Jump to content

La_Dolce_Vita

Regulars
  • Posts

    14,519
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by La_Dolce_Vita

  1. I have a problem with people with people praying, but that's the problem I have with people believing in these supernatural things that supposedly have plans and intentions for them. Faith beliefs and religion definitely shouldn't be treated with respect when people discuss them openly. But even knowing other people believe these things bother me, as I think taking an interest in the truth and wanting to know what is true and what is not is really important. I've not understood prayer in the way you describe as a possibility. I've always understood it as some appeal to a higher being. And if it doesn't involve that then why pray and not just mull things over?
  2. I don't know. The form of meditation I was talking about was the zen stuff, which is like training the mind to stay in the present and stop thinking about the past and future. I don't know if prayer could be a form of a different type of meditation for other people. But I've never understood meditation as 'getting your head round things', though what I did explain to you is something that does clear the mind. I have no problem if prayer is devoid of any thinking about a God though. But I have never met anyone who prays but doesn't believe in a God. I know of a friend who prays because she thinks a God might exist, which is just as silly. But I've never met an atheist who prays. Pray is done with a form of thinking that include an idea of a God being involved with the person somehow and listening. I would not have thought it prayer without that.
  3. We're not talking just about lifestyles and pastimes. Religious people think they know about the world - that it has a God, with intentions and plans, etc. If they can't explain why they think that other than just say it's faith then their belief is daft. Whatever behaviour they get up to because of this belief is also daft. I do admit. That it would be a more interesting world if people believed in Manx fairies and bugganes and stuff like that. Spooky stuff. But if we're interested in knowing what is the truth and what is not then don't believe these things. And we've stopped believing in bugganes and fairies for this reason. It's just a lot of people still believe in something very similar - a God of some desert tribe who lived thousands of years. Because this God comes with promises and hopes people hold on to it and dispense with wanting to find out what is true - they just claim it is. It's just a toy that adults aren't prepared to let go. And it's daft.
  4. Exactly - as you might be wrong and then who would look stupid? But if you're are the believer you're the one who thinks you know the truth and thinks you are right about something existed. You're the one who has to do the leg-work to show what you think is right, otherwise it is to be respected no more than some daft person who thinks invisible unicorns live in their wardrobe.
  5. Out of all the replies - I'm curious about this - what normal parameters do you think their (my) faith removes? Rationality. In all other things we rely on evidence to form our beliefs, but with religion the need for evidence is ignored. And those who believe owing to faith perversely think that faith is a good think.
  6. Me. And I presume a lot of people. How can you pray to something you don't think exists?
  7. I disagree. Respect for a person's belief is owed to those who don't try and force that belief down your throat. Like you're trying to do now. I don't respect beliefs for those reasons and I don't think others should. Well I have a deeply held belief that there are pixies living by the stream near my house, that they require that I pray to them by the stream, which affords me protection from bad luck, and demand that I leave them expensive biscuits every Tuesday to keep them happy. I have no good reason for believing this other than having happened to find some written stories about them. I will not force this belief on anyone. But do you respect this belief? I mean, other than use the word respect as a weasel word and treat it as meaning 'deserving of high value', do you think my belief deserves respect? If you say so, I think you're either a liar or have a very strange view of things. If I really thought this you should think I was mad or really fucking gullible. But there is nothing different than this made-up belief about pixies than believing in the Christian God, Hindu Gods, or Ancient Greek Gods. If you think these things exist and think these beings have some intentions or plans and have involvement in the real world then your belief deserves no respect unless you have good evidence. If a person makes claims about what goes on in the real world then those have to be justified. Sift out the nonsense and stick to what we can we know and what we don't by looking at evidence. If people have these faith beliefs then I much prefer they don't tell me, as I don't want to hear nonsense or get given the creeps, but it is better that people discuss them so there is some possibility of the naive person being able to critically assess their beliefs through talking with someone more rationally-minded (in this area).
  8. A very stupid position to take on the matter of religion. I do think the emphasis should be on a person's beliefs being belittled rather than the person. But religious beliefs involve positions about what is true and what is not and if the believers have nothing to show for their wild claims then being belittled is exactly the sort of the treatment that they opening themselves up to receiving. It is just wiser to hold back with friends that you don't want to upset. They're naive and foolish for thinking there is a God that has a plan for them, but as long as they know that you think their beliefs are bollocks then that is sometimes the best you can do. The faith you refer to in science is not the same meaning of faith that people have in religion. People have faith in a method that seems to work best at determining what is true and what is not or what is most likely to be true or not. Religious faith just means that the believer has no good reason for believing; it means they have no evidence. Beliefs resting on faith deserve no respect. Respect for a person's belief is owed to those who have good reasons for believing in what they do.
