ultimatebrokebackforum.com forum

OUR COMMUNITY => Support Groups & Connections => Topic started by: Doug2017 on May 28, 2006, 03:36:28 PM

Title: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 28, 2006, 03:36:28 PM
Hi guys, and gals,

I just wanted some place for us non-believers to talk.  In a world where every turn is filled to capacity with religion, it is nice to have a small corner of our own to express our thoughts and feelings.

BBM is a wonderful movie, whose ending I wished was a little more positive, but then again, it would not have had near the impact.

This film has a tremendous amount of symbolism in it, from the fear of Ennis to the strength of Jack.   There is a whole lot of reality in this movie. 

When I first saw this movie I was devastated because it drug up a lot of old memories of mine from times when I struggled so very hard against the hatred that seems to come from every quarter.  That is my problem, not anyone elses. 

I have seen this movie a number of times now, and have come to realize that I would not have put up with Ennis like Jack does.  Jack was not listening to Ennis, Ennis was telling him over and over that was not going to be the way Jack wanted it.  Jack should have moved on long before the end scene.  While it is really beautiful to see someone hold on that hard, and heartbreaking when it does not get returned, it is a fact of life that when you love, you may not get loved back, and you can waste a lifetime waiting for it to happen.

There is deep reality to this movie in that it does not see magical turnarounds in the characters.  Artificial magical happenings that have no bearing on real life. 

I do think a lot of Ennis's fear is based up what his father did to him as a child.  His father went out of his way to damage his kids ability to love another human being, this is evident with the wife, where he is only having sex to have children.  If she did not want to have more children, then he left her alone, or did I misinterpret that one? 

The fear of being found out is ever most to the front of both of these gents minds, and it colors all they think of and do.  Jack is willing to risk it, Ennis is not.  I know this struggle well, I have been on both sides of it.  I was out for a long time, when I had someone to be with, and share with.  Now that my loved one has passed on, I find myself back to where I was before.  I also find myself back in a part of the country where it is not really that safe to be out.

Then with the current mainstream of religious happenings it is even more so now than it was just 10 or 15 years ago, at least in the more rural areas. 

So, I guess I am putting this link out there in hopes that I am not the only atheist who watched BBM and was moved.  I would seriously like to talk about religion, but I do not think it is appropriate to get into the face of the many christians who come here in support.  This is much like cutting ones nose off to spite their face. 

With love, respect, and humility (yeah, we atheists have those things too...)

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Gonzo on May 28, 2006, 07:33:32 PM
I'm checking my email real quick and I haven't had time to read the entire post.  I just want to say thanks for having the bravery to start this thread.  I will read it later and rest assured I will visit this thread often.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 28, 2006, 08:15:45 PM
I'm checking my email real quick and I haven't had time to read the entire post.  I just want to say thanks for having the bravery to start this thread.  I will read it later and rest assured I will visit this thread often.  Thanks.

Hahaha! Me brave?  Not really, just I really wanted to talk to people who actually make sense to me.  And my thought was that if we can create a nice thread that believers can read, maybe, just maybe we can all understand each other a little bit better.

I look forward to hearing from you.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 28, 2006, 09:33:46 PM
I was thinking about some of the misconceptions that I keep hearing about non-believers. 

a.) They have no morality.

This is absolutely not true, the difference is their morality is based upon reason rather than laws handed down by authority.  The golden rule is a very biggie for atheists, as is not harming others.  Non initiation of force is another.

b.) They do not believe in anything, as the common misuse of this word means.

Again, not true, we believe in reality, we believe that existence exists, and all else flows from strictly from cause and effect.  Here "belief" is know.  Nothing magical, nothing outside of nature.  Contradiction does not exist, anything perceived as contradictory has one or more of three causes.  1.) Too little information  2.) A premise is wrong or 3.) the least likely, something is perceived wrong.  Reality can only be known by resolving the contradictions.  It is ok to not know and say so, instead of making up something to explain it.

c.)  Atheists can not love.

So wrong, atheist are capable of the highest love, because they know that love is the highest value, just under one's consciousness.  They can see the reality, and either accept it or pass on it.  There is much less chance of them being deluded into a poor relationship.   However, one also has to be prepared for the hate, pain, and destruction placed onto one constantly from the outside world of believers.  Most well meaning, but deluded into to believing things that if they were conscious would shock them to their very foundations.   

As I think of other things I will put them up... sleep well
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 29, 2006, 12:29:19 AM
Doug,

Thanks for posting this thread.  You’re not the only atheist here at all.  Back in January there were a number of us who posted to the Religious thread at that time.  Those early threads aren’t even archived.

Are you aware of other GLBT atheist forums on the net?  The one or two I’ve seen are not actively managed and so don’t attract participants.   Sure, I know plenty of national organizations, but I was wondering specifically about GLBT forums?

It seems as though the national GLBT organizations have moved to at least sounding more religious along with the rest of the pundits.  So now we have for example The Institute for Welcoming Resources (http://www.welcomingresources.org/) sponsored by NGLTF.  And the HRC (http://www.hrc.org/) is working on their own “Out In Scripture” nondenominational outreach program.  I’ll leave the fighting-them-in-the-pews to folks who care about theology.  I was raised atheist by atheist parents.  Was I lucky!

Do you have some local support?  My city has a gay friendly atheist news group that meets for pizza.  I just wish they’d use forum software other than the Yahoo group they’ve got.  I hate those banner ads!  But then my city has seven or eight independent free thinking, humanist, and/or atheist organizations, so there’s plenty to choose from.  One local couple has started a group known as The Brights. (http://www.the-brights.net/)  Maybe you’ve heard of them?  Some folks just sort of cringe a little at the name, but they have a healthy international following.

I have to agree with the reservations you mentioned in your first post regarding BB.  In my very first post I said we don’t have to own these characters.  At that time there was quite a bit of back and forth as to whether the characters were gay or bi.  I said I preferred my gay men to be honest forthright and courageous.  I can’t claim to be any paragon of courage, so it’s not hard to understand, but I still find it frustrating to watch Ennis frozen to the ground out of fear and ignorance.

Again, thanks for the thread,

Pete
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: helen_uk on May 29, 2006, 02:05:32 AM
Thanks for starting this thread, Doug.  :)

I want to raise my hand and can be counted amongst those who don't rely on the supernatural to live their lives.

I get quite frustrated when it's implied that I can't live a good life, and be kind and generous to others, because I don't believe in a god or gods.  That somehow it is some higher being that gives us the capacity for these things.  And who also keeps us from doing bad things.


:)

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 29, 2006, 08:39:02 AM
Doug,

Thanks for posting this thread.  You’re not the only atheist here at all.  Back in January there were a number of us who posted to the Religious thread at that time.  Those early threads aren’t even archived.

Man I wished I had known...  I live way out in the boonies, so I had to wait for BBM to be on satellite before I could see it.  Here, none of the movies that would be interesting to see are ever allowed to be displayed.  I am still waiting to see Fahrenheit 911, someday.

Quote
Are you aware of other GLBT atheist forums on the net?  The one or two I’ve seen are not actively managed and so don’t attract participants.   Sure, I know plenty of national organizations, but I was wondering specifically about GLBT forums?


I am not aware of any, I have looked from time to time only to find that the last post was in 2003 or something.  It is like the atheists are being wiped off the planet.  Sure does not help my feelings of isolation I can tell you that... <wink>

Quote
It seems as though the national GLBT organizations have moved to at least sounding more religious along with the rest of the pundits.  So now we have for example The Institute for Welcoming Resources (http://www.welcomingresources.org/) sponsored by NGLTF.  And the HRC (http://www.hrc.org/) is working on their own “Out In Scripture” nondenominational outreach program.  I’ll leave the fighting-them-in-the-pews to folks who care about theology.  I was raised atheist by atheist parents.  Was I lucky!
 

Yes, you was very lucky.  Your parents did not infect you with the mind disease meme of religion.  I assume you know what a meme is, but just in case, a meme is something like a mind virus, it gets past our minds defences, and becomes an unquestioned fact.  I do not know how old you are, but this is a minor one " I'd walk a mile for a ... "  Everyone in my age group would know that is "camel".  No thought, no question, just know and would fight you on any other answer, yet, any answer it just as valid.  Religion is the same, that is also why the one they where infected with is the one they fight for. Very few change that. Anyway,  I was lucky too, while my parents confessed religion, they did not participate or make me after I rejected sunday school, oh so many years ago.  They are atheists too for the most part, though they still struggle with some of it. 

Quote
Do you have some local support? 
 

Absolutely none.  I talk to no one, socialize with no one.  I did meet with one other gay guy here a few years ago, but he was so messed up by religion that I could not really deal with him.  He soon moved to Seattle.  I do not know of any others, but I have no doubt that many exist like Ennis, like me, who go on day by day, looking and acting like we fit in.  Because we are hidden in plain sight, we can not even pick out our own like minded people, it would not surprise me if there an maybe a few dozen like me in this vast area, if only we could find a way to reach each other.  I know the folks told me many years ago that if the neighbors ever find out that I am gay, they would kill me.  I have little doubt they would do major damage to me, but I can not risk the damage they would do to the rest of the family.  Yeah, I could move away again, but to what advantage?  To live in a place that does not fit me in every other way, but sexual... naw, been there, done that, have the shirt to prove it.  I miss my gay bowling league the most, it was a lot of fun.

Quote
My city has a gay friendly atheist news group that meets for pizza.  I just wish they’d use forum software other than the Yahoo group they’ve got.  I hate those banner ads!  But then my city has seven or eight independent free thinking, humanist, and/or atheist organizations, so there’s plenty to choose from.  One local couple has started a group known as The Brights. (http://www.the-brights.net/)  Maybe you’ve heard of them?  Some folks just sort of cringe a little at the name, but they have a healthy international following.
 

When I am through typing here I will definitely be looking them up. No, I have not heard of them.  At this point, I just want to have intelligent conversation, I do not care if it is with people from mars...  When I lived in the city, which I hated because of all the noise, and never ending traffic, I did not find atheist organizations then either, but I guess I did not know where or how to look.  My atheistism is mostly of my own thinking.  I had a very profound event happen that showed me how to dispel the illusions.  I was working in a retail store, and was getting overwhelmed, I guess.  Anyway, I would get up, drive to work, work, come home, sleep, and start over.  But then a strange thing began to happen, when I went to sleep, I was back at work again.  It got to the point I could not tell if I was awake and actually at work, or if I was asleep and dreaming it.  I had this one guy come in and order a part.  I wrote it down on the order sheet, noted it on the specials sheet, it was ordered.  A week later it came in, I marked it has being there, put his name on the box. And I called him that his order was in.  He came in, and said he had never ordered a part...  Of course he did, so I went to the original order sheet, it was not there, I went to the special orders sheet, it was not there either.  So I looked for the box, there was no box.  Insanity had taken over, how was I going to tell the difference between reality and illusion?  The only thing I had, was the contradictions and resolving them.  No order, no box, I did not order it, and just dreamed it.  So, I quit that job, and I have never had that happen to me again.  The manager of that store was the first encounter I had of an extreme religious nut, he was really insane.  He would come in and fire you, call you all sorts of names, then huff out, but the assistant manager would then say just keep doing your job, it will be ok.  And sure enough, it was like he never said anything until the next time.  He had many a boy crying in the back after one of his outbursts, most walked away never to return, not that I blame them.  Even then I was Ennis, I could not afford to quit, so had to endure it. 

Quote
I have to agree with the reservations you mentioned in your first post regarding BB.  In my very first post I said we don’t have to own these characters.  At that time there was quite a bit of back and forth as to whether the characters were gay or bi.  I said I preferred my gay men to be honest forthright and courageous.  I can’t claim to be any paragon of courage, so it’s not hard to understand, but I still find it frustrating to watch Ennis frozen to the ground out of fear and ignorance.
 

I agree.  We do not have to become these characters, yet I did find the last scene to be really too close to home.  I have been right there where Ennis is standing, tears in my eyes, missing my friend, while clutching his cloths.  So this movie hit me like a ton of bricks.  However, in other parts of the movie I identified with Jack as well.  And I totally agree with your frustration with Ennis being so afraid and ignorant, yet I do really understand him, and have met him in person a number of times, mainly in other people, but once in awhile he stairs back at me from the mirror.  As I have gotten older, I have lost some of my fire to fight it all.

Actually, now that I have seen the movie a number of times, it is Jack that I think should be questioned, not Ennis.  Ennis, from the very first told Jack that this was not going to work.  Jack did not listen.  Jack really needed to move on, take his occasional times with Ennis as just that, and find someone he could really love, and find satisfying love back.  Ennis is damaged goods, not that such do not deserve love, they do, but they cause so much pain as well... believe me I know first hand... 

While the more religious go on and on about how wonderful Jacks love is and how this is a story about love conquers all.  I do not see it that way, I see it as more of a story about how to waste your life trying to change someone else, instead of changing yourself.  Wasting your life denying the reality in front of you, because you would rather believe in a fairy tail. 

Ennis, I love you, I wished I could give him a big hug and hold him. Yet, we all know that he would not be comfortable doing that, for he has it ingrained that any of that will get him killed.  He is just damaged, not beyond hope, but he will have to work on it and only he can do that.  I really think by the way he looks at the last scene that he maybe realizes that to not have someone like Jack is just as bad, if not worse, than death itself.

Then another thing I kept thinking about on Jack, if he truly wanted more with Ennis, why do it by living in Texas? And driving for 14 hours every other month?   Get your shit together Jack and move back to within 20 or 30 minutes of Ennis, it ismuch easier to for a friend to drop by, spend some time, and still maintain the illusion of being separate.  I used to know two or three couples that maintained their own homes, but spent time together at one or the others as they felt they wanted.  Jack could have easily bought the cow and calf ranch he wanted, and hired a top ranch hand, Ennis, and it been legit in all ways, if he would have wanted to have Ennis more in his life, though that may have been more painful, or may have allowed Ennis his illusion, and given Jack more of what he wanted.  Anyway a few thoughts...

Quote
Again, thanks for the thread,

Pete


You are very welcome, I guess it always bugs me that the only the religious ones get any support, any compassion, and etc.  I guess that is the problem of being a minority within a minority, it is such a double whammy.  It isolates one even more, I feel much more isolated by the religion, than by gender preference.  But, again, that is me.

Thanks for responding, I look forward to getting to know you better.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 29, 2006, 09:08:46 AM
Thanks for starting this thread, Doug.  :)

I want to raise my hand and can be counted amongst those who don't rely on the supernatural to live their lives.

Hey, Helen, welcome my friend!  You are so counted... <wink> 

Quote
I get quite frustrated when it's implied that I can't live a good life, and be kind and generous to others, because I don't believe in a god or gods.  That somehow it is some higher being that gives us the capacity for these things.  And who also keeps us from doing bad things.

