveys. With this one the object of the survey is pretty clear as the questions are rather leading. Not bad if you want to control the result you are after, but in terms of getting an objective result its useless ;)
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hello RPM,
Who is to say what is inappropriate? Well RPM, traditionally there are three competing arguments as to who determines "inappropriateness"![/i]
- SEAGOON
Sorry Seagoon, but if you are saying that there would be no "moral" behavior without the Bible you need to do a little more research. This is the constant problem with religious "science". It necessarily must lead to a conclusion adopted by its agenda. Sad that educated people in today's world still fall into that trap.
I snipped out the rest of your wall of text because it was just more nonsense supporting your straw man.
-
To argue that moral behaviour has no basis in the Bible seems a bit silly. I think, maybe, I can see where you are coming from MT and I have argued similarly in the past, but one thing keeps creeping up in my own mind.
Is there a morality that stands in contrast to the Bible? If so, how can it be moral?
-
Hello MT,
Originally posted by midnight Target
Sorry Seagoon, but if you are saying that there would be no "moral" behavior without the Bible you need to do a little more research. This is the constant problem with religious "science". It necessarily must lead to a conclusion adopted by its agenda. Sad that educated people in today's world still fall into that trap.
I snipped out the rest of your wall of text because it was just more nonsense supporting your straw man.
Do me the great favor of interacting with the material beyond the snip that you think is untrue, and then I can try to come up with a coherent response to your critique, otherwise I'm attempting to defend an argument I was not advancing.
If it isn't too much to ask, it would help if people could limit their attacks to what I actually say, rather than hidden agendas or popular caricatures of American evangelical Christians. I know its a sign of my general mental inadequacy, but I get confused when I'm asked to provide a defense for why I believe things I don't believe. I also have difficulty answering if I have stopped beating my wife.
Me am very tired,
Seagoon
-
Just because something agrees with the Bible doesn't prove the Bible is the singular moral authority in the world.
For example...
I rescued the weak from the hand of one stronger than he when I was able;
I gave bread to the hungry, clothing [to the naked], a landing for the boatless.
I buried him who had no son,
I made a boat for him who had no boat,
I respected my father, I pleased my mother,
I nurtured their children.
Sounds familiar?
It is from the autobiography of Nefer-seshem-re of the 5th dynasty of Egypt.
I don't think he ever read the Bible.
-
One last thought related to the above.
I had a depressing conversation a little while ago with a young woman on a plane, that was sadly reminiscent of the some of the stuff above. It started with the general person in the next seat small talk, but when she heard that I was a Christian Pastor, she immediately got a vaguely irritated expression and stopped speaking. When I asked her if there was something she wanted to say, she bluntly stated "I have a problem with what you are trying to do to America." I asked her what it was that I was trying to do and was informed that I was basically an American "Taliban" trying to take over the USA and create a theocracy where women would be repressed, and homosexuals would be put in concentration camps, liberals would be disenfranchised, and the American military would be used to attempt to take over and Christianize every third world nation etc. I tried to explain my actual beliefs and aims, but I kept get cutting off with "But you believe... but I've read in X that..." and realized after a while that I didn't exist, I was just a huge walking stereotype.
After a while I asked her how many of her friends were evangelical Christians, to which she answered "none, but that doesn't mean I don't know all about them." I explained to her that I felt a little like a Jew trying to talk to a German who had become an expert in Judaism by watching films like "Jud Suss" and the "The Eternal Jew" and that I'd been asked to defend why I and the Rothschilds had sold out Germany after the first world war and were part of a worldwide Communist conspiracy to destroy the Nordic peoples and polute their bloodline. Unfortunately, the conversation didn't improve from there.
-SEAGOON
-
Hello MT,
Originally posted by midnight Target
Just because something agrees with the Bible doesn't prove the Bible is the singular moral authority in the world.
For example...
I rescued the weak from the hand of one stronger than he when I was able;
I gave bread to the hungry, clothing [to the naked], a landing for the boatless.
I buried him who had no son,
I made a boat for him who had no boat,
I respected my father, I pleased my mother,
I nurtured their children.
Sounds familiar?
It is from the autobiography of Nefer-seshem-re of the 5th dynasty of Egypt.
I don't think he ever read the Bible.
You still aren't interacting with what I wrote in my reply to RPM about three competing theories for actually determining and enforcing "inappropriateness", you are advancing your own argument.
-
Originally posted by BlkKnit
I'm in too. Kinda made me sad over some of the honest answers I had to give. grarsch's response here makes me even sadder.
