Big discovery in stem cell research

[chris lindberg]

Better this type of research than those other crazy scientists trying to make a black hole here on Earth that could suck up our entire planet!

[Flames_Gimp]

as long as i don't have to drink it, they can test out the stem cells on me

[alltherage]

Originally Posted by photon

You can't compare the statement "wacky religious people" to "wacky asians". They're different because people choose to be religious while asians do not.

Saying the statement "wacky religious people" is discrimination is like saying "stupid Vancouver Canucks fans" is discrimination. While not a polite thing to say, and it's probably offensive to someone, it's not discrimination.

I would have to disagree. People aren't compelled by the doctrines of sports teams- people don't base their entire lives around countless years of the research, of sports teams, and in my opinion, people don't really chose a religion.

People chose to research a religion, and if the foundations of the religion are not compelling, it is simply that- just a religion. When the deeper you read in to something, and the more sense it makes, and the more you challenge something, the more it challenges you, it's not the same.

The charter of rights mentions nothing about hate literature based on sports teams being illegal, does it? Oh well, i face this crap day in and day out, message board or not, and I just don't have the energy at this precise moment to combat is on an annonymous message board.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by photon

You can't compare the statement "wacky religious people" to "wacky asians". They're different because people choose to be religious while asians do not.

Saying the statement "wacky religious people" is discrimination is like saying "stupid Vancouver Canucks fans" is discrimination. While not a polite thing to say, and it's probably offensive to someone, it's not discrimination.

I totally see your point but....

Discriminating between people on the grounds of merit is generally lawful in Western democracies. Discrimination on other grounds, such as skin color or religion, generally is not. When unlawful discrimination takes place, it is often described as discrimination against a person or group of people.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

I totally see your point but....

Who exactly was discriminated against in this thread though, and how was that discrimination carried out?

Everybody gets to say their piece.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by alltherage

I would have to disagree. People aren't compelled by the doctrines of sports teams- people don't base their entire lives around countless years of the research, of sports teams, and in my opinion, people don't really chose a religion.

People chose to research a religion, and if the foundations of the religion are not compelling, it is simply that- just a religion. When the deeper you read in to something, and the more sense it makes, and the more you challenge something, the more it challenges you, it's not the same.

The charter of rights mentions nothing about hate literature based on sports teams being illegal, does it? Oh well, i face this crap day in and day out, message board or not, and I just don't have the energy at this precise moment to combat is on an annonymous message board.

I don't understand why religion is a sacred cow (pun intended) that cannot be criticized and mocked like (to use the previous example) one's preferred sports team.

If an educated adult were to claim that he truly, genuinely believed in the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny, people would question that person's sanity, and rightly so. Yet if someone claims to truly, genuinely believe in an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent magical space fairy who created everything in the universe, why must we show respect for that viewpoint?

[Edit]
As for "hate speech", criticizing and mocking a religion most clearly is not. Canadians are free to bash someone's religious beliefs all day long provided they're not actively promoting violence against people of that religion.

[alltherage]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I don't understand why religion is a sacred cow (pun intended) that cannot be criticized and mocked like (to use the previous example) one's preferred sports team.

If an educated adult were to claim that he truly, genuinely believed in the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny, people would question that person's sanity, and rightly so. Yet if someone claims to truly, genuinely believe in an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent magical space fairy who created everything in the universe, why must we show respect for that viewpoint?

[Edit]
As for "hate speech", criticizing and mocking a religion most clearly is not. Canadians are free to bash someone's religious beliefs all day long provided they're not actively promoting violence against people of that religion.

The easter bunny is hardly comparable to religion. There has been countless years of research into the validity of some religions. There has not been proof that God does not exist, and there are mysteries involved in the Catholic religion that have not been solved by science as of yet. Just because it's not your view doesn't mean it's not true.

[AC]

Originally Posted by alltherage

The easter bunny is hardly comparable to religion. There has been countless years of research into the validity of some religions. There has not been proof that God does not exist, and there are mysteries involved in the Catholic religion that have not been solved by science as of yet. Just because it's not your view doesn't mean it's not true.

See obligatory Russell's teapot/Flying Spaghetti Monster/Invisible Pink Unicorn response.

The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim.

Logically, believing in Mithras as opposed to Jesus makes more sense seeing how these attributes given to Jesus were given to Mithras (and many others even) previously:

• allegedly born on Christmas of the Sun God by a virgin mother,
• was the saviour of mankind,
• associated with a holy trinity,
• put to death on a cross and buried in a cave,
• took part in a last supper with his 12 disciples,
• ascended to heaven,
• often associated with a lamb,
• etc

Which mysteries are you referring to specifically?

[MarchHare]

The easter bunny is hardly comparable to religion.

Which religion? If you're referring to monotheistic Western religions, then yes, the myth of a magical invisible bunny who delivers candy to children is very comparable to the myth of a magical space fairy who created the universe.

There has not been proof that God does not exist

You don't prove a negative. As Anthony noted, the burden of proof falls to the one making the claim. I challenge you to conclusively disprove the existence of the Easter Bunny.

there are mysteries involved in the Catholic religion that have not been solved by science as of yet.

Such as?

[rubecube]

ATR, you took my post completely out of context. Pat Robertson is a religious wacko. The people who burn down labs and send their kids to Jesus camp are wackos.

[alltherage]

Originally Posted by rubecube

ATR, you took my post completely out of context. Pat Robertson is a religious wacko. The people who burn down labs and send their kids to Jesus camp are wackos.

Fair enough bro, thanks for the clarification. Sorry if I was a little trigger happy there.

Anyway, this thread is about a cool scientific breakthrough, not religion. Let's keep it that way. I spend enough time defending my belifs as it is, and i'm not real interested in converting people as it is.