Yes, agree, is it not insane to believe that one is damned from birth to be evil?  That one can not be loving, caring, passionate, and down right good, without an authority figure threatening their life to be so?  Agghhh, I am good because I actaully know right from wrong, and do not need threats to act in my best interest or others best interest.  I know how to think, so I do not need rules to behave, I actually understand the cause and effect of my choices.  As an old friend used to say, "I want to do what is right even when no one is looking." 

I look forward to getting to know you better. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 30, 2006, 03:10:02 PM
I want to raise my hand and can be counted amongst those who don't rely on the supernatural to live their lives.

Thanks for joining in, Helen.

In one of my first posts on the original religion thread, I tried to solicit people’s thoughts on what religion does for people emotionally or socially and what forms a non-theistic “religion” might take that would provide the same things.  A religion which is has no supernatural.  I thought, with a collection of creative folks here, there might be a few who hold to interesting alternative cosmologies or metaphysics.  But I probably didn’t explain myself very well.  And we did have a few interesting posts on Buddhism.

I see Humanism as still waging an intellectual’s debate about the limitations of theology.  The ID debate shows that we (in the US) still haven’t moved far from the Scopes trial of 1925.  I don’t see a conflict between Science and Religion, but I’m in the minority there.

However, when you’re expecting a second coming in your lifetime, reliance on the supernatural allows you to ignore your environmental impact.  Over Memorial Day, I heard a commentary about the Iraq war on the radio.  The writer’s final statement was about praying for peace.  I could only think that religious fundamentalism on all sides played a part in getting us into that mess.  I also hoped that we do more than pray to stop it.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 30, 2006, 06:18:01 PM
Man I wished I had known...  I live way out in the boonies,…

Doug, there used to be a real friendly on line forum and chat place called www.ruralgay.com.   Unfortunately the guy who ran it took it off line several years ago.  There’s still a place holding page at the domain with a few links to remnants of their community: an IRC channel and Yahoo news group.  For example, its where I found out about the GTA (http://www.gaytruckersassn.org/), and they had great resources on friendly, supportive businesses all through the West.   My point is that those people are still out there.  For example, you might be interested in High Mountain Ranch (http://www.highmountainranch.com/).

I spent 22 years of my life on 5 acres in a house I build myself.  But we weren’t out in the boonies.  More like in a rural suburb.  But there was enough isolation involved for me to know exactly what you’re talking about.

Quote
Anyway,  I was lucky too, while my parents confessed religion, they did not participate or make me after I rejected sunday school, oh so many years ago.  They are atheists too for the most part, though they still struggle with some of it.

After reading your other posts, it sounds as though that in spite of your luck, you’ve still read the Bible quite a bit.  I may be interested in Christianity for political or cultural reasons, or I may express an interest in philosophical or metaphysical issues, but I’ve not read much beyond the Gospels.  I own a couple of Bibles (New Jerusalem), but they’re for reference only. 


Quote
My atheistism is mostly of my own thinking.  I had a very profound event happen that showed me how to dispel the illusions.

That’s quite a story.  And it is admirable of you to use it to grow into your own philosophy of life. 

I’ve had a Free Thinker tell me that I couldn’t be a true Free Thinker since I still agreed with my parent’s atheism.  I guess that in spite of having atheist parents, I could have found a religion.  My sister has spent a good deal of time attending church.  She goes to a Unity congregation.  And we have never discussed her beliefs. 

But at a pretty young age, I discovered archeology and Greek and Roman mythologies.  I just liked the stories!  I found a book of comparative mythologies from cultures all over the planet.  Again I enjoyed the magical qualities of the story telling.  But the effect is that I see the Bible as only another mythology.  In High School, I found Twain’s “Letters From the Earth” which is satirical skepticism at its best.

Quote
Then another thing I kept thinking about on Jack, if he truly wanted more with Ennis, why do it by living in Texas? And driving for 14 hours every other month?   Get your shit together Jack and move back to within 20 or 30 minutes of Ennis, it ismuch easier to for a friend to drop by, spend some time, and still maintain the illusion of being separate.  I used to know two or three couples that maintained their own homes, but spent time together at one or the others as they felt they wanted.

That’s a possibility that I haven’t seen discussed before.  Seems like a reasonable expectation.  I’ve certainly known partners who lived is separate homes.  Ah, but there were so many possibilities that Annie Proulx did not let her characters consider.


Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 30, 2006, 08:57:00 PM

In one of my first posts on the original religion thread, I tried to solicit people’s thoughts on what religion does for people emotionally or socially and what forms a non-theistic “religion” might take that would provide the same things.  A religion which is has no supernatural.  I thought, with a collection of creative folks here, there might be a few who hold to interesting alternative cosmologies or metaphysics.  But I probably didn’t explain myself very well.  And we did have a few interesting posts on Buddhism.

Yes, I too think one of the biggest falls of non-believers society is not having a "church" to go to and socialize, be emotionally supported.  One form a non-theistic "religion' might take, or at least I would like to see it, is on biological immortality.  I think there is a lot going on in this area that is not being discussed.  For example the effect of telemerace on lengthening the "shoe string tips" of DNA is very interesting.  How that cells in the test tube can be made any age by adding or taking the end sequence away.   

I also read on a stem cell test on using a monkey and monkey stems cells they added them to the blood of an older female monkey.  They found no adverse effects after 3 months, and then decided to find out what the stem cells had done.  Upon examination, they fould the stem cells had become young cells through out the body, lining the blood vessels, and in nearly all organs, making them younger from the inside out.  How did they know which cells came from the stem cells?  The stem cells were male.  Very interesting.  Perhaps someday one will be able to take adult stem cells make them young with telemerace, multiply them and put them back into the host making him younger from the inside out as the younger cells divide and grow at a much faster rate than older ones.  Interesting...

Then on top of that it would be wonderful to have educational lectures, ie surmons if you will, on how things work, on what is actual fact.  There is a whole world of facts that are being manipulated into something evil. We are being lied to in nearly every turn of life.  Another, take a look in politics, there nearly everything is an illusion.

Quote
I see Humanism as still waging an intellectual’s debate about the limitations of theology.  The ID debate shows that we (in the US) still haven’t moved far from the Scopes trial of 1925.  I don’t see a conflict between Science and Religion, but I’m in the minority there.[/qutoe]

Yes, agree, we are actually even slipping backwards here to 1925 if the powers that be get their way. 

The conflict between science and religion is that they are based two totally different viewpoints of reality. 

Science has it that reality is independent of belief, it exists just as it is. A rock on a far distant planet exists even if it is never seen or know by mankind.  Existence has natural occurring rules, such as that matter is neither created nor destroyed in normal conditions, in nuclear conditions it is same, but they can be converted from the solid matter directly into massive energy.  Reality is made of space, time, matter and energy.  An effect always comes after the cause. Cause and effect runs the show, even if we do not always know all the variables in that show. To resolve the variables, science proposes a hypothesis, an educated guess, then runs experiments to see what will either support or not support the hypothesis. Then a new hypothesis comes from that, that will include the support, and not the contradictory, and new tests will be run.  Repeating until such a time as the results always support the hypothesis, without contradiction,  then it becomes a theory.  A theory will be modified if at a later time evidence is found that is contradictory to the original theory, but that usually is quite rare.  The new theory then has to incorporate the new evidence, and all the old without contradiction.  A theory that does not have new evidence against it for a long time is fact.  Gravity is fact, evolution is fact, chemistry of microchips is fact.  This is knowledge, with knowledge we can build computers, technology, new machines, new medicines, and even extend life.

Religion is the viewpoint that belief is reality.  Reality is malleable to the will of belief.  If you believe then it is real.  Nothing can be known using belief, because belief can not be used to forge new computers, technology, new medicines or extend life.  No new technology has ever come from religion, or just belief.  The best it can hope for is to stumble upon sound scientific principle and use it as ritual.  Therefore we see the useful rituals of not eating pork, or shellfish in a time of no refrigeration.  We see the rituals of careful sex in a time when disease could only be understood as a wrath of an angry god.  That lightening, hail, wild fires, and floods could only be understood as god's punishment for something, pity the poor sole who it got blamed on.  As with any really insidious illusion, it has a great many truths based on reality to make swallowing the lies so easy.  But even great food mixed with a little poison is still poison. 

Religion should not be taught as a science substitute because it has nothing to do with science.  Science by its very nature can not disprove the negative.  It can not prove that an rock on the far side of the moon has a whiskey spring flowing from it that if drank will give one eternal youth, and love from his Ennis or Jack, does not exist.  For where ever one looks, even if it is not there, it could be someplace else.  The assumption has to be that until credit evidence is provided, it does not exist. There can be people who imagine it is real and feel it's presence, even benefit from it's uplifting image.  However, that does not mean it exists.   For science if one has to believe first to experience then that is very strong evidence of non-existence in reality. 

Religion does the opposite, it says that god and all exist despite the total lack of evidence.  Belief is reality.

If science was going to make a guess, a hypothesis that god exists, then it would be forced to come up with experiments to support or not support that.  It would look into statistics, to see if one could see the work of god there.  At every turn there is no difference between the death rates of believers and non-believers when all factors are taken in.  Just as many die from floods, volcanoes, tornadoes, earthquakes, disease, famine, etc.  What the statistics shows us is if there is a god his intervention is exactly the same as if he was not there.  Prayers are answered in exactly the same ratios as one would suspect random reality to work.  I do not see any other choice but to conclude there is not a god at work.  Or surely his chosen, he beloved, would not have the same stats as the lowly non-believer.    Surely there would be a marked difference in outcomes of an intervening god of his chosen over another groups heathen god, yet we do not see it.

Quote
However, when you’re expecting a second coming in your lifetime, reliance on the supernatural allows you to ignore your environmental impact. 

Back in 1982 I became a part of a group that sincerely believed the second coming was Dec 12th, 1982.  They sold their homes and gave away the vast majority of it, because they where going to be taken up.  At the time I was young, and did not know what to think.  I was so very frightened the night of Dec 11th, thinking that all was going to end, most people were going to be left behind to suffer great sorrow.  Maybe even me, because I could not quite shake the thought that this was all their own making.   Dec 12th arrived as a clear, cold day nothing happened.  The people of that church dissolved into utter financial ruin.  They had gave away everything, then did not have the money to pay the mortgages, so lost their ranches.  Some of them 20 some years later still have not recoved, but, by god, they go to church every chance they get and believe with everything they have.  They did not learn a thing...

Quote
Over Memorial Day, I heard a commentary about the Iraq war on the radio.  The writer’s final statement was about praying for peace.  I could only think that religious fundamentalism on all sides played a part in getting us into that mess.  I also hoped that we do more than pray to stop it.

If the prayers on both sides had been answered in the first place there would not have been war.  The common people on both sides knew that it was going to kill their beloved children, destroy their homes, and lives.  This war is a direct example of how belief standing for reality works.  Our government believed with all its heart that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, never mind the inspectors did not find any, never mind that a lot of intelligence stated that they had been destroyed, never mind the facts about yellow cake in Niger, or what aluminum tubes really have to be like to be used to make enriched uranium.  Do not bother to resolve the contradictions to your belief, because they are wrong... belief creates reality.  Yet, true reality will show at some point, it has to.  Belief will not make weapons appear, nor make yellow cake real, or transform aluminum tubes into something usable for uranium enrichment. 

However, It can be kept hidden by lies for a long time, especially if the powers that be have the power to keep one from being able to check.  This is where our "fourth" branch of government failed us, that fourth branch is the media whose job it is to keep the government honest.  I can only hope we wake up soon as a nation, it maybe too late already. 

Take Care my friends,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 30, 2006, 10:20:47 PM
Quote
The conflict between science and religion is that they are based two totally different viewpoints of reality.

I understand what you're saying here.  I meant that there doesn't have to be an inherent conflict, because they are apples and oranges.  That is we don't rely on religion to answer a scientific hypothesis - or we shouldn't.  And we don't often rely on science to supply answers to ethical dilemas.  We consult our sense of emphathy for that. 

There are plenty of scientists who hold religious beliefs.  But they've separated their religious from scientific beliefs.  In their mind, there is no conflict.  They just don't take Genesis literally, for example.  Or they may blink when their pastor talks about miracles.  And there are also religious sects who allow for the scientific reality of evolution for example.  The conflict arises when you believe in Biblical inerrancy or when you hold the Bible to be literally true.

I love John Brockman's The Edge (http://www.edge.org/).  Every year he does a big "World Question" and invites short answers from a lot of cutting edge scientists.  Last Year's Question was "WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT PROVE IT?"
It's great reading:  http://www.edge.org/q2005/q05_print.html
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on May 30, 2006, 10:31:03 PM
Can anyone give some perspective on Brokeback Mountain?  For example, IMO neither Jack nor Ennis care much about religion, except they are from uneducated people and religion is part of their culture.  But don't forget the religion is made in the image of the believers, not the other way around, so Jack and Ennis seemed to have bigger problems with society's expectations, wrapped up in economics, lack of education and homophobia.

I'm not passionate about non-belief, I'm more disinterested like Jack or Ennis.  I see religion as a by product of culture.  So I'm curious what non-belief means to you in connection with Brokeback Mountain.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 30, 2006, 11:23:33 PM
The only reference to a specific denomination is Jack's mother's Pentacostalism.  But he never mentions her speaking in tongues, nor does he even know what the Pentacost is, so how much of an influence was it?

Ennis has nothing much to say about religion, except that he won't go to the church socials with Alma.  I see Ennis as simply being in the dark, uneducated and cowed to the point that he'll take anything offered by any perceived moral authority as Truth.

Given this, it doesn't matter that they don't care much for religion.  They're still living under its sway.  They're not disinterested if they're in fact letting homophobia engendered by religious belief rule their lives. 

Religion is certainly part of their culture, but I'm not sure what you mean by it's "made in the image of the believers, not the other way around".   I've always found it odd that Christianity is pretty much anything anyone wants to make it.  Some charismatic speaker comes along with a new angle, and you've got a new sect.  Small primitive churchs are aborning all the time.  Why some stick and others fall off the wall is anyone's guess.

The flip side of the "True Christian" problem is you would think some of its incarnations would just scare off the masses.  Wouldn't Fred Phelps cause more than a few people to loose their religion?  Wouldn't George Bush?   They're Christians, right?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 30, 2006, 11:37:33 PM

Doug, there used to be a real friendly on line forum and chat place called www.ruralgay.com.   Unfortunately the guy who ran it took it off line several years ago.  There’s still a place holding page at the domain with a few links to remnants of their community: an IRC channel and Yahoo news group.  For example, its where I found out about the GTA (http://www.gaytruckersassn.org/), and they had great resources on friendly, supportive businesses all through the West.   My point is that those people are still out there.  For example, you might be interested in High Mountain Ranch (http://www.highmountainranch.com/).[/qutoe]

Yes, I remember ruralgay.com.  I read on it a fair amount, and tried to meet a couple of people from it.  It never worked out, but hey, one has to try...

Quote
I spent 22 years of my life on 5 acres in a house I build myself.  But we weren’t out in the boonies.  More like in a rural suburb.  But there was enough isolation involved for me to know exactly what you’re talking about.