I am not a churchgoing self righteous type, but I am a Christian (no, not a "good" Christian, but none-the-less). I cannot fathom why anyone would look into a poll like this and then complain about there being a poll like this.
All in all its a pretty simple little poll, nothing to be afraid of, but I can see where it might give certain stereotypical results. I said "might", so maybe not. But then there are reasons that stereotypes exist.
I work with a Baptist preacher and occasionally show him some of the religious debate threads here. Usually leaves him dumbfounded.
" I cannot fathom why anyone would look into a poll like this and then complain about there being a poll like this."
You are kidding right?
Same reason that the religious get upset when they see anything printed/said that is the opposite of what they believe.
-
OK, I'll play, but don't expect me to allow you to set the parameters of the discussion.
You basically stated there were 3 "competing arguments" as to "who determines inappropriateness".
1. The Bible which you said was the one true source for right and wrong.
2. Government, of which you gave some wonderful examples like Hitler and Stalin... very even handed of you.
3. Personal preference... like the hulking brute next door who thinks pedophilia is just fine with him.
Good grief man. Do your parishoners fall for these one sided pieces of fluff? This is a classic straw man argument and I hope most of the readers of this BBS see it for what it is.
I guess my biggest problem with your philosophy is not the teachings of Jesus, but the fear mongering perpetrated by people like yourself and others in your profession. Why attack others if your message is so strong? Why not compare your philosophy to the best of the others in this wide world than to the worst? Afraid it won't match up?
So no, I don't think I'll argue point for point with your premise that there is the Bible and then there are those other horrible methods that lead to sin and degradation. Maybe you need to expand your knowledge base instead of trying to narrow that of others.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hello RPM,
Who is to say what is inappropriate? Well RPM, traditionally there are three competing arguments as to who determines "inappropriateness"; the first is that we determine it by a fixed and unchanging standard established by an absolute authority. At one time in Western society, that standard was the Bible. I would still argue that that is the only true and coherent standard for right and wrong, but obviously I'm in a decided minority in the modern world.
The transition that was initially made after the bible and still quite popular, is that government decides what is and is not appropriate. Occasionally this is done simply by dictat when an absolute ruler imposes his preferences on the people (as in the case of Stalin, Hitler, etc.) sometimes it is done by the consensus of an oligarchy (such as the Supreme Court in the USA) or sometimes it is done via a 51% vote of the people. Either way, what happens is that preferences of individuals are imposed and become the standard until the balance of power shifts or the preferences change.
The manner of decision that many people naturally prefer however, is that they decide what is inappropriate and what isn't according to their personal preferences and simply act in accordance with their decision. The problems with this are that no social compact is possible using this method and when widely applied it usually makes people scream for an authoritarian version of option #2. Let me give you an example, let us say that you are a hulking brute of a man and you decide that it is entirely "appropriate" for you to have a sexual relationship with your neighbors six year old son. Your neighbor is a single mom, and she cannot stop you herself, if she doesn't agree with your definition of "appropriate" she will need either outside help, either via clan or society or she'll have to kill you with a firearm. We might aplaud her decision to do so, but what if she decided to kill you for having a consensual sexual relationship with her 33 year old daughter, which she did not believe was "appropriate"? Obviously a uniform standard for where the general borders of appropriate and inappropriate lie needs to be set and agreed upon in any society lest we become a pack of wild dogs.
Personally, I am happy that even though our society has abandoned natural law and now makes up the rules as it goes along, the majority still feel that things like child porn, sexual fantasies involving children, and sexual relationships with children are "inappropriate." I am not looking forward to the day that NAMBLA fantasizes about when the age of consent is dropped to something like 11 or 12 and you and can no longer legally shield our children from adult predators. As for your scenario, the average age of most respondents here, like you and I, is well over 21, and in our age bracket we are talking about something a little more serious than high school seniors dating the sophmore girls.
RPM, even the word "cheating" is biased and implies that there is something wrong with that action. Heck, even the phrased "cheated on a test" implies a bias and moral stigma. Should I have said "harvested answers from other sources not approved by the test giver" to avoid that stigma? Where do we come to the end of all this "there is no right and wrong" babble? Do you really want to live in an entirely user defined society? "How dare you say flying a plane into the Twin Towers is 'inappropriate', that is because you have an infidel bias, it is a good and glorious thing to me, I demand you stop using the biased term "act of terrorism"!