  9. I have no connection to the police in any way, shape or form. I just respect the Police and am a supporter of the way they engage with the public. What's wrong with that? We just expect something better from you, that's all, rather than an unintelligent swallowing of cringeworthy government propaganda. But it does read as if you have a connection to the police. It seems almost incomprehensible otherwise.
  10. And that it indicates possession, or rather that's what the purpose is.
  11. From speech, as people very often say something that sounds closer to 'of' in fast speech.
  12. I do notice this with 'buigh' and 'bwee' and with 'anvroie' and 'awree' or even the definite article in genitives for placenames such as 'e', Tholt y Will and Tholt e Will, which can be confusing. I don't know if anyone or any group has decided what should be used or should not for the sake of simplicity or whether there are bigger...issues or things to concern Manx speakers about than spelling. I imagine spellings with crystallise based on usage over time. People will just choose the simpler of the two, as you say.
  13. Oh I see. I think if you typed quicker it would be trickier. I type pretty quickly but would have to look at the keyboard for keys that needed a shift button.
  14. Well auto-correct does it automatically, so you don't get an opportunity to learn, unlike spellchecker (which people can look into, if they're arsed about it). Thinking on, if someone wrote 'should of' or 'would of' they should be told, in my opinion, and I don't think it's pedantic, but a comma used when a semi-colon would be better isn't worth bothering about.
  15. But Latin rules when rigidly applied to English led to taboos about split infinitives and other things, so you can't pull a rule book straight from it and apply it to English. I think the written language should be more than just something that is understood, it should have some rules. It depends on the type of error whether it deserves condemnation.
  16. But auto-correct is not an education tool, is it? It is to make what is written correct, rather than not. A person with a poor education or being dyslexic has the benefit of producing something that doesn't make them look uneducated (and uninterested in learning) or dyslexic. Curious, why do you use an ampersand instead of 'and'? I understand that you use it to try and mean the same thing as 'and' as written in a business name, but isn't it more of a faff trying to use the shift key and hitting 7 instead of typing 'and'?
  17. Plurals of words ending in '-o' are often '-oes' - example embargo/embargoes. As for my use of 'o' - I was referring to don't being a contraction of do not, and won't being a contraction of will not (poor example!), so the apostrophe indicates the removal of the o to convert not into n't ETA - typo - can't have one of those in a grammar/spelling thread! Oh I see. Well 'does' already has its own spelling and meaning and is NOT the plural of 'do', so maybe it's one (or one of several) exceptions to this rules of plurals from a singular ending in 'o'. I wouldn't worry too much about apostrophes. There are far worse things that people write. It's grammar and correct word usage that's a bigger issue.
  18. Don't, Won't and aren't have apostrophes because they are contractions - you need the apostrophe to show that letters are missing. But what you are talking about when it comes to MHKs is not about contractions, but how to use correct punctuation with abbreviations (specifically, acronyms), particularly when you want to use the plural. And in this case, you only need to use an apostrophe if possession is being indicated. I have just written 'MHKs', which is correct, because no possession is indicated. Why would 'does' be the plural of 'do'? And I don't understand what you mean about 'o'.
  19. Well...possessive requires an apostrophe, but when contracted you would not use an apostrophe. So it's "I have seen four different GPs in the last month" and "The GP's stethoscope" or if a number of GPs own the stethoscope then "The GPs' stethoscope". The only time you use an apostrophe with a contraction is if the word looks funny or confusing without it. You would write the "1980s were a shit decade" (an apostrophe would be incorrect, as it isn't possession and 1980s can be read perfectly well), but you might want to write the "do's and don'ts" of etiquette" (as dos looks a bit strange) and maybe even "...cd's", instead of "cds" to avoid confusion that what is written is not an acronym.
  20. It isn't just what you make of it. Part of what makes a great night life is a decent venue, good atmosphere, and good music (if it is a club). And although lack of customers can kill somewhere off, demand for somewhere decent isn't going to necessarily result in a new pub or club.
  21. Where??? Even the best of mates don't make for a great night-life. If the venue is shit then it's shit. Douglas is very poor for pubs and far worse for places to end the night. I think the Rovers is the only decent pub in the town centre now.
  22. I can't see how they can stop it going through. I mean, what legitimate justification could be made to reject it? If anything, it is quite likely that England would have to follow suit, as there are Human Rights implications to preventing straight people having equal access to this form of state recognition and benefit.
  23. Bicycle or Motorcycle lock Brand new (not been used) £20
  24. They do and I think it is wonderful the pier is being restored. I don't know, I won't spoil your excitement. Maybe I am too used to life in the big smoke (Douglas).
  25. Erm...you are being hetero-normative if you think that sex just means sexual intercourse. Other than that, I am not really sure what you mean or why I might have an issue here. Though I don't think that people should avoid sex if they are unwilling to become a father. Better use of contraception and a more rational understanding of abortion would seem to be needed. Society, at present, does have a confused and muddled morality surrounding abortion.
×
×
  • Create New...