Sounds real nice.  I used to live in the burbs myself, not rural though.  I had an old rural house, a few lots that had an old apple orchard on it, and I had a big garden area.  I could not live in the city without some trees and a garden...

Quote
After reading your other posts, it sounds as though that in spite of your luck, you’ve still read the Bible quite a bit.  I may be interested in Christianity for political or cultural reasons, or I may express an interest in philosophical or metaphysical issues, but I’ve not read much beyond the Gospels.  I own a couple of Bibles (New Jerusalem), but they’re for reference only. 


Well, lets just say I have read parts of it.  I tried to get through it a couple of times, but it is so mind numbing that I just can not.  So, I research for the contradictions to what is being held up as fact.  There are hundreds if not thousands...  I really liked the Secret Gospel of Mark, but even though it matches everything else that was put in the bible, time wise, writer, paper etc,  it was kept out because it dared to suggest that Jesus had sex with a boy he raised from the dead.  People do not seem to realize that there was hundreds of writings in that time period that would all have been valid for the bible, but a group of men sat down, threw out most, kept what they thought was important, or which would give them the most control, burned most of the other, and made a bible.  It is sort of like taking all the information for  an encyclopedia set, and throwing away 90% and calling it the encyclopedia. 


Quote
That’s quite a story.  And it is admirable of you to use it to grow into your own philosophy of life. 

I’ve had a Free Thinker tell me that I couldn’t be a true Free Thinker since I still agreed with my parent’s atheism. 


He is an idiot.  It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with parents or anyone else. It has everything to do with aligning your subjective reality with objective reality.  No one can truly know objective reality it is vastly too large and too small.  So, we all build internal models of reality so we can function.  The closer one builds that model to reflect objective reality the freer thinker he is, because he can understand cause and effect.  Those who build a model from beliefs, have to have mysticism to explain their model, magic, gods, etc, because they have no way to understand cause and effect.  How can you understand cause and effect if belief has causeless effects, or effects happening before causes?   

Quote
I guess that in spite of having atheist parents, I could have found a religion.  My sister has spent a good deal of time attending church.  She goes to a Unity congregation.  And we have never discussed her beliefs. 


Yes, you could have.  But I suspect that your internal map of reality would have had a very major time accepting the obvious contradictions it would have had to take. 

Quote
But at a pretty young age, I discovered archeology and Greek and Roman mythologies.  I just liked the stories!  I found a book of comparative mythologies from cultures all over the planet.  Again I enjoyed the magical qualities of the story telling.  But the effect is that I see the Bible as only another mythology.  In High School, I found Twain’s “Letters From the Earth” which is satirical skepticism at its best.

Yes, this is why I think it is very important that religion be taught in school as a comparative study of mythologies.  It would be enlightening for people to see at an early age their religion is not the only one, and that their creation story is the only one, or any better than any other.  I like the aboriginal Australian story of how god hatched from a cosmic egg, and that man came from a boil on his knee.  They believe just as strongly as the christians do, and have just as much evidence for it as the christians do.  Yes, kids should study the top ten religions their similarities and their differences.  They should be taught to think, not believe.

Quote
Quote
Then another thing I kept thinking about on Jack, if he truly wanted more with Ennis, why do it by living in Texas? And driving for 14 hours every other month?   Get your shit together Jack and move back to within 20 or 30 minutes of Ennis, it ismuch easier to for a friend to drop by, spend some time, and still maintain the illusion of being separate.  I used to know two or three couples that maintained their own homes, but spent time together at one or the others as they felt they wanted.

That’s a possibility that I haven’t seen discussed before.  Seems like a reasonable expectation.  I’ve certainly known partners who lived is separate homes.  Ah, but there were so many possibilities that Annie Proulx did not let her characters consider.

My thinking on Jack is he just was not listening to Ennis.  On all the threads it seems like they think Jack was doing right.  But, no, I do not think so.  Ennis was up front with his need to be hidden, was up front that he was not going to move in, was up front his fears.  Jack knew them, saw them, experienced them.  Jack also knew Ennis would meet him at least half way, this he saw when Ennis came to Jack on the second night, when Ennis nailed a kiss on Jack first after four years, Ennis gave up jobs to be with Jack, and Ennis mailed Jack back after the big fight.  If Jack wanted more of Ennis he had to provide the protection that Ennis required to feel safe.  We all have to feel safe to love freely.  Jack could have rented a nearby ranch and hired Ennis a ranch hand.  Obviously Ennis would work for anyone to make ends meet, and given the excuse as to why people may see him and Jack around together at the same time it would have worked.  Of course, Jack would have to be more careful so that his reputation did not interfer with Ennis's safe feelings.  Anyway... tis all just a movie...

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on May 31, 2006, 05:50:07 AM

My thinking on Jack is he just was not listening to Ennis.  On all the threads it seems like they think Jack was doing right.  But, no, I do not think so.  Ennis was up front with his need to be hidden, was up front that he was not going to move in, was up front his fears.  Jack knew them, saw them, experienced them.  Jack also knew Ennis would meet him at least half way, this he saw when Ennis came to Jack on the second night, when Ennis nailed a kiss on Jack first after four years, Ennis gave up jobs to be with Jack, and Ennis mailed Jack back after the big fight.  If Jack wanted more of Ennis he had to provide the protection that Ennis required to feel safe.  We all have to feel safe to love freely.  Jack could have rented a nearby ranch and hired Ennis a ranch hand.  Obviously Ennis would work for anyone to make ends meet, and given the excuse as to why people may see him and Jack around together at the same time it would have worked.  Of course, Jack would have to be more careful so that his reputation did not interfer with Ennis's safe feelings.  Anyway... tis all just a movie...


IMO both Ennis and Jack were very much constrained in their choices, but bottom line it SEEMS Ennis had more choices than Jack, because Ennis' biggest constraint was his own homophobia that he could not overcome.  Jack was really stuck -- moving back to Wyoming wouldn't work 1) because Ennis didn't want him to do it (greater proximity?  more opportunities to head off to the mountains?  more opportunities for people to figure out what was going on?) and 2)  Jack's second best option throughout his life was his cushy situation with Lureen not to mention that he wasn't MERELY using her, he lived with her and had a son that he cared about.  OTOH, Ennis was divorced, after the Thanksgiving blowup probably even more estranged from Alma and girls, didn't have much to lose, it looks like, and Jack's suggestion that Ennis move to Texas seems fairly reasonable.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on May 31, 2006, 06:06:31 AM
The only reference to a specific denomination is Jack's mother's Pentacostalism.  But he never mentions her speaking in tongues, nor does he even know what the Pentacost is, so how much of an influence was it?

Ennis has nothing much to say about religion, except that he won't go to the church socials with Alma.  I see Ennis as simply being in the dark, uneducated and cowed to the point that he'll take anything offered by any perceived moral authority as Truth.

Given this, it doesn't matter that they don't care much for religion.  They're still living under its sway.  They're not disinterested if they're in fact letting homophobia engendered by religious belief rule their lives. 

Religion is certainly part of their culture, but I'm not sure what you mean by it's "made in the image of the believers, not the other way around".   
I've always found it odd that Christianity is pretty much anything anyone wants to make it.  Some charismatic speaker comes along with a new angle, and you've got a new sect.  Small primitive churchs are aborning all the time.  Why some stick and others fall off the wall is anyone's guess.

So you think the reason for homophobia in Wyoming and the rest of the US is only from the Bible?  IMO homophobia is more primitive than the bible or any religion, but religion is used to justify it.  Religion is used to justify other things, as well.  It seems Ennis' life was much more shaped by poverty and lack of education -- and his own ability to "stand it" rather than take risks (as Jack did) to "fix it."

Quote
The flip side of the "True Christian" problem is you would think some of its incarnations would just scare off the masses.  Wouldn't Fred Phelps cause more than a few people to loose their religion?  Wouldn't George Bush?   They're Christians, right?


In my case George Bush has caused me to have a knee jerk reaction against Christianity, although before he was president I saw Christians as mostly benign in modern times.  I still think the greatest antidote to religious war is freedom of religion - IMO the most profound idea ever, because it has come the closest to ending religious wars (if not religious prejudice).  Instead of responding to 9-11 attacks with hyped up Christianity, we should be responding with hyped-up freedom of religion (which also means freedom to have no religion). 

But my greatest interest in this thread is the non-believer's angle on Brokeback Mountain, which I think starts first with analyzing the story -- and then second, with analyzing the story's impact on our personal lives. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: DEO on May 31, 2006, 07:26:46 AM
Fellow Gentlelady & Gentleman Atheist Brokaholics:

I am delighted at the prospect of networking/communing with others like myself, but my tricky schedule disallows me to spend nearly as much time conversing on this thread, or even the site in general, as I yearn to.  I can, however, with some advance notice, manage my schedule to allow for direct phone, email, or in-person conversations/socializing/mutual support, highlighting BBM, atheism, or anything else we mutually find fulfilling.  I don't know whether Dave Cullen's policy for this wonderful site prohibits the inclusion of personal contact info. in postings, nor, despite the high level of good-heartedness, intelligence and civility prevalent herein, do I find it prudent to do that, at least not initially.  I enthusiastically await replies herein from any of you who would like to discuss the possibilities of meeting or conversing via phone or email, at least.  To the extent that my personal statistics may affect your interest, I am a gay male, however, I'm interested in all sorts of social connections and mutual support with both men and women of any affectional orientation, based on shared love for BBM, shared non-supernatural world view, shared passion for science, especially biotechnology, shared general intellectual inclination, and shared general optimism that BBM and (hopefully) equal future masterworks of humane, world-changing "magic" will be made, and will uplift our civilization to much greater levels of tolerance, understanding and respect for reason, too.

Fondly,

Dan
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on May 31, 2006, 07:41:52 AM
Fellow Gentlelady & Gentleman Atheist Brokaholics:

(snip) I'm interested in all sorts of social connections and mutual support with both men and women of any affectional orientation, based on shared love for BBM, shared non-supernatural world view, shared passion for science, especially biotechnology, shared general intellectual inclination, and shared general optimism that BBM and (hopefully) equal future masterworks of humane, world-changing "magic" will be made, and will uplift our civilization to much greater levels of tolerance, understanding and respect for reason, too.

Fondly,

Dan

Dan, you can send anyone a personal message through the forum and it will be routed to their normal e-mail.  The main purpose of the forum is to provide a place to discuss BBM and the best way to participate is to post, which you can do at your convenience, also catch up on other's posts at your convenience.  Members are all over the world geographically.  IMO most feel safe here due to a sense of anonymity, then after time many find the level of discussion is high enough that some kindred souls are really out there.  Discussion and participation are emphasized.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: DaveinPhilly on May 31, 2006, 08:02:00 AM
Doug, and friends - Glad you've found a home for your thoughts!

DaveinPhilly
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 08:13:25 AM
Quote
The conflict between science and religion is that they are based two totally different viewpoints of reality.

Quote
I understand what you're saying here.  I meant that there doesn't have to be an inherent conflict, because they are apples and oranges.  That is we don't rely on religion to answer a scientific hypothesis - or we shouldn't.  And we don't often rely on science to supply answers to ethical dilemas.  We consult our sense of emphathy for that. 

I guess the problem I have with that is that religion in ethical dilemmas can not decide based upon reality, it has to decide on tradition set forth by authority.  It also has to decide based upon interpretation, rather than knowledge, which leaves a whole lot of room for manipulation.  I agree, perhaps even most of the time that tradition as merit, there has to be lot of truth inmixed with the poison so that it will be accepted.  That poison is that human consciousness is not the highest valve, but a god and afterlife is.  With that value system, it is easy to sacrifice the individual for the so called good of the group, especially if that individual is relegated to the enemy camp, or even not human.  Do you not see this ethic being used all the time? Do you not see that it is the direct result of using religious ethic?  Or I am all wet, that is possible...

Quote
There are plenty of scientists who hold religious beliefs.  But they've separated their religious from scientific beliefs.  In their mind, there is no conflict. 


Yes, I know that.  But it also quite obvious they are denying that conflict.  That is like separating milk and water after they have been mixed, it is not possible, yet they seem to suggest that.  This demonstrates the power of the religion meme to be able to close off anything that is contradictory to it's existence. 

Quote
They just don't take Genesis literally, for example.  Or they may blink when their pastor talks about miracles.  And there are also religious sects who allow for the scientific reality of evolution for example.  The conflict arises when you believe in Biblical inerrancy or when you hold the Bible to be literally true.

Yes, agree, if you hold that the Bible is just a story no different that BBM, total fiction which makes you think, then yes, this is true. 

However, if what I observe is right, most think that parts of it are in error, the parts that they do not agree with, and the rest is absolutely truth.  Which I have to wonder how does one say "this passage is truth, I will live my life about it, and I will force that upon everyone else by law, and by tradition, and by social pressure" and the next one "this one does not apply to me, nor do I believe it?"  By what criteria does one say this one is valid and that one is not, and how does one get that across to the masses of others who say it is valid?  Then, is there not a social contract of sorts that since one says they are Christian, that they are held to the doctrine that defines Christian, ie the bible, are they not bound to their authority figures as well?  Is this not like saying I am vegetarian but I eat beef? 

I just can not understand how all encompassing truth can be in a set of words that HAVE to be interpreted by authority figures to be understood.  Would one not think that an all powerful god should be able to get his instruction manual printed in plain straight forward 5 year old understandable english? For example, there is a passage where Jesus says you must hate your family and self to follow him, when I asked about this passage from my minister he said, "Well, hate does not mean hate, it means separated from god."  Yet, separated from god in the place of hate does not make sense all, how does one "if you do not separated from god your wife", for example?  What was I supposed to make of that?  If it is ok to take the word "hate" and turn it into "separated from god", then it should be ok to take the word "abomination" and turn it into "most beloved by god"...  If words do not mean anything, yes literal translation, then the whole is meaningless, is it not? 


Quote
I love John Brockman's The Edge (http://www.edge.org/).  Every year he does a big "World Question" and invites short answers from a lot of cutting edge scientists.  Last Year's Question was "WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT PROVE IT?"
It's great reading:  http://www.edge.org/q2005/q05_print.html[/qutoe]

Thanks, I will try to get some time to read it.  I do not have a problem with someone believing something, I have a major problem with them by law, by rule and by social pressure demanding that everyone else believe it too, or be damned.  Is this not what the christian right is doing with "defence of marriage law", with the god hate fags mentalitly? 

I know I am overly touchy on this subject, but I have first hand been dealt blow after blow from, so hopefully it is understandable.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 08:42:36 AM
Can anyone give some perspective on Brokeback Mountain?  For example, IMO neither Jack nor Ennis care much about religion, except they are from uneducated people and religion is part of their culture.  But don't forget the religion is made in the image of the believers, not the other way around, so Jack and Ennis seemed to have bigger problems with society's expectations, wrapped up in economics, lack of education and homophobia.