- SEAGOON
Hello Seagoon,
Uh, wow. I did'nt realise I had triggered so much anger inside of you. I really did not intend to do so. Thanks for portraying me as a rapist, tho. Good show. I'm sorry your conversation with the young girl went poorly, but you have to understand what the youth of the nation have seen. They have watched scandal and abuse run rampant thruout religion. Do as I say, not as I do. They are jaded. My reference to Morel Orel (http://www.adultswim.com/shows/moralorel/) is about a Davey and Goliath parody. Sorry, I try to mix a bit of humor with my spirituality.:)
I was just pointing out some clarification of the points in question would be appropriate to achive the answers I thought you were seeking. But, you have raised a couple points I'd like to redress.
If you were looking for NAMBLA types and not Seniors dating Sophmores then make it more clear in the question. Age of consent varies from state to state, so the question would get answers that would queer your research. See where I'm going? It was too vague and I tried to point it out. Personally, I'd like to see it more uniform and up to 18 nationwide. Child molesters should get 1 strike and your out.
The question "I have engaged in an inappropriate physical relationship with someone other than my spouse" is so wide open for interpretation there is no way you can get legitemate info. What if I'm single and have no spouse? The question assumes I'm married. My version gives a more defined data.
I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about research. If you want white noise for data I'll sit down and be quiet.
-
Originally posted by Silat
" I cannot fathom why anyone would look into a poll like this and then complain about there being a poll like this."
You are kidding right?
Same reason that the religious get upset when they see anything printed/said that is the opposite of what they believe.
But, but, bu-ut. If your not religious, then why does it matter? Why wouldn't you just put on a goofy grin, nod slowly and walk away. ;)
I can see where religious folks need to work at it. I know I should work harder at it. I dont see where those who are not religious should work this hard at it. Whats the point? Whats to gain?
Its almost like this bbs has become to me now, as church-goers were to me in my youth. I mean, yes the poll seems like it will garner results only in a certain range. Isn't that what polls are supposed to do? For a poll to be truly fair it should ask every possible question known to man and each of those asked in various ways. Thats my simple minded opinion and I say that without sarcasm. I am not well educated, have never taken a class on polls, religion, politics or higher math.
I am not really trying to pick a fight here, I just find myself heating up a bit over some of the attitudes: that because I believe in God that I am somehow inferior, a mindless moron following an ancient voodoo that was written on the backs of cereal boxes or something. Believe me, I have been on the other side of this argument and I dont tell someone they are immoral just because they do not profess the Christian faith. Why should anyone tell me that I'm a mindless fool if I do?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Just because something agrees with the Bible doesn't prove the Bible is the singular moral authority in the world.
For example...
I rescued the weak from the hand of one stronger than he when I was able;
I gave bread to the hungry, clothing [to the naked], a landing for the boatless.
I buried him who had no son,
I made a boat for him who had no boat,
I respected my father, I pleased my mother,
I nurtured their children.
Sounds familiar?
It is from the autobiography of Nefer-seshem-re of the 5th dynasty of Egypt.
I don't think he ever read the Bible.
Thats cool. seriously.
I dont think I am saying what is in my heart here. This is all starting to look like 2 giant walls a mile apart. They face each other with little heed of what lies between and never getting closer.
Religion or faith isn't morality, it isn't a requirement for morality IMO. I know some folks who are just the opposite, well, nevermind, I'm sure you know some too. They seem to be everywhere in my experience.
But again my argument of:
"Is there a morality that stands in contrast to the Bible? If so, how can it be moral?"
remains valid I think, historical ties being what they were and free thinkers spreading ideas, makes me wonder if maybe the fellow above had indeed read the Bible, in some form or another?
-
Hi MT,
Thank you for your patience, and for interacting with the rest of the post. I'm afraid I don't have much time to write as I have to be at a concert in a little while, I'll try to write a little more later.
Originally posted by midnight Target
OK, I'll play, but don't expect me to allow you to set the parameters of the discussion.
You basically stated there were 3 "competing arguments" as to "who determines inappropriateness".
1. The Bible which you said was the one true source for right and wrong.
2. Government, of which you gave some wonderful examples like Hitler and Stalin... very even handed of you.
3. Personal preference... like the hulking brute next door who thinks pedophilia is just fine with him.
Actually, I stated that the general theory was that there were three competeing theories for determining the parameters for appropriate or inappropriate:
1) A fixed and unchanging standard
2) A floating standard, fixed for a time by government either by declaration or some level of consensus
3) Individual autonomy
Obviously several religions such as Christianity and Islam teach that we should only really rely on number one, and if there really is a God and He has made His will known to men, then it follows that we should obey it. Obviously, Christianity and Islam disagree fundamentally on which revelation is true and which is false, but they agree on what should be the final source of instruction. You no doubt would disagree not only with making the Bible the final arbiter of our ethical decisions, mores, etc. but would be opposed to the entire notion of option #1.
