http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/17/albright.qa/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/17/albright.qa/index.html

But as for the content or the original post. If someone said that to me it would cause me to respond and I would challenge them on that statement. As Carl pointed out, they do not believe that, it is something to say to try and catch someone off guard. But the merit is very low. Now if I do talk to someone and they simply tell me they do not wish to talk about it, I offer to leave something for them to read, and if they say no… I wish them a good day and thank them for their time.

But as for the content or the original post. If someone said that to me it would cause me to respond and I would challenge them on that statement. As Carl pointed out, they do not believe that, it is something to say to try and catch someone off guard. But the merit is very low. Now if I do talk to someone and they simply tell me they do not wish to talk about it, I offer to leave something for them to read, and if they say no… I wish them a good day and thank them for their time.

Taking the relevant parts of the New Testament at face value, Jesus’ death wasn’t human sacrifice .. it was self sacrifice. Suppose someone made a choice that THEY would die if it would save (in the non-religious sense of the word) 50 others. In an appropriate context (you can make up your own scenerio) this person would be called a hero (he jumped onto a grenade — he spent the last hour of his life helping people evacuate a building that is about to collapse — OK, I said that you could make up your own scenerio). Would the saved people give that answer? (“I wouldn’t wish to accept personal gain as a result of an act of human sacrifice.”) I don’t think that they would.

On the other hand, if one views the death penalty as human sacrifice, then I suppose you’d view Jesus’ death (as presented in the New Testament) as human sacrifice. In this case, IF (and ONLY IF) you believe that any benefits to society brought about by the death penalty are outweighed by the negatives of the killing itself, THEN you might say something like “I wouldn’t wish to accept personal gain as a result of an act of human sacrifice.” Was this the point?

This time I’m not trying to be picky. I am just trying to understand the point of the post.

Taking the relevant parts of the New Testament at face value, Jesus’ death wasn’t human sacrifice .. it was self sacrifice. Suppose someone made a choice that THEY would die if it would save (in the non-religious sense of the word) 50 others. In an appropriate context (you can make up your own scenerio) this person would be called a hero (he jumped onto a grenade — he spent the last hour of his life helping people evacuate a building that is about to collapse — OK, I said that you could make up your own scenerio). Would the saved people give that answer? (“I wouldn’t wish to accept personal gain as a result of an act of human sacrifice.”) I don’t think that they would.

On the other hand, if one views the death penalty as human sacrifice, then I suppose you’d view Jesus’ death (as presented in the New Testament) as human sacrifice. In this case, IF (and ONLY IF) you believe that any benefits to society brought about by the death penalty are outweighed by the negatives of the killing itself, THEN you might say something like “I wouldn’t wish to accept personal gain as a result of an act of human sacrifice.” Was this the point?

This time I’m not trying to be picky. I am just trying to understand the point of the post.

If you add some Google ads, you might even make some money.

If somebody clicked on a Google ad everytime they try to convert you, you’d be a Googlionaire.

If you add some Google ads, you might even make some money.

If somebody clicked on a Google ad everytime they try to convert you, you’d be a Googlionaire.

I agree that it’s a big problem in America. Since tons of history focuses on either the government or religion, it’s safe to say religion is a fairly large part of people’s lives. Just because there’s a rise in atheism and agnosticism doesn’t mean religion isn’t big anymore. There’s still a lot of unexplained questions/corruption/blah blah blah going on in religion and it’s a huge part of what happens everywhere.

This post is pimp.

I agree that it’s a big problem in America. Since tons of history focuses on either the government or religion, it’s safe to say religion is a fairly large part of people’s lives. Just because there’s a rise in atheism and agnosticism doesn’t mean religion isn’t big anymore. There’s still a lot of unexplained questions/corruption/blah blah blah going on in religion and it’s a huge part of what happens everywhere.

This post is pimp.

Perhaps that’s the point you need to explore – how come another person stating a belief has the power to harass you.

Usually people who state their belief don’t harass me (unless their belief includes me not being alive or such AND they are going to act on it). It won’t bother me because I don’t let it bother me.

– Arik

Perhaps that’s the point you need to explore – how come another person stating a belief has the power to harass you.

Usually people who state their belief don’t harass me (unless their belief includes me not being alive or such AND they are going to act on it). It won’t bother me because I don’t let it bother me.

– Arik

(a little harder hitting)

(a little harder hitting)