Hi, welcome!  To me that is the care of religion for Jack and Ennis, the society's expectations, wrapped up in economics, lack of education and homophobia.  It is care of religion that keeps their love secret, makes them fearful.  Just think of a world where the kind of love Jack and Ennis has was totally supported.  They would have came down from the mountain among happy family, they would have married in November, and had a nice ranch of cattle and calves.  There would not have been the sad wives, the children who did not ask to be thrown into this, the extreme pain of a love and lives lost. 

Quote
I'm not passionate about non-belief, I'm more disinterested like Jack or Ennis.  I see religion as a by product of culture.  So I'm curious what non-belief means to you in connection with Brokeback Mountain.

I see the disinterested by Jack and Ennis is more that they did not know there was another possibility. 

I guess that is the rub for me, that if you are not fighting against what happens to people who do not fit the religious illusion, then by doing nothing, you are condoning it.  The end result is Jack getting tire ironed, his murders getting away with it because "he got what he deserved", like the two young men after Jerry Farwells kill a fag for christ speech.   How many lives have to be lost this way, how many loves destroyed, how much fear created, how much compassion and love has to be lost before passion kicks in?  Just something to think about... no judgement here at all, we all have to do what we can... just like Ennis and his reluctance, he can not be faulted for that, he has to make his decisions upon the weights of life he is dealt.  While a decision can be wrong in hindsight, it can never be wrong at the moment given the weights at that moment, it will always be the same, therefore it is ridiculous to fret over a decision. 

Take Care...   
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 08:56:34 AM
Fellow Gentlelady & Gentleman Atheist Brokaholics:

I am delighted at the prospect of networking/communing with others like myself, but my tricky schedule disallows me to spend nearly as much time conversing on this thread, or even the site in general, as I yearn to. 

Hi, Welcome!   Sure understand that, my time is going to have to become less here as well, but in the mean time... <wink>

Quote
I can, however, with some advance notice, manage my schedule to allow for direct phone, email, or in-person conversations/socializing/mutual support, highlighting BBM, atheism, or anything else we mutually find fulfilling.  I don't know whether Dave Cullen's policy for this wonderful site prohibits the inclusion of personal contact info. in postings, nor, despite the high level of good-heartedness, intelligence and civility prevalent herein, do I find it prudent to do that, at least not initially.  I enthusiastically await replies herein from any of you who would like to discuss the possibilities of meeting or conversing via phone or email, at least.  To the extent that my personal statistics may affect your interest, I am a gay male, however, I'm interested in all sorts of social connections and mutual support with both men and women of any affectional orientation, based on shared love for BBM, shared non-supernatural world view, shared passion for science, especially biotechnology, shared general intellectual inclination, and shared general optimism that BBM and (hopefully) equal future masterworks of humane, world-changing "magic" will be made, and will uplift our civilization to much greater levels of tolerance, understanding and respect for reason, too.

Sounds great.  I am rather new here myself, but I would think you could Personnel message (PM) your contact information fairly safely and without violating rules.  It seems that part of the point of this is to meet up with other like minded people. 

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: gboo on May 31, 2006, 09:43:48 AM
Another non-believer here!  I wouldn't call myself an athiest, because frankly that takes a stronger statement of faith (or non-faith) than I'm willing to make. 

I guess I have an unusual relationship with religion.  I've never had any major negative experiences surrounding it so I don't feel the fear, anger, etc. of many who did grow up in conflict with religion.  I have no interest in making religion a big part of my life, and I spend very little time thinking about it.  Yet because I'm fortunate enough to have escaped any religious trauma, when I am faced with it I don't have a problem with it (on a personal level, that is.  I have a huge problem with people who want to force their religion on society at large).   

My mom's family is Jewish (her grandparents were orthodox) and my dad's is episcopalian but my parents are basically athiests.  We went to Unitarian church when I was little, but it was mainly a way to socialize with other liberal families.  My family's attitude toward religion was very relaxed.  We celebrated (still do) all the major christian and jewish holidays, but it was all about tradition as opposed to the religious aspect of it.  To this day, I always have to remind myself what a big deal Easter is to christians, because to me it's about chocolate bunnies and jelly beans.  Same with christmas -- it's trees and presents to me.  One of my favorite stories about growing up concerns going shopping at Sears with my mother and my sister.  I was 6 and she was about 5 and we were looking at christmas tree decorations.  My sister went up to a creche set and asked what it was.  The saleswoman told her it was the scene of Jesus's birth and it was a christmas decoration.  My sister's comment: "that doesn't look very christmas-y to me!"  When I was about 14 we stopped having a tree altogether.  My dad is an architect and one year a contractor he worked with gave him a brick embossed with "Merry Christmas." So now every December my parents put it out on the mantel, and we have a laugh about our Christmas Brick!

I have to say that as I've gotten older, I've felt a stronger identification with my Jewish heritage, but not in a religious sense -- more as a connection to my ancestry.  I think it stems largely from my involvement with Holocaust issues.  While I was in grad school I had a freelance job writing summaries of audiotaped interviews with Holocaust survivors -- my summaries were sent to various historical archives so researchers looking for interviews about certain camps or towns, etc. could find interviews that were relevant.  Also, I'm a lawyer and for three years I worked for the Justice Department office that denaturalizes and deports Nazi war criminals.  I guess if you asked me what religious I am, at this point I would say Jewish (I used to say none), although I never go to services, don't speak Hewbrew, don't believe in God and think the scriptures are just literature.  But I have to say -- when I meet another Jew I do feel a sense of kinship and identification.  And to be completely frank, I suppose I like it when I get to tell people I'm Jewish because it reminds them that not everyone is christian.

I guess I'm just lucky that I grew up with a family that didn't shove religion down my throat.  And most of my friends and family have a similar attitude toward religion as I do, so I feel supported in my choices.  I really feel sorry for people who feel conflict with their families and their communities because of religion. (doesn't that raise the question of how religion can be so wonderful when it causes so much strife?)  I recognize how fortunate I am that I don't have to deal with that.

Well, I guess that's changing, though, because it's getting harder and harder to avoid being slapped in the face by religion at every turn.  I do feel a lot of fear and extreme anger at the increasing influence of christianity in society at large.  What galls me most is that the idea of separation of church and state seems to have gone out the window.  It really pisses me off when christians say that this is a christian nation (they say "judeo-christian, but we know the judeo is really meaningless).  Uh, hello -- this country was originally colonized by people fleeing the state's imposition of a religion.  I say if people find comfort in god and religion, good for them.  If people want to spend all their free time studying the bible, torah, koran, whatever, go for it.  But really, I simply don't get why they feel the need to inject it into the lives of others.  I basically don't believe in god, although at heart I'm an agnostic because I don't rule anything out.  I do have one very certain belief about god, though -- if there is a god, she/he/it would NOT be happy at the way many people are using religion to impose their personal choices on others. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: gboo on May 31, 2006, 10:05:35 AM
Can anyone give some perspective on Brokeback Mountain?  For example, IMO neither Jack nor Ennis care much about religion, except they are from uneducated people and religion is part of their culture.  But don't forget the religion is made in the image of the believers, not the other way around, so Jack and Ennis seemed to have bigger problems with society's expectations, wrapped up in economics, lack of education and homophobia.

I'm not passionate about non-belief, I'm more disinterested like Jack or Ennis.  I see religion as a by product of culture.  So I'm curious what non-belief means to you in connection with Brokeback Mountain.

Actually, to the extent religion comes up in BBM, I think the movie tends toward a slightly negative view (which I found refreshing!).  It really jumped out at me when Ennis dismissed the idea of going to the church social by sneering, "that fire & brimstone crowd."  I thought it was a subtle, yet brave reminder that traditional religion can be offensive and threatening to gay people (and others who don't fit their idea of "normal and correct").  And when Jack said he didn't know what the pentecost was, even though his mother was such a strong believer in it, to me that signaled that Jack has no interest in religion.  And let's not forget that icky comment by the minister who performs the wedding of Ennis and Alma!  Not exactly a positive portrayal of a man of the cloth.

The non-religious or anti-religious aspects of the film are, as I said, quite subtle.  But how rare is it for the heros of a film to be portrayed in that light?  I really appreciate that Ang/Larry/Diana expected us to identify with and love Jack and Ennis, yet they made them explicitly non-god-fearing.  To me, it's another way they were unusually respectful of the intelligence and maturity of the audience.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 11:14:10 AM
Another non-believer here!  I wouldn't call myself an athiest, because frankly that takes a stronger statement of faith (or non-faith) than I'm willing to make. 

I sure understand, I used to be the same.  It was only when I was forced to confront my demons that I saw that being  a little believer is like being a little pregnant...  But you will have to find your own course, there are many many paths to the mountain top.  Some take the rocky shear cliff face, others the wondering gradual stream bed on the other side.  It is the journey that counts, not the destination.  If it is done in love, care and compassion then it is all wonderful. In my humble opinion.   

Quote
I guess I have an unusual relationship with religion.  I've never had any major negative experiences surrounding it so I don't feel the fear, anger, etc. of many who did grow up in conflict with religion.  I have no interest in making religion a big part of my life, and I spend very little time thinking about it.  Yet because I'm fortunate enough to have escaped any religious trauma, when I am faced with it I don't have a problem with it (on a personal level, that is.  I have a huge problem with people who want to force their religion on society at large). 

There a many of a time I would give a major body organ to feel just this way...  I am so tired of the fight, but it goes on.  If you can not fix it, you have to stand it, is absolutely true.  And no, I do not think your relationship with religion is unusual, in fact, I would say that is the usual relationship with religion, which makes it hard to see why this is a big deal.  And maybe, just maybe it is not a big deal, maybe it just me who has this strong reaction to it.   I always have to wonder why 95% say they subscribe to religion, yet at least 65% do not actually believe what they subscribe to.    

Quote
My mom's family is Jewish (her grandparents were orthodox) and my dad's is episcopalian but my parents are basically athiests.  We went to Unitarian church when I was little, but it was mainly a way to socialize with other liberal families.  My family's attitude toward religion was very relaxed.  We celebrated (still do) all the major christian and jewish holidays, but it was all about tradition as opposed to the religious aspect of it.  To this day, I always have to remind myself what a big deal Easter is to christians, because to me it's about chocolate bunnies and jelly beans.  Same with christmas -- it's trees and presents to me. 

Exactly, the same here.  We celebrate the family for Christmas, have the tree, the great food, love and hugs all around. A celebration of winter.   Easter is a celebration of spring, with flowers, candy, little creatures and our families love.  We celebrate the Christian holidays as family holidays, and get togethers for friends. 

Quote
One of my favorite stories about growing up concerns going shopping at Sears with my mother and my sister.  I was 6 and she was about 5 and we were looking at christmas tree decorations.  My sister went up to a creche set and asked what it was.  The saleswoman told her it was the scene of Jesus's birth and it was a christmas decoration.  My sister's comment: "that doesn't look very christmas-y to me!"  When I was about 14 we stopped having a tree altogether.  My dad is an architect and one year a contractor he worked with gave him a brick embossed with "Merry Christmas." So now every December my parents put it out on the mantel, and we have a laugh about our Christmas Brick!


LOL! Yes, that is a very nice tradition.  I agree with your sister, much of the religion around Christmas and especially around Easter does not seem to reflect what I am celebrating.  But then Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny are not religious either, now are they? 

Quote
I have to say that as I've gotten older, I've felt a stronger identification with my Jewish heritage, but not in a religious sense -- more as a connection to my ancestry.  I think it stems largely from my involvement with Holocaust issues.  While I was in grad school I had a freelance job writing summaries of audiotaped interviews with Holocaust survivors -- my summaries were sent to various historical archives so researchers looking for interviews about certain camps or towns, etc. could find interviews that were relevant.  Also, I'm a lawyer and for three years I worked for the Justice Department office that denaturalizes and deports Nazi war criminals.  I guess if you asked me what religious I am, at this point I would say Jewish (I used to say none), although I never go to services, don't speak Hewbrew, don't believe in God and think the scriptures are just literature.  But I have to say -- when I meet another Jew I do feel a sense of kinship and identification.  And to be completely frank, I suppose I like it when I get to tell people I'm Jewish because it reminds them that not everyone is christian.

It is important to have roots.  I was listening to a conservative talk show the other day, and they was talking about how the holocaust never happened and it was just a Jewish scare story.  While I am not Jewish, I have read and have seen enough pictures to know that it actually happened.  If I remember correctly, was it not 5 million suspected gay people also put to death at that same time?  They with the pink triangle...  one does not ever hear much about them, the jewish gays...   I sorta of wished I had that feeling of kinship and identification, I am too butch for the gay illusion, yet too nelly for the cowboy illusion.  Yet, I was born and raised on a ranch have raised cattle and been around cattle all my life, even rode a horse in my younger days, but never liked the boots and hat.  The boots always hurt my feet and the hat was hot...  Sorry, rambling...

Quote
I guess I'm just lucky that I grew up with a family that didn't shove religion down my throat.  And most of my friends and family have a similar attitude toward religion as I do, so I feel supported in my choices.  I really feel sorry for people who feel conflict with their families and their communities because of religion. (doesn't that raise the question of how religion can be so wonderful when it causes so much strife?)  I recognize how fortunate I am that I don't have to deal with that.


Yes, you are lucky.  I am lucky in that my family did not shove religion down my throat.  Religion is a non-subject here, but so is gay.  Ahh, you do see the contradiction, excellent.  That is the very question, how can religion be so wonderful when it causes so much pain and suffering, when wars can be justified by it.  When people can be marginalized by it.  When sacrifice of the individual can so easily be done with it.  I guess my mission is to maybe get people to see that even if they feel they are not being impacted, that they actually are.  We build walls of protection that we get so used to that we actually begin to believe they are normal, and just.  Just my humble opinion...

Quote
Well, I guess that's changing, though, because it's getting harder and harder to avoid being slapped in the face by religion at every turn.  I do feel a lot of fear and extreme anger at the increasing influence of christianity in society at large.  What galls me most is that the idea of separation of church and state seems to have gone out the window. 


It does not gall me, it scares me to death...  Without separation of church and state, there is no brakes to the rising tide of fanaticism, and is this not why we have attacked other nations?  Without separation of church and state, there is nothing to stop them from being in our bedrooms with laws.  It is already happening, I watched a show on the Texas legislature where one religious nut put a law forward to make it a felony for a man's penis to touch an asshole. He kept quoting the bible as his justification.   His intent was to make it a felony for gay men, but a dem woman was grilling him that it should apply to men and women as well, and he agreed.  She was giving him a hard time about if the man and woman want anal sex that he would make it felony?  He said yes, even if it just accidently slipped...  Just how they was going to enforce this law was not discussed, did this law not justify cameras in everyone's bedroom?  It got watered down to a misdemeanor, but this law passed in Texas. That it was even discussed should make everyone scared, that it passed should make everyone absolutely scared to death.

Quote
It really pisses me off when christians say that this is a christian nation (they say "judeo-christian, but we know the judeo is really meaningless).  Uh, hello -- this country was originally colonized by people fleeing the state's imposition of a religion. 