My point regarding number 3 was that absolute individual autonomy, while it may seem attractive, makes any form of civilized society impossible. So that leaves you with option #2 and having government of one form or another setting the standards for us and facing the fact that those standards will thus constantly be in flux as laws change and governments come and go. Those standards will seldom be as bad as the could be or as good as they could be either (as far as the fixed standard I adhere to would describe good and bad) and generally evil will be restrained to some degree or another by civil government unless that government is itself given over to the perpetration of evil.
Anyway, more later, I have to get going.
- SEAGOON
PS: RPM, I wasn't angry, sorry if I came over that way. I'm more saddened than anything else. It seems like after so much water here on the OC has gone under the bridge, if you leave for a while you return to square one. Cest La Vie...
-
Actually Seagoon you couldn't be more wrong. I think that there most certainly are an unchanging set or morals (with minor fluctuations over the centuries) that all humans should live by. I think they exist in the absence of religion and I think that no religion holds a monopoly on those morals.
-
My point regarding number 3 was that absolute individual autonomy, while it may seem attractive, makes any form of civilized society impossible.
Disagree. And when people say that countries would resort to chaos without government, what they really mean is that they will resort to chaos without government.
It's that sheep mentality. Even if the sheep dog eats a third of the herd every year, it's comforting for them to have the sheep dog there.
-
Hello Guys,
First, please forgive me, as you may have already sussed-out, my current schedule isn't leaving me with much time to talk or respond here and I'm not going to be able to do justice to any sort of proper discussion with the limited time I currently have to work with. Perhaps when things go from boil to simmer...
Second, thanks to everyone who helped out by taking my admittedly imperfect survey. I'm going to post the results here from the original group and the AH BB. (If you'd like to discuss the results with some of the gentlemen/ladies in the other group. I can invite a few of them over.) Obviously the percentages are off, because they reflect total number of answers not the number of people taking the poll. The total number of poll takers in both groups was roughly the same, btw.
Anyway here they are, make of them what you will, both votes were anonymous, second group did not know another group would be asked the same questions - differences in vote tallies vs. the other poll are in parentheses:
AH BB GROUP ANSWERS
POLL QUESTION: PERSONAL ETHICS AND RELIGION POLL -
CHOICES AND RESULTS
- I am a male, 33 votes, 11.42% (+3)
- I am a female, 0 votes, 0.00% (-4)
- I am a minister, elder, deacon, in a church, a missionary, seminary professor, or other religious professional , 3 votes, 1.04% (-16)
- I have a daily schedule of private prayer and devotional bible reading , 1 votes, 0.35% (-13)
- I pray and read the bible devotionally in private but not on a daily basis , 7 votes, 2.42% (-10)
- I never or almost never have a time of private prayer and devotional bible reading , 20 votes, 6.92% (+15)
- I have cheated on an exam or test and not publicly confessed it , 12 votes, 4.15% (+5)
- I have broken a vow or an oath sworn before God and not publicly confessed it , 12 votes, 4.15% (+9)
- I occasionally tell lies when it is to my advantage to do so , 21 votes, 7.27% (+15)
- I frequently tell lies when it is to my advantage to do so , 3 votes, 1.04% (+3)
- I have an addiction (to something serious other than AH2 - drugs, porn, alcohol, nicotine, something you feel powerless to stop doing), 11 votes, 3.81% (+9)
- I do family devotions/worship on a daily basis , 2 votes, 0.69% (-7)
- I sometimes do family devotions/worship , 5 votes, 1.73% (-10)
- I have no practice of family devotions/worship, 22 votes, 7.61% (+20)
- I pretend not to be a racist, but secretly I have racist thoughts/opinions , 8 votes, 2.77% (+7)
- I am openly racist and/or don't think there is a problem with that , 5 votes, 1.73% (+5)
- I sometimes steal, submit false expense reports or commit some other form of business fraud , 8 votes, 2.77% (+7)
- I have engaged in an inappropriate physical relationship with someone other than my spouse , 10 votes, 3.46% (+9)