Exactly, and people forget that the religion we see today did not exist until Billy Graham started it.  Before that religion was more or less a private thing, even the founding fathers stated that religion was between the man and his god. But they have been busy rewriting history, and putting spin on it.  People do not know that In God We Trust did not exist on our money until 1954, Under god in the pledge was not there until 1957.  This nearly 200 years after the founding of this country, and yet to talk to most people they seem to think it was always there.  When I was in school it was "one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."  Back then it was Eplurabus Unum "from many one".  I think if the founding fathers where here today they would be up in arms.

Quote
I say if people find comfort in god and religion, good for them.  If people want to spend all their free time studying the bible, torah, koran, whatever, go for it.  But really, I simply don't get why they feel the need to inject it into the lives of others. 


Totally agree with you.  That brings up another thought that I just do not understand, if god is all powerful, all knowing, and all loving like we are told, then what need does he have for these self-appointed religious solders?  Why does he need anyone to spread the word, when he can just show the word as simply as a wave of the hand?  Surely he does not need Pat Robertson, Jerry Farwell, the God Hates Fags guy to help.  And such a god, why would he ever need hate and fear to bring us his love, when he could just have his love prove itself.  Anyway... that is just another contradiction...


Quote
I basically don't believe in god, although at heart I'm an agnostic because I don't rule anything out.  I do have one very certain belief about god, though -- if there is a god, she/he/it would NOT be happy at the way many people are using religion to impose their personal choices on others. 

Yep, agree.  Do I agree that it is possible that a god is out there someplace, yes, I have to agree that such is true.  And if he would like to set down sometime and have a cup of coffee and have a long conversation, I would agree he exists, but he would have explaining to do before I would follow him.  Jesus would have to explain to me why I should be happy to dash little ones against the rocks, and why I should not question war. 

Of course this is all just my opinion and does not mount to a hill of beans, but thanks for letting me have a voice.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 11:33:12 AM

Jack's suggestion that Ennis move to Texas seems fairly reasonable.

Yes, I will have to agree.  But I can see that Ennis would not want to give up what little contact he had left of his girls. Neither of these guys knew of gay communities.  I have thought it would be nice to live in such, but the sacrifices on freedom and rural life seem a hard exchange. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 01:03:14 PM
Quote
In my case George Bush has caused me to have a knee jerk reaction against Christianity, although before he was president I saw Christians as mostly benign in modern times.  I still think the greatest antidote to religious war is freedom of religion - IMO the most profound idea ever, because it has come the closest to ending religious wars (if not religious prejudice).  Instead of responding to 9-11 attacks with hyped up Christianity, we should be responding with hyped-up freedom of religion (which also means freedom to have no religion). 

G Bush among others has caused the same knee jerk reaction, and that is what people see from me when certain buttons are pushed.  You are absolutely right that freedom of religion is one of the most profound ideas, and that it and separation of church and state, keep the religion in balance with reality.  Under the current administration we have seen the erosion of those two concepts to be replaced with religious intolerance and hatred headed for a talibon style of government if we do not put the brakes on this runaway.  My opinion. 

I also do not understand the debate on gay marriage.  It is always framed in "rights".  It is not about rights, it is about religious freedom.  It is very simple, if a man talks to his god and his god thinks it is a good idea, then he talks to his minister and he thinks it is a good idea and if his church is also for it. Then what business is it of Pat Roberson ilk? It is not like if Jake an Ennis get married down the street, it is going to end Bob and Doris's marriage.  Yet, the christian right would like everyone to think so.   They do not want religious freedom, they want only freedom of their interpretation of the bible.

Quote
But my greatest interest in this thread is the non-believer's angle on Brokeback Mountain, which I think starts first with analyzing the story -- and then second, with analyzing the story's impact on our personal lives. 

Put up what you want to talk about and I am sure that most of us have an opinion, or least I usually do.  <grin>

The first scene with Aguirre, I did not see anything more than two kids who needed work, both somewhat shy, but Jack less so.  I did have a problem with Jack complaining about the job as he did.  Aguirre was up front with them as to their jobs, they should have not taken the job if they did not like the conditions of it.  But I also understand they needed the work, that point just bugged me a little. 

I know I would never have been as bold as Jack to take someones hand and put it between my legs, absolutely not if I was not sure he was gay in the first place.  Though I have to admit to having no gaydar at all, a talent I really wished I could acquire.  Given the reaction Ennis, I would have pulled away sorry that I had assumed so much.  I am not sure that I like the message sent by that action, it too similar to the message sent by many straight movies of her saying no, but we all know secretly she really wants it, how many rapes has that illusion lead to?  How many straight men are going to be horrified that gay men are out to get them?  And the sex was just way too rough for my tastes for a first encounter.  But, again, it is just a point, not a make or break thingo, and only my preferences... 

I really loved the second tent scene, where Ennis comes to Jack, and it is very tender and loving.  This is the love I was looking for, two consenting adults, having precious time together. 

I enjoyed that they was playing together when Aguirre saw them.  It looked like a lot of fun.  Relationships should have a lot of laughter in them, and fun in them.

The fight scene was interesting in only I did not really understand it's point.  It looked to me they where having fun until Ennis got mad, which is very common.  Teasing is the same, it is all fun until someone gets hurt.  But it was important to the end scenes, so that is understood.

The Ennis sick scene was confusing to me, why he was throwing up is a mystery.  If he was so saddened I would have thought he would have been crying uncontrollably instead. 

I really felt bad that both him and Jack felt it was necessary to cover by taking innocent wives.  And it had no other option be to be hard for all involved.  I know that a great many men take wives in the hope that they will somehow change them.  All it does is make them even more isolated from their own beings.   But that is true to reality, and if that was the point it came across clear.

Another thing true to reality is the bone crushing poverty these two was dealing with.  Jack was trapped by it and so was Ennis only in different ways. 

I had great hope that they would find a way to be together, but having been in these kind of places myself, I also know that is not necessary the outcome.  It would have been nice. 

Jacks death, Ennis in his room, to the end scene hurt me greatly.  It brought back a flood of memories, of pain, of loss, and hopelessness. Of cleaning out my own lovers closet, of going through his things, of struggling to say good bye.  And missing him so very terribly at times, Christmas his favorite time of year is especially hard.  I wanted so badly to hug Ennis and cry with him. Yes, the tears are flowing down my checks again... damn...   

Ok, I am back...  It was truly overwhelming for me, and I had to search out for some comfort.  Therefore, I ended here.  Only the living need comfort, I know that Jack is gone forever, never again will Ennis lay eyes upon him, or touch him, smell his being, or experience his consciousness.  Ennis must learn that loosing Jake is just as bad of death as the death he so fears for himself. Ennis must learn to trust others and find love and happiness where he can, there is no other option but overwhelming loneliness, waste of life, and love.  There is nothing to fear about death, it is simply non-existence of a conscious mind.

Hopefully I have given something to think about, but remember all is just my humble opinion.

Thanks for being here. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 01:07:37 PM

Quote
Actually, to the extent religion comes up in BBM, I think the movie tends toward a slightly negative view (which I found refreshing!).  It really jumped out at me when Ennis dismissed the idea of going to the church social by sneering, "that fire & brimstone crowd."  I thought it was a subtle, yet brave reminder that traditional religion can be offensive and threatening to gay people (and others who don't fit their idea of "normal and correct").  And when Jack said he didn't know what the pentecost was, even though his mother was such a strong believer in it, to me that signaled that Jack has no interest in religion.  And let's not forget that icky comment by the minister who performs the wedding of Ennis and Alma!  Not exactly a positive portrayal of a man of the cloth.

The non-religious or anti-religious aspects of the film are, as I said, quite subtle.  But how rare is it for the heros of a film to be portrayed in that light?  I really appreciate that Ang/Larry/Diana expected us to identify with and love Jack and Ennis, yet they made them explicitly non-god-fearing.  To me, it's another way they were unusually respectful of the intelligence and maturity of the audience.

Very well said, and I agree totally.   I really think this was another part of why this movie hit me so very hard, I really could identify with the two characters. 

Welcome to thread! I look forward to seeing more of your terrific insight!
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 31, 2006, 02:07:08 PM
So you think the reason for homophobia in Wyoming and the rest of the US is only from the Bible?  IMO homophobia is more primitive than the bible or any religion, but religion is used to justify it.

No, I don’t think religion is the only reason homophobia exists, but it’s the first rationale that anyone reaches for.  If you’re trying to suggest that it’s some genetic or primordial abhorrence, I won’t agree with you.  Other cultures and other times have been more accepting. 

Quote
It seems Ennis' life was much more shaped by poverty and lack of education -- and his own ability to "stand it" rather than take risks (as Jack did) to "fix it."

And yet, ranches exist all over America.  Ennis could have gotten a job as a ranch hand on a cattle or sheep ranch in Sonoma county less than an hour’s drive from the Golden Gate Bridge if he wanted to.  The contradiction is shown by the illiterate, little or no English Basque hands who come half way around the planet from Spain to tend sheep in Wyoming, while Ennis can’t drive the 200 miles to Denver or Fort Collins to escape into a new and better life.  He is absolutely bound and gagged by fear.

Quote
But my greatest interest in this thread is the non-believer's angle on Brokeback Mountain, which I think starts first with analyzing the story -- and then second, with analyzing the story's impact on our personal lives. 

So Gboo has started a skeptic’s analysis of the movie.  What are your thoughts?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on May 31, 2006, 02:35:26 PM

The fight scene was interesting in only I did not really understand it's point.  It looked to me they where having fun until Ennis got mad, which is very common.  Teasing is the same, it is all fun until someone gets hurt.  But it was important to the end scenes, so that is understood.

Hi Doug -  I actually had some questions about the way this is portrayed as well, at first it looks as if Ennis is trying to play along with Jack (after Jack lassos him with the rope) but it quickly seems to turn more serious.  IMO this is because Ennis feels bad about leaving the mountain, and he can't pretend to be happy or even have one last joyful time with Jack.  He is too much distressed.  The punch is explained a little more in the written story -- Ennis (in the motel) tries to explain to Jack that he had an older brother who always beat him up, so Ennis had to develop an instinct to fight back so his brother would leave him alone.  But the truth is, it was probably because Ennis was feeling more pain than he could bear at that moment, and Jack was the cause of it, although Jack hitting Ennis (the bloody nose) was an accident.  Jack hit Ennis first (bloody nose) then Ennis punched Jack, hard, no accident.

I hope that is not too confusing!

Quote
The Ennis sick scene was confusing to me, why he was throwing up is a mystery.  If he was so saddened I would have thought he would have been crying uncontrollably instead. 

The story explains this better than the movie.  It says after driving less than a mile, Ennis had to pull to the side of the road, felt like his guts were being pulled from him hand over hand a foot at a time, tried to vomit but nothing came up. " He felt as bad as he had ever felt and it took a long time for the feeling to wear off."

This is due to parting from Jack.  He explains to Jack in the motel (in the story, not the movie) it took him a year to realize he got sick because he never should have let Jack out of his sight.

Quote

I really felt bad that both him and Jack felt it was necessary to cover by taking innocent wives.  And it had no other option be to be hard for all involved.  I know that a great many men take wives in the hope that they will somehow change them.  All it does is make them even more isolated from their own beings.   But that is true to reality, and if that was the point it came across clear.

Another thing true to reality is the bone crushing poverty these two was dealing with.  Jack was trapped by it and so was Ennis only in different ways. 

I had great hope that they would find a way to be together, but having been in these kind of places myself, I also know that is not necessary the outcome.  It would have been nice. 

Jacks death, Ennis in his room, to the end scene hurt me greatly.  It brought back a flood of memories, of pain, of loss, and hopelessness. Of cleaning out my own lovers closet, of going through his things, of struggling to say good bye.  And missing him so very terribly at times, Christmas his favorite time of year is especially hard.  I wanted so badly to hug Ennis and cry with him. Yes, the tears are flowing down my checks again... damn...   

Ok, I am back...  It was truly overwhelming for me, and I had to search out for some comfort.  Therefore, I ended here.  Only the living need comfort, I know that Jack is gone forever, never again will Ennis lay eyes upon him, or touch him, smell his being, or experience his consciousness.  Ennis must learn that loosing Jake is just as bad of death as the death he so fears for himself. Ennis must learn to trust others and find love and happiness where he can, there is no other option but overwhelming loneliness, waste of life, and love.  There is nothing to fear about death, it is simply non-existence of a conscious mind.

Hopefully I have given something to think about, but remember all is just my humble opinion.

Thanks for being here. 

Brokeback got us good!
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on May 31, 2006, 02:47:26 PM

Actually, to the extent religion comes up in BBM, I think the movie tends toward a slightly negative view (which I found refreshing!).  It really jumped out at me when Ennis dismissed the idea of going to the church social by sneering, "that fire & brimstone crowd."  I thought it was a subtle, yet brave reminder that traditional religion can be offensive and threatening to gay people (and others who don't fit their idea of "normal and correct").  And when Jack said he didn't know what the pentecost was, even though his mother was such a strong believer in it, to me that signaled that Jack has no interest in religion.  And let's not forget that icky comment by the minister who performs the wedding of Ennis and Alma!  Not exactly a positive portrayal of a man of the cloth.

The non-religious or anti-religious aspects of the film are, as I said, quite subtle.  But how rare is it for the heros of a film to be portrayed in that light?  I really appreciate that Ang/Larry/Diana expected us to identify with and love Jack and Ennis, yet they made them explicitly non-god-fearing.  To me, it's another way they were unusually respectful of the intelligence and maturity of the audience.

I agree with that statement, actually most analysis on this board in almost all the threads is absent religion, even in symbolism and imagery tend toward mythology or secular symbolism (I did see one unfortunate reference to the camera making the sign of the cross -- ack) but most comments are religion-free.  IMO the written story and the film treat religion as nothing more than any of the other props -- something that would be there because it is unavoidable when a guy gets married, or in their social lives, almost no different than the fireworks display on the fourth of July.  The portrayal of religion in BBM is dispassionate and subtle, as gboo says.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 02:54:28 PM

Hi Doug -  I actually had some questions about the way this is portrayed as well, at first it looks as if Ennis is trying to play along with Jack (after Jack lassos him with the rope) but it quickly seems to turn more serious.  IMO this is because Ennis feels bad about leaving the mountain, and he can't pretend to be happy or even have one last joyful time with Jack.  He is too much distressed.  The punch is explained a little more in the written story -- Ennis (in the motel) tries to explain to Jack that he had an older brother who always beat him up, so Ennis had to develop an instinct to fight back so his brother would leave him alone.  But the truth is, it was probably because Ennis was feeling more pain than he could bear at that moment, and Jack was the cause of it, although Jack hitting Ennis (the bloody nose) was an accident.  Jack hit Ennis first (bloody nose) then Ennis punched Jack, hard, no accident.

I hope that is not too confusing!


Excellent actually.  I just got up from reading the short story, it came in the mail today.  The big brother story adds a whole other dimension to Ennis.  The story of Jacks father added very big piece for me, it explained why he needed to be away so much better than what is in the movie.

Quote
The Ennis sick scene was confusing to me, why he was throwing up is a mystery.  If he was so saddened I would have thought he would have been crying uncontrollably instead. 


The story explains this better than the movie.  It says after driving less than a mile, Ennis had to pull to the side of the road, felt like his guts were being pulled from him hand over hand a foot at a time, tried to vomit but nothing came up. " He felt as bad as he had ever felt and it took a long time for the feeling to wear off."

This is due to parting from Jack.  He explains to Jack in the motel (in the story, not the movie) it took him a year to realize he got sick because he never should have let Jack out of his sight.

Yes, I read that.  Which tells me that if the stigma was no there to stop these two lovers, it would have been them at a wedding in November.  Of course, that is just me wanting a happy ending... <grin>

Quote

Brokeback got us good!

Boy did it ever! And still does at the most odd times.  Sometimes as I am milking, I find myself tearing up thinking about Ennis standing there... I still want to hug him and hold him, let those tears flood Ennis, and when it is over you will feel better. We will talk about regret and how choices are made.  Maybe then we can begin the healing... 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: gboo on May 31, 2006, 03:10:25 PM
To follow up on my comment re: Ennis's line about "that fire & brimstone crowd," I think another reason it struck me so much is that Ennis is taking a defiant, f***-them attitude toward the religious mainstream, which apparently played a direct role in his life through Alma's involvement with it.  The fact that the very young Alma, Jr. says she wants Ennis to come home from a trip with Jack in time for a church function (picnic, I think -- I don't remember off the top of my head) also shows that Ennis's family life required him to be involved in church.  So here is Ennis, bucking expectations and expressing disdain for religion, an attitude that puts him at odds with mainstream society.  Yet he could never for an instant dream of taking a similar attitude toward his sexuality.  He could never think, let alone say, "screw everyone.  I don't care what people think.  I want to be with Jack and that's that." 

Maybe this is a function of Ennis's relationship with his father.  He can't bear to defy his father's very explicit warning about homosexuality.  But it doesn't seem that his parents forced any dogmatic religious views on him (he tells Jack, "my folks, they was methodist, indicating he doesn't consider himself methodist), so it's OK for him to be defiant about church.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 31, 2006, 03:19:17 PM
the problem I have with that is that religion in ethical dilemmas can not decide based upon reality, it has to decide on tradition set forth by authority.  It also has to decide based upon interpretation, rather than knowledge, which leaves a whole lot of room for manipulation.

Well put Doug.  Not to mention that their sense of morality is based on reward and punishment.  I don’t call that morality, coercion is a better word.  Is there morality in duress?  Do you trust moral judgments made under threat? 

Quote
That poison is that human consciousness is not the highest valve, but a god and afterlife is.  With that value system, it is easy to sacrifice the individual for the so called good of the group, especially if that individual is relegated to the enemy camp, or even not human.

You’re not all wet, friend.  I admire your passion.  Don’t think for a second that I’m trying to be some sort of apologist. 

Quote
But it also quite obvious they are denying that conflict.  That is like separating milk and water after they have been mixed, it is not possible, yet they seem to suggest that.  This demonstrates the power of the religion meme to be able to close off anything that is contradictory to it's existence.

I agree entirely.  Hey, that separation never makes any sense to me, but you hear people say they have a separate compartment in their heads for their faith.

Quote
most think that parts of it are in error, the parts that they do not agree with, and the rest is absolutely truth.  Which I have to wonder how does one say "this passage is truth, I will live my life about it, and I will force that upon everyone else by law, and by tradition, and by social pressure" and the next one "this one does not apply to me, nor do I believe it?"

Welcome to Smorgasbord Christianity where you can pick and choose what to believe and ignore the rest.

Quote
I just can not understand how all encompassing truth can be in a set of words that HAVE to be interpreted by authority figures to be understood.

Or that the best sources were written nearly a century after the actual events took place, and that all the source documents were copied by hand for over a thousand years.  You think error might have crept in?  Accidentally?  Deliberately?

Quote
I know I am overly touchy on this subject, but I have first hand been dealt blow after blow from, so hopefully it is understandable.

Doug, you’re being mild mannered and well behaved compared to the flameouts that used to go on here.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on May 31, 2006, 07:27:48 PM

Doug, you’re being mild mannered and well behaved compared to the flameouts that used to go on here.


I am mild mannered and well behaved the majority of the time.  Well, <evil grin>, I like to think so anyway.  <grrrrr> LOL!

When I first came to this forum I was reeling, and sadly one of the emotions I had unchecked was I wanted to kick some religious butt... justice for my beloved, if nothing else.  But as I have witnessed time and time again, all this does is create even more strife.  There is enough strife already, already so much hate and condemnation.  It took me a couple of days to get my bearings again, I am deeply sorry for that.  I am not a weak person, but this movie sure did put me in a tail spin. Excuses all...

Flaming is not the answer, especially against Christians that have taken the first step to understanding.  Only a fool would attack them and put them back into the enemy camp.  We need everyone, and lets face it, some Christians that can run shotgun for us would not hurt either.

Flaming is also irrational.  Let the others loose it by flaming, we need to show rationality, calmness, and compassion at all times.  While I lurk on the Christian thread, I will not be there flaming.  Maybe at some time I might post a little, but I would much rather they come here and read to see that we are human after all.  Flame if they have to... Just my opinion...

Take Care my friend.   

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on May 31, 2006, 08:57:50 PM
To follow up on my comment re: Ennis's line about "that fire & brimstone crowd," I think another reason it struck me so much is that Ennis is taking a defiant, f***-them attitude toward the religious mainstream, which apparently played a direct role in his life through Alma's involvement with it.  The fact that the very young Alma, Jr. says she wants Ennis to come home from a trip with Jack in time for a church function (picnic, I think -- I don't remember off the top of my head) also shows that Ennis's family life required him to be involved in church.  So here is Ennis, bucking expectations and expressing disdain for religion, an attitude that puts him at odds with mainstream society.

It could also be that Alma's church is a harsher Calvinist "Sinners in The Hands of an Angry God" sort while Ennis' Methodists are relatively less so.  You're right, as if shying away from social obligatioins isn't bad enough, divorce certainly would have caused rumors to fly in small town Wyoming.  Why go through all that and then stay?  It only made the tiny fish bowl that much smaller.  Even to this day, there are more people in the City of Sacramento than in the entire state of Wyoming. 

Quote
Maybe this is a function of Ennis's relationship with his father.  He can't bear to defy his father's very explicit warning about homosexuality.  But it doesn't seem that his parents forced any dogmatic religious views on him (he tells Jack, "my folks, they was methodist, indicating he doesn't consider himself methodist), so it's OK for him to be defiant about church.

Or that the lesson learned from his father is that its tolerable as long as you're not caught.  But you'd think that would have led him to tolerate a greater involvment with Jake.  As per Doug's suggestion, Jake moving and hiring Ennis as a hand.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on May 31, 2006, 09:21:25 PM
sactopete -   Jack moving back to Wyoming, and hiring Ennis as a hand?

I posted earlier about why I thought Jack would not/could not move back to Wyoming - but are you saying that Jack would actually have the money for his own ranch (somehow paid out by LD -- if that were true)-- even if he could do that, I do not believe Ennis would be able to be on Jack's payroll, ever.  In their relationship Ennis has to feel that he is dominant.  He can't take a loan from Jack.  Worse, he could never be "paid" by Jack.

On another topic, I was thinking about how little religion has been mentioned in discussion comments in other threads (except to discuss Jack's mother the Pentecostal, Ennis and the church socials, etc.) but most people commenting in the threads have steered clear of discussing religion.  IMO that is because in our society it is presumed that if we are fans of Brokeback Mountain we must be anti-Christian.  We also must be anti- George Bush.  The other context religion has been mentioned is how friends or family refuse to see the movie due to religious beliefs.

Then the thread was started "Christians who love BBM"-- only recently -- almost seemed like a very brave thing for anybody to admit they are a Christian who loves BBM.

But then, should be no surprise, it turned out there were many and the last time I looked in there they were heavily discussing the Bible.

Not to ramble.  Boiled down, the point is Brokeback Mountain has challenged the rigid standpoint of Christianity, and that is a good thing.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Zadoc on June 01, 2006, 06:25:55 AM

When I first came to this forum I was reeling, and sadly one of the emotions I had unchecked was I wanted to kick some religious butt... justice for my beloved, if nothing else.  But as I have witnessed time and time again, all this does is create even more strife.  There is enough strife already, already so much hate and condemnation. 

Flaming is not the answer, especially against Christians that have taken the first step to understanding.  Only a fool would attack them and put them back into the enemy camp.  We need everyone, and lets face it, some Christians that can run shotgun for us would not hurt either.

Flaming is also irrational.  Let the others loose it by flaming, we need to show rationality, calmness, and compassion at all times.  While I lurk on the Christian thread, I will not be there flaming.  Maybe at some time I might post a little, but I would much rather they come here and read to see that we are human after all. 


  Hello Doug,

  I'm the guy who wrote to you from Christians Who Love Brokeback asking you to elaborate on a post you'd made there wherein you'd stated you were feeling alot of anger towards 'Christians'.  And you did answer, which I was very grateful for.

  I feel very drawn to you brother, and although I am a non-denominational, unaffiliated Christian,
the most important thing to me in my life is the humanity I share with everybody else on this planet.
I don't care what their belief systems are, or whether they have one at all..., at core I believe all men are my brothers, and if my brother is in need of me....I'm there!   So when you say: "We need everyone, and lets face it, some Christians that can run shotgun for us would not hurt either"!,  I want you to know that I would be happy to 'run shotgun' for you Doug. 

  The fact that you opened the flap of your tent to 'Christians who have taken steps toward understanding' inviting them to come visit 'to read and see that we are human after all' ... says so much about the kind of man that you are. 
  I do not, never have, never will, impose my spiritual beliefs upon no man, and don't want them doing that to me neither!  Whatever's going on in my 'soul', is between me and the infinitely unconditionally loving Supreme Being I believe in.........in other words as Jack tells Ennis about their relationship: "ain't nobody's business but ours".......and that's the last thing I'm going to say about that.

  The most important thing I want you to know that I'm ridin' right here beside you Man, and that I would be honored to remain there, for I have seen by all the things you have posted here, that you are a deeply caring, strong, sensitive, responsible, and thoughtful man.
 
  Sincerely,
  Zadoc
 

 
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 01, 2006, 07:47:28 AM
I posted earlier about why I thought Jack would not/could not move back to Wyoming - but are you saying that Jack would actually have the money for his own ranch (somehow paid out by LD -- if that were true)

Well Jack makes the boast that LD would pay him to send him away.  OTHO, there's Ennis' fantasy about Jack's short meeting with a tire iron.  So the posibilities are somewhere between them.  And IMO, Jack and Ennis are rarely truly honest with each other.  So I see the boast as just a boast.  I doubt he'd have gotten much if anything.  A payoff would have certainly meant relinquishing custody, so if he had any feelings at all for his kid, that would have been a tough choice.

Quote
In their relationship Ennis has to feel that he is dominant.  He can't take a loan from Jack.  Worse, he could never be "paid" by Jack.

I'd hate to think Ennis would cut off his nose to spite his face, that he couldn't allow for being a paid contractor.  But I can definitely see your point.

Quote
IMO that is because in our society it is presumed that if we are fans of Brokeback Mountain we must be anti-Christian.  We also must be anti- George Bush.  The other context religion has been mentioned is how friends or family refuse to see the movie due to religious beliefs.

You know, there's no reason to make those assumptions.  America is an overwhelmingly Christian country.  Most people are raised in Christian households, therefore most GLBT people have Chrisian upbringings.  To get from this simple observation to the assumption that Brokeback Mountain fans are by definitioin anti-Christian requires a real stretch, and numerous further assumptions.  Of course the opposing conflict as you've described it is one defined and framed by conservatives, religious and political.  That's the first tactic of political warfare: define your strawman/enemy.  As we know, to be raised an atheist in this country is unusual, and it doesn't require one to be anti anything.  At least that's my experience. 

Quote
Then the thread was started "Christians who love BBM"-- only recently -- almost seemed like a very brave thing for anybody to admit they are a Christian who loves BBM.

Started by Brian in response in part to some of the quite heavy flaming that Christianity was getting from others in numerous threads.  Brian wasn't the only "defender of the faith" so to speak either.  As I've said to Doug, these boards have been "reorganized" a couple of times and the older threads have been archived.  Don't take that as any kind of suggestion that any suppression of expression occured here.  Just a lot of heated BS, if you ask me.

I'm not sure its about bravery.  Brian wanted some space to discuss doctrine without skeptics lobbing sarcastic grenades.  No one has or ever had a problem with that.  I can't recall that the worst flamer ever tried to spoil his thread.  The big debates were restricted to the general topic threads.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 01, 2006, 08:05:58 AM
IMO that is because in our society it is presumed that if we are fans of Brokeback Mountain we must be anti-Christian.  We also must be anti- George Bush.  The other context religion has been mentioned is how friends or family refuse to see the movie due to religious beliefs.

Tellyouwhat, I've posted several times in the past that its unfortunate that our country no longer listens to the religious left, that religion in America has a long history of being in the vanguard of social progress and collectivist economics.  So these assumptions you mention are new.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: gboo on June 01, 2006, 09:23:36 AM
IMO that is because in our society it is presumed that if we are fans of Brokeback Mountain we must be anti-Christian.  We also must be anti- George Bush.  The other context religion has been mentioned is how friends or family refuse to see the movie due to religious beliefs.

Tellyouwhat, I've posted several times in the past that its unfortunate that our country no longer listens to the religious left, that religion in America has a long history of being in the vanguard of social progress and collectivist economics.  So these assumptions you mention are new.

I think Tellyouwhat's observations reinforce your point that the religious left is pretty much overlooked.  When most people think Christian (I admit I'm among them), their first reaction is "right-wing," "dogmatic," "evangelizing," "homophobic," etc.  It's unfortunate, because you're right -- many Christians are not like that at all, and they have been on the frontlines of social justice movements.  But the "other kind of Christians" are so vocal and visible (and according to statistics I've read, so large in number) that they are now the face of Christianity.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 01, 2006, 09:26:32 AM
  Hello Doug,

  I'm the guy who wrote to you from Christians Who Love Brokeback asking you to elaborate on a post you'd made there wherein you'd stated you were feeling alot of anger towards 'Christians'.  And you did answer, which I was very grateful for.

You are welcome.  I am a little disappointed that I did not get more of a come back, but that is ok. 

 
Quote
I feel very drawn to you brother, and although I am a non-denominational, unaffiliated Christian,
the most important thing to me in my life is the humanity I share with everybody else on this planet.
I don't care what their belief systems are, or whether they have one at all..., at core I believe all men are my brothers, and if my brother is in need of me....I'm there!   So when you say: "We need everyone, and lets face it, some Christians that can run shotgun for us would not hurt either"!,  I want you to know that I would be happy to 'run shotgun' for you Doug. 