- I have engaged in an inappropriate emotional relationship with someone other than my spouse , 10 votes, 3.46% (+9)
- I have had inappropriate thoughts about minors (please only answer if you are over 18), 11 votes, 3.81% (+10)
- I am sometimes guilty of gossiping, 23 votes, 7.96% (+6)
- On a few rare occasions, I have succumbed to the temptation to view pornography , 11 votes, 3.81% (-3)
- I frequently view pornography , 23 votes, 7.96% (+21)
- I sometimes drink beyond moderation or simply get drunk , 18 votes, 6.23% (+16)
- I sometimes use illegal drugs or abuse prescription drugs , 10 votes, 3.46% (+10)
EVANGELICAL REFORMED CHRISTIAN DISCUSSION GROUP ANSWERS
CHOICES AND RESULTS
- I am a male, 30 votes, 17.24%
- I am a female, 4 votes, 2.30%
- I am an officer in the church, a missionary, or seminary professor, 19 votes, 10.92%
- I have a daily schedule of private prayer and devotional bible reading, 14 votes, 8.05%
- I pray and read the bible devotionally in private but not on a daily basis, 17 votes, 9.77%
- I never/almost never have a time of private prayer and devotional bible reading, 5 votes, 2.87%
- I have cheated on an exam or test and not publicly confessed it, 7 votes, 4.02%
- I have broken a vow or an oath sworn before God and not publicly confessed it, 3 votes, 1.72%
- I occasionally tell lies when it is to my advantage to do so, 6 votes, 3.45%
- I frequently tell lies when it is to my advantage to do so, 0 votes, 0.00%
- I have a sinful addiction, 2 votes, 1.15%
- I do family devotions/worship on a daily basis, 9 votes, 5.17%
- I sometimes do family devotions/worship, 15 votes, 8.62%
- I have no practice of family devotions/worship, 2 votes, 1.15%
- I pretend not to be a racist, but secretly I have racist thoughts/opinions, 1 votes, 0.57%
- I am openly racist and/or don't think there is a problem with that, 0 votes, 0.00%
- I sometimes steal, submit false expense reports or commit some other form of business fraud, 1 votes, 0.57%
- I have engaged in an inappropriate physical relationship with someone other than my spouse, 2 votes, 1.15%
- I have engaged in an inappropriate emotional relationship with someone other than my spouse, 1 votes, 0.57%
- I have had inappropriate thoughts about minors, 1 votes, 0.57%
- I am sometimes guilty of gossiping, 17 votes, 9.77%
- On a few rare occasions, I have succumbed to the temptation to view pornography, 14 votes, 8.05%
- I frequently view pornography, 2 votes, 1.15%
- I sometimes drink beyond moderation or simply get drunk, 2 votes, 1.15%
- I sometimes use illegal drugs or abuse prescription drugs, 0 votes, 0.00%
-
Looks to me like you only have 1 or 2 completely honest people in YOUR group :D
-
i bet there were a lot of porno guys who almost finished the web poll thing, but when they got to the porn questions said "o yeah, PORN!!!!" then it was off to pron.com & they were all like "CHICKS!!! KEWL!!!:aok :aok :aok "
-
I am a Man.
I am not without Sin.
I've asked for forgiveness...with my Heart.
I believe that the GOD that I know has washed me of my Sins.
Yet I have not to prove anything to a mortal man my beliefs.
Mac
-
to be honest I am confused by the results
- I am a male, 33 votes, 11.42% (+3)
- I am a female, 0 votes, 0.00% (-4)
- I am a minister, elder, deacon, in a church, a missionary, seminary professor, or other religious professional , 3 votes, 1.04% (-16)
how is 91.66% of the voters only making up 11.42% of the votes?
that makes all the other numbers funny to me
:huh
-
Hi Mustaine,
Originally posted by Mustaine
to be honest I am confused by the results
how is 91.66% of the voters only making up 11.42% of the votes?
that makes all the other numbers funny to me
:huh
The stats in their present form aren't of much use, they are based on the total number of votes not on the total number of voters. So 33 was 11.42% of the total votes cast in the poll.
To be really useful, you would need to add together the I am a male, I am a female figures and then express each results as a percentage of that number.
For instance, there were 33 total participants on the AH side. Of that percentage 3 of the participants were religious professionals. So 9% of the respondents are religious professionals.
If someone has time, they could do the math on a calc in a few mins (I'll try to get to it but no promises, I'm supposed to be teaching 1000 years of church history tonight).
- SEAGOON