Ok, here is your gun, you protect the left side, I will protect the right side...  The difference in our outlook is I do not believe all men are my brothers, because that has connotations of sacrifice for the good of my bother over the good of the individual. However, I am a firm believer that human consciousness is the highest value, and for that consciousness to experience the very best life, it requires us all treating each other like the highest value that we are.  I do not know if that will make sense to you, but anyway... 

 
Quote
The fact that you opened the flap of your tent to 'Christians who have taken steps toward understanding' inviting them to come visit 'to read and see that we are human after all' ... says so much about the kind of man that you are. 


Hopefully, a fully conscious loving human... the pentacle of my ideal.  One who sees the cause and effect of the big picture as well as the nitty gritty of the detail. 
 
 
Quote
I do not, never have, never will, impose my spiritual beliefs upon no man,

THAT, my friend, is all that I ask for.  I expect no more or less...  Now how do we get the rest of the religious community to respect freedom of religion?

Quote
and don't want them doing that to me neither!  Whatever's going on in my 'soul', is between me and the infinitely unconditionally loving Supreme Being I believe in.........in other words as Jack tells Ennis about their relationship: "ain't nobody's business but ours".......and that's the last thing I'm going to say about that.

You know the founding fathers had a similar outlook, their ending decision was that god things was only between the man and his god.  Too bad that our history is being rewritten to reflect the opposite. 

 
Quote
The most important thing I want you to know that I'm ridin' right here beside you Man, and that I would be honored to remain there, for I have seen by all the things you have posted here, that you are a deeply caring, strong, sensitive, responsible, and thoughtful man.


I am probably too sensitive...  the illusion of the atheist is they do not have compassion nor are sensitive, makes me want to go screaming into the night when I see that illusion of how heartless atheists are is presented as fact.  But the Christian right would not dare let the image of gays or atheists be caring, loving, sensitive, deserving of respect and compassion people, that would ruin their strangle hold on the purse...

A simple question for you, I really want to understand this.  By what criteria do you accept one passage of the bible is truth and the next one is not?  I know that Jefferson saw the miracles as false, and made his own bible without any of them.  I wished I could understand this.

Take Care.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 01, 2006, 11:40:22 AM
I'm one of those people that some folks would define as a non-believer and some folks would define as a believer.  I live in the most uncomfortable of worlds.  I understand everyone's arguments.  I mean, really understand them.

First, there is no doubt that humanist's are ethical, moral and value human beings; hence, their name.  While I might officially be Catholic I'm not an idiot.  And, I personally don't behave decently because I'm scared of anybody or anything.  I don't see anything Christian in obeying a golden rule because I'm scared to death of the consequences if I don't.  The Christian message is treat your neighbor as yourself because that neighbor is you.  That's a sprirtual message, not a punitive, judgmental,  loveless one.

Second, fundamentalist Christians are considered by people like me to be missing the whole point of the original Christian message.   They are sinning by making an idol of scripture while not doing justice to their fellow human beings, and are therefore not really Christian.  Wanting to be something is not enough to be it.  Jesus was about justice.  The letter of the law is always, ultimately a limitation on justice.  It certainly is a limitation on mercy, which we are also called to do.  This is my personal opinion.

Third, religious belief is based on mythological stories.  People like me know that a myth is not a lie.  Myths are greater truths.  I had a Christian teacher ask me once:  "Does Jesus have to actually have died on the cross then have been literally resurrected for the story to be True?"  That question changed my life.  Religions spring from mythological foundation.  That foundation is as true as anything we can know.  That's why a certain religion spreads like wildfire.  It speaks to the universal human condition.  It tells us a truth about ourselves and our place in the universe.  Unfortunately, the myth becomes literalized and its truth is lost.  But in its pristine form it is TRUE.  The Christian message, read mythologically,  is true to me and reflects my reality.  This is why I believe in it.

"Believers" like me think that myth and ritual are necessary to tie us to this existence.  They tell us where we are and where we are going, if anywhere.  Sacred rituals which speak to the contemporary world we live in and reflect the reality we know ground us and propel us through the stages in our lives.  They help us become authentic, mature human beings.  The lack of  ritual for young men in the modern world  is the reason so few today become men and seem so alienated.  They are missing the psychological and social process prompted by ritual. 

I think I am Christian, at least culturally.  (One person's heresy is another's orthodoxy.)  I respect atheists and agnostics and any other thinking person.  I have belief and passion for science.  My belief is that no Christian is required to ignore science or factual information.  No Christian is required to hate reason or non-believers.  A Christian can be a skeptic -- about all things.  As a mature "Christian" there are times when I belong on this thread of the forum because on that day I don't believe, or at least I make room for the idea that there is no divine.  On my rationalist days I come up against the brick wall of the limits of science and I remember personal experiences which unequivocally convince me of something called a divine.  I think I am a free-thinking Christian, which is not an oxymoron, and there are many more like me.  In the final analysis, the Truth is there are things we can and will never know and understand.  The Christian message doesn't contradict this.

No one can tell me the rules of being Christian.  I have to make my own journey.  It's the nature of the beast.  I am my own priest.  No free human being can be otherwise.  All I know is that even if it weren't true that Jesus never said a word about homosexuality, never condemned it,  I could never disapprove of it when his whole message was God is love, and as entities made in that image we are expected to be similarly godlike - to love each other.  We are to treasure love, nurture it and make more of it.  If two men or two women are engaged in love, making a family, bringing compassion and generosity to each other, and in general being what human beings are meant to be to each other I am to respect them, love them and accept them.  They fit right into my beloved community.

I'd like to be here on non-believing days.  It's a place I can fit comfortably, authentically and honestly.  On other days, I could come here and authentically love all you mistaken, misdirected, lost non-believers. LOL


Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 01, 2006, 02:13:58 PM
I'm one of those people that some folks would define as a non-believer and some folks would define as a believer.  I live in the most uncomfortable of worlds.  I understand everyone's arguments.  I mean, really understand them.

Welcome quijote!   I actually envy you... I really, really can not understand the believers position.  Perhaps someone such as you can spoon feed me until I get it? 

Quote
First, there is no doubt that humanist's are ethical, moral and value human beings; hence, their name.  While I might officially be Catholic I'm not an idiot.  And, I personally don't behave decently because I'm scared of anybody or anything.  I don't see anything Christian in obeying a golden rule because I'm scared to death of the consequences if I don't.  The Christian message is treat your neighbor as yourself because that neighbor is you.  That's a sprirtual message, not a punitive, judgmental,  loveless one.
 

Can you define "spiritual message" how is that different than just a straight forward message?  or is it?

Quote
Second, fundamentalist Christians are considered by people like me to be missing the whole point of the original Christian message.   They are sinning by making an idol of scripture while not doing justice to their fellow human beings, and are therefore not really Christian.  Wanting to be something is not enough to be it.  Jesus was about justice.  The letter of the law is always, ultimately a limitation on justice.  It certainly is a limitation on mercy, which we are also called to do.  This is my personal opinion.

One of my biggest faults is when I think Christian I see the Christian Right... Pat Roberson, Jerry Farwell, Fred Phelps...  I know there are others, but it seems to me they are condoning by their lack of protest against these monsters.  You see, according to them, it is you who is not a Christian.  Be that as it may...   This is where I get confused, what is the point of the original Christian message, how do I cull out the true message from the message that is poring out of radio and tv? 


Quote
Third, religious belief is based on mythological stories.  People like me know that a myth is not a lie.  Myths are greater truths.  I had a Christian teacher ask me once:  "Does Jesus have to actually have died on the cross then have been literally resurrected for the story to be True?"  That question changed my life. 


This I just can not understand, how can something not true be Truth?   Is that not like saying something is not a fish is a fish?  Is not that irrational, where non-A is A?  How do you identify anything if law of identity does not mean anything?  No myth is not a lie, it is a made up story, Santa Clause is a myth... is it a lie, no if it told as just a story, but it is a lie if it told as the truth,  he does not exist in reality, so telling a kid that he had better behave because Santa will not give him any presents, well this is just plain manipulation, plain and simple in my mind... I am wrong? 

Quote
Religions spring from mythological foundation.  That foundation is as true as anything we can know.  That's why a certain religion spreads like wildfire.  It speaks to the universal human condition.  It tells us a truth about ourselves and our place in the universe.  Unfortunately, the myth becomes literalized and its truth is lost.  But in its pristine form it is TRUE.  The Christian message, read mythologically,  is true to me and reflects my reality.  This is why I believe in it.
 

What does the words True and Truth mean to you?  To me they mean in reality are actual, yet I get the distinct feeling that is not what you mean?  I hope...   


Quote
"Believers" like me think that myth and ritual are necessary to tie us to this existence. 

Why?  Just by existing are you not tied to this existence?  How much more tied can one be? 

Quote
They tell us where we are and where we are going, if anywhere.  Sacred rituals which speak to the contemporary world we live in and reflect the reality we know ground us and propel us through the stages in our lives.  They help us become authentic, mature human beings. 


I find this very hard to understand.  How does a sacred ritual answer the questions of the comtemporary world and how to live in it? I have seen many of these rituals and they are completely unexplainable to me, and have no meaning in the contemporary world. 

Quote
The lack of  ritual for young men in the modern world  is the reason so few today become men and seem so alienated.  They are missing the psychological and social process prompted by ritual. 


I have to disagree, respectfully.  The reason that the young men in the modern world are so alienated is they are missing the psychological and social process of having real, available male role heroes who can teach the real world to them.  They have only movie stars, and other such irrational sources for their moral guidance.  They need men of honor, of integrity, of high moral standard in their lives, but as the world is now, those such people are consumed fighting to make enough to live.  These male model heroes need to be able to show them how the reality works, and what honor really is, even if that takes some tough love.  An example from the animal world, there was young juvenile male elephants that where killing other animals, raising hell with the young females hurting them.  They brought in some old males who put them in their place, and they became the nice young male elephants.  I really think our young men need the same thing.  Just my opinion... 

Quote
I think I am Christian, at least culturally.  (One person's heresy is another's orthodoxy.)  I respect atheists and agnostics and any other thinking person.  I have belief and passion for science.  My belief is that no Christian is required to ignore science or factual information.  No Christian is required to hate reason or non-believers.  A Christian can be a skeptic -- about all things.  As a mature "Christian" there are times when I belong on this thread of the forum because on that day I don't believe, or at least I make room for the idea that there is no divine. 

You are welcome to this thread.  I guess to me that when one uses the term "Christian" they make a social contract of being bound by the bible and those that profess to represent it.  And that is a big part of my reaction to "Christian" anything.  I do not see divine in anything, but man do I see awe inspiring nature in everything. 

Quote
On my rationalist days I come up against the brick wall of the limits of science

Such as?  I agree there are many limits of science, and I do not have a problem with saying "I do not know."  However, the idea of Divine Intervention is to label anything science says " I do not know" as god.  But that is irrational... if you do not know, you can not know it is god either...

Quote
and I remember personal experiences which unequivocally convince me of something called a divine. 

Examples?  You do not need to answer, I know these things can be terrifically personal.

Quote
I think I am a free-thinking Christian, which is not an oxymoron, and there are many more like me.  In the final analysis, the Truth is there are things we can and will never know and understand.  The Christian message doesn't contradict this.


How can Truth be things we can and will never know and understand?  How can you designate it as Truth when you admit not knowing?  Doesn't Truth have to be known as true to be truth?   This is a very big head scratcher for me...

Quote
No one can tell me the rules of being Christian.  I have to make my own journey.  It's the nature of the beast.  I am my own priest.  No free human being can be otherwise. 


Same here, I am my own minister, this is my own journey.  I agree totally.

Quote
All I know is that even if it weren't true that Jesus never said a word about homosexuality, never condemned it,  I could never disapprove of it when his whole message was God is love, and as entities made in that image we are expected to be similarly godlike - to love each other. 

I wished I could believe this.  But when I see the actions of the Christian Right, when I read the passages where Jesus preaches hate, murder, and god says he is evil, I have to conclude that even if I believed they existed, I would have to oppose them as being evil.  So my question to you is how do you rationalize these passages away?  By what criteria do you negate one passage and accept the next?

Quote
We are to treasure love, nurture it and make more of it. 

Yes, that is my belief, so why do I not see the Christian community doing this?  When I read the Christian thread is all about Jesus this, God that, but very little of the actual in the trenches unconditional love.  I do not want the love of the Jesus or God I know, they are evil in goodie goodie clothing in my book. When I see people murdered in their name and they not do a thing about it, how can you trust them?  When nature unleashes all hell and they do nothing about it, how can you not condemn them?  Do we not condemn the man who stands by and does nothing while people die?  It all seems conditional on you believing first, convert, then we will accept you as one of us.  But, again, I am rather touchy on this subject, and may interject what is not there into it.  'tis the nature of the wounded...

Quote
If two men or two women are engaged in love, making a family, bringing compassion and generosity to each other, and in general being what human beings are meant to be to each other I am to respect them, love them and accept them.  They fit right into my beloved community.


They sure belong in my beloved community to be sure.  This is the kind of world that I would love to be in. 

Quote
I'd like to be here on non-believing days.  It's a place I can fit comfortably, authentically and honestly.  On other days, I could come here and authentically love all you mistaken, misdirected, lost non-believers. LOL

Well, you are always welcome, even if you are a mistaken, misdirected, lost believer.  <evil grin>
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 01, 2006, 05:04:36 PM
Doug,

Lordy, if I actually answered your questions it would take over a thousand pages.  Every single question you have asked has had volumes written about them.  I've been reading for at least 30 years.

I understand that what you know about Christian thought comes from the noisiest and most dogmatic sects of Christianity.  Free-thinking Christians speak up the best they can; however, they don't make for a good sensational story like the extremists do.  Jimmy Carter is a Southern Baptist who does his best to speak out on behalf of another kind of Christianity and the hate mail he gets is vicious.  Many Christians speak but they don't wrap themselves in sanctimony and aren't arrogant enough to believe they speak for anyone but themselves, let alone God.  They don't flaunt the Christianity part.  They are humble in their statements.  They believe in nuance which doesn't make a whole lot of black-white, easy to get impact.  Those who aren't right wringers do more Christian acting than talking as well.  There are finally groups that are raising money to more effectively organize and get an alternative Christian point of view into mainstream dialogue.  Good luck to thoughtful people anywhere on any issue getting a hearing in the media, though.

The only way to cull out the true Christian message is to read scholars who are experts on the historical period, who have studied the Christian texts closely, and who understand the language, culture and theologies of the time.  There are volumes written also about scripture, who the experts think wrote what and why. It's the same thing you'd do if you wanted to understand string theory.  You read about quantum physics, theories on space-time and dimensions, and you must understand fundamental scientific principles.  To get to the original Christian message, use the scientific method.  Read and connect the dots.

As for Truth, materialists believe in one way only to ascertain truth.  Truth is facts.  The rest of us intuit the limitations in that even if we don't understand the philosophical underpinnings of our argument.  We live in a world of paradox and we see that there is no way to scientifically describe a concept which is not a concept because its reality is beyond the ability of words to convey.  The human brain and reason have their limits.  Just read any scientist who is a devout believer in the use of the scientific method as a way to describe reality yet who is also a believer.   There are many books which contain the debates between advocates of materialism and those who oppose them.  As for myth and its function and how it reveals Truth, you need to at a minimum read Jung and one of his main disciples, Joseph Campbell.

I personally believe in the reality of a mystical experience which channels a truth to us that the scientific method and reason can never reveal.  It's the source of our yearning for something unnamed.  When a scientist tells me all living things are made up of stardust, I hear something more than the material, finite aspect of the statement.  I believe in a transcendent reality, sometimes.  I believe that Jesus wasn't the only "son" of God.  To explain how I ended up here is to have to explain how I connected the dots reading scientific journal articles on anything and everything, archaeology, history, mythology, biblical scholarship, philosophy, theology, mystical writings and biographies, books on art and the artistic experience, on art and the sacred, poetry, literature, ad infinitum.

Every answer I could give you must be explained in terms of reams of context, or it would explain nothing and would be misleading.  Sorry about that.  Luckily, we can talk about Brokeback from a non-believer's point of view pretty clearly, precisely and easily.  So, thanks for welcoming my misled, misdirected and lost self.
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 01, 2006, 07:51:13 PM
Doug,

Lordy, if I actually answered your questions it would take over a thousand pages.  Every single question you have asked has had volumes written about them.  I've been reading for at least 30 years.

Understand.  So, there is not some rather simple minded criteria for what is valid in the bible and what is not?  God man, I would have thought it would have been as simple as what fits the loving God image... the rest being junk... but if you say so...

Quote
I understand that what you know about Christian thought comes from the noisiest and most dogmatic sects of Christianity.  Free-thinking Christians speak up the best they can; however, they don't make for a good sensational story like the extremists do.  Jimmy Carter is a Southern Baptist who does his best to speak out on behalf of another kind of Christianity and the hate mail he gets is vicious.  Many Christians speak but they don't wrap themselves in sanctimony and aren't arrogant enough to believe they speak for anyone but themselves, let alone God.  They don't flaunt the Christianity part.  They are humble in their statements.  They believe in nuance which doesn't make a whole lot of black-white, easy to get impact.  Those who aren't right wringers do more Christian acting than talking as well.  There are finally groups that are raising money to more effectively organize and get an alternative Christian point of view into mainstream dialogue.  Good luck to thoughtful people anywhere on any issue getting a hearing in the media, though.

I see, so the more vicious, hate mailing Christians are going to be the voice of the religion, such a shame, I do understand.  Try getting the viewpoint of thoughtful  atheist people on any issue a hearing in the media, impossible.  Every time they have to bring in the most radical Right winger they can find who just makes such a noise that any semblance of reason is impossible.  I do think we have more in common than at odds, at least I hope so...

Quote
The only way to cull out the true Christian message is to read scholars who are experts on the historical period, who have studied the Christian texts closely, and who understand the language, culture and theologies of the time.  There are volumes written also about scripture, who the experts think wrote what and why.


Does it strike you in the least bit odd that a God who made the universe can not speak direct, plainly, and coherently to the people he loves?  Is it odd that one has to have his word interpreted for your consumption?  Is not this way loaded with the possibility of manipulation by the authority figures?

Quote
It's the same thing you'd do if you wanted to understand string theory.  You read about quantum physics, theories on space-time and dimensions, and you must understand fundamental scientific principles. 


To get the majority of it without having to understand the complex math behind it all you have to do is watch one of the videos put out about it.  One set here:  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html  However, one thing about string theory it is far from complete and is only interesting at the time, and it is does not impact my life if it is right or wrong.  I am comfortable saying I do know how it works at that extremely small level. 

Quote
To get to the original Christian message, use the scientific method.  Read and connect the dots.

When I do that I get just the opposite of what you appear to have gotten.  The scientific method does not allow for contradicton, and call something complete or valid.

Quote
As for Truth, materialists believe in one way only to ascertain truth.  Truth is facts.  The rest of us intuit the limitations in that even if we don't understand the philosophical underpinnings of our argument.  We live in a world of paradox and we see that there is no way to scientifically describe a concept which is not a concept because its reality is beyond the ability of words to convey. 

How can a paradox exist, does that not require something to exist and not exist at the same?  The only things that fit that description is imagination, fantasy, make believe... It exists in the subjective reality, but does not exist in the objective reality. 

Quote
The human brain and reason have their limits.  Just read any scientist who is a devout believer in the use of the scientific method as a way to describe reality yet who is also a believer.   There are many books which contain the debates between advocates of materialism and those who oppose them.  As for myth and its function and how it reveals Truth, you need to at a minimum read Jung and one of his main disciples, Joseph Campbell.

I have read some of Joseph Cambell, what he describes are mythical stores that produce a feeling, an image.  Like the one of the lotus blossom blooming out of gods head, on the blossom existence, and there are infinite levels of gods and lotus blossoms, like the sands of the beach.  Is that not called imagination?  Is fantasy the in all of all?  Is not this the primitive mind struggling to answer the unknown, with nothing to work with? Seems so to me.  How can ancient stories be taken as real, when the writers did not even understand the basics of reality?  When lightening, wind and hail was the wrath of a god, rather the effect of a strong moisture laden updraft?  Why do we run our lives by stories of the ancients in only our spiritual lives, when we do not do the same thing with our health, security, homes, travel and every other single point of our lives?  Why are we living in high rises, instead of mud huts,  not bleeding our sick to drain demons, etc. and yet we relegate our spiritual lives to stories written some 2,000 years ago by very ignorant people?  Does that make sense? 

Quote
I personally believe in the reality of a mystical experience which channels a truth to us that the scientific method and reason can never reveal.  It's the source of our yearning for something unnamed. 


I have no problem with the reality of a mystical experience, that is a subjective reality.  In subjective reality anything is possible, hypnosis is an effect of subjective reality, belief is all powerful, however, when one thinks that subjective reality creates objective reality, there becomes a real problem.  In subjective reality one can fly, one can be divine, one can be and do anything his mind will allow him to believe.  Objective reality is the existence field separate from subjective reality of the individual.  Subjective reality can only effect the body of the experiencer, and his actions.  Therefore it is just plain wrong to force others to accept ones subjective reality as objective reality.  To your credit, You have not done this here to clarify.  Subjective reality has to believed before it can be experienced, Objective reality does not have to be believed before it is experienced. 

 
Quote
When a scientist tells me all living things are made up of stardust, I hear something more than the material, finite aspect of the statement.  I believe in a transcendent reality, sometimes.  I believe that Jesus wasn't the only "son" of God. 

When a scientist tells me all living things are made up of stardust, that is a wondrous thing to me. I understand how that stars have to die to make the heaver elements.  It is amazing to me that cause and effect of nature got it all together to create a world of life.  To me Jesus is either not the son of God or we all are.  The only God I can relate to is Nature, but that God is not conscious, can not care if I exist or not, but I am a child of that God.  My consciousness is the greatest value of all to me, without it I do not exist, and therefore, I have to assume that everyone elses is to them as well.  Human consciousness is the highest value.

Quote
To explain how I ended up here is to have to explain how I connected the dots reading scientific journal articles on anything and everything, archaeology, history, mythology, biblical scholarship, philosophy, theology, mystical writings and biographies, books on art and the artistic experience, on art and the sacred, poetry, literature, ad infinitum.

Understand, you are well studied.  So, can I safely assume that the 95% who claim to be Christians actually have done this as well, or are they just faking it with a wink and a nod?  My aunt can not turn on a computer, or understand the simplest of things, yet she is a staunch Christian.  How does that work?  I can see that there is no way to understand the mystically inclined mind, I am greatly saddened by this.  It looks like I will forever be on the outside looking in.  Oh well... if God needs some faggot to fry for enternity, I guess I have nothing better to do...

Quote
Every answer I could give you must be explained in terms of reams of context, or it would explain nothing and would be misleading.  Sorry about that. 


So, I have to take that to mean that God actually does not love us all, nor does he expect to save many because of the extreme learning curve required to understand.  Seems rather odd for a God of love. 

Quote
Luckily, we can talk about Brokeback from a non-believer's point of view pretty clearly, precisely and easily.  So, thanks for welcoming my misled, misdirected and lost self.

You are always welcome. 

Sadly, there is not much to talk about from a non-believers point of view.  What is just is, from there it is a simple conversation.

Well, stick around, we might think of something interesting...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Zuraffo on June 02, 2006, 02:32:04 AM
Does Spiritualist consider as a non-believer? ;)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 02, 2006, 06:42:44 AM
Does Spiritualist consider as a non-believer? ;)

Hi Welcome!

Here all are welcome.  That depends on who you ask, and what you mean by spiritualist. 

Two broad versions come to mind.  The one where every rock, tree, bush and everything has a human like spirit hidden within it, and the other is where the person is calling the awe, that feeling of inspiration of nature, spirit, like when one sees the grand canyon for the first time, or is in a setting like the mountains in BBM.

The first in my book is a believer, the second a non-believer.  However, my intent on opening this thread was to get the believer and non-believer to common ground so that we could stop hurting each other, and maybe, just maybe, learn to understand each other a little better, and treat each other a little better.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on June 02, 2006, 08:08:38 AM
Hi Doug, me again.

I think I understand now the need for this thread on a Brokeback Mountain forum -- the subject matter begs the question, how can gay issues fit into a society that continues to claim "In God We Trust?"

I have read quijote's posts with interest, and have to say I also am one who can actually get a spiritual experience out of a Catholic Mass (having been raised that way).  I'm married to a scientist and profound non-believer but he attends Unitarian services with me, agreeing that he gets something out of it (course every time God is mentioned in our service the ministers apologize to the atheists in church and explain god is a symbolic concept).

Here is my ultimate concern-- it seems that humanity, in an anthropological sense, can never stamp out man's yearning for the spiritual.  That is why IMO atheists need to recognize this yearning in a large percentage of the population.  It is like so many of our impulses, well -- like the sex drive for example.  At a certain level it's great -- even necessary.  At a hyped up level it becomes distracting and harmful.  It is one of the things we need to learn to live with, in other words, and (I always come to this conclusion) somehow try to harness for good. 

But George Bush (the most convenient example I can think of) has harnessed religious energy for evil.  (subverting democracy and a war on the side)

I have read E.O. Wilson's Consilience (a few years ago) and it seems he made a similar (slightly grudging) point.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 02, 2006, 10:14:47 AM
Hi Doug, me again.

I think I understand now the need for this thread on a Brokeback Mountain forum -- the subject matter begs the question, how can gay issues fit into a society that continues to claim "In God We Trust?"

Actually, while that is a good question, that is not the main one I focus on. The one I want to get answered is how do people who believe and people who do not believe treat each other with respect and dignity?  How do we come to the common ground so we see a loving human, instead of a believer or a non-believer standing before us?   How do we get to a place where real freedom of religion is respected and understood?  In my book there is a great need for this.  There are so many "a" points that we can get side tracked on, but "the" point is treating each other like we are the highest value, but that is rather hard when the majority think they are not the highest value, and others have even less value than them.

Quote
I have read quijote's posts with interest, and have to say I also am one who can actually get a spiritual experience out of a Catholic Mass (having been raised that way).  I'm married to a scientist and profound non-believer but he attends Unitarian services with me, agreeing that he gets something out of it (course every time God is mentioned in our service the ministers apologize to the atheists in church and explain god is a symbolic concept).

That is my belief as well, that god is a symbolic concept, some of it wrong in this day and age. It is my belief that the entire bible is a book , whose content was picked out of hundreds of available articles to achieve a desired outcome, control, way back when knowledge of the world was limited to gods and demons for everything not understood.   That is why a "loving" god is vengeful and violent, who came up with this convoluted idea of murdering his son to atone for the violent hate he feels for mankind, and still to this day requires one to jump through nonsensical hoops to be saved.  He had to be a violent, vengeful god to explain the floods, tornadoes, earthquakes, and hurricanes of old, it had to be a mad god it could not have been the nature of cause and effect of a physical world, that was not understood...  He has to be irrational to explain the chaos of the natural world we live in.  Just my humble opinion.

I understand your spiritual experience.  I, too, when I was part of MCC, no other church, felt a warm, comfortable, loving feeling while in a groug of happy singing people who I felt kin to.  I am sure that most take that as spiritual, or even the presence of god, however, I am sure it is our genetic social need being met that triggers that subjective feeling.  Just as sex, holding, compassion, understanding in one person triggers deep love.  We are genetically programmed by evolution to survive just like any other creature. That is why the baby creatures never need meet another of it's kind to know how to sound and act, genetic coding, instinct to some, god to others. 

Quote
Here is my ultimate concern-- it seems that humanity, in an anthropological sense, can never stamp out man's yearning for the spiritual.  That is why IMO atheists need to recognize this yearning in a large percentage of the population. 

Only a fool of an atheist would suggest stamping out the "spiritual".  My problem with spiritual is that I am quite sure it is misunderstood as something it is not.  Feelings, triggered by whatever, are not spiritual, they are subjective responses of the individual.  I have yet to hear of a spiritual event that was not such.  Does that mean it was not real? Yes, and no... and here is where people get lost.  It is real in the subjective reality, and not real in the objective reality, the vast majority have no concept of the difference, which is profound testament to the failure of our schools.  Objective reality, existence, is so vast, so big and so small we can not grasp it.  Cause and effect so out of our realm of experience that we can not experience it, so we have to make metaphors, analogies to get a grasp of it.  That internal map of the objective reality is our subjective reality, a pale representation of the original, but the only reality we can experience.  However, the objective reality is just existence as it is.  The matter and energy.  Our jobs should be to create our subjective reality to match as closely as possible the objective reality.  Since something cann't exist and not exist at the same time, contradiction does not exist in objective reality, our key to telling if our internal subjective reality is off, and needing correcting.  We have to understand that when we experience a contradiction, no matter how minor, we have one or a combination of the following: a.) not enough information, b.) a bad premise or c.) a physical perception not getting it right (fairly rare).  No, the believer is not going to even consider any of the above it is just too threatening to their internal map, which will fight for its life like no other, this is the main reason why it is so hard to quit drugs, stop smoking, etc, our internal subjective reality has these as benefical to us, not the harmful to us as they actually are. 

Quote
Of course, that It is like so many of our impulses, well -- like the sex drive for example.  At a certain level it's great -- even necessary.  At a hyped up level it becomes distracting and harmful.  It is one of the things we need to learn to live with, in other words, and (I always come to this conclusion) somehow try to harness for good. [/quote}

Exactly.  To learn to live with, we need to understand the underlying causes and effects, we need to let go of the blame, and work on the balance.  The vast majority of things in this world are not evil, but out of balance.  There is great wisdom in the statement of "moderation in all things". 

Quote
But George Bush (the most convenient example I can think of) has harnessed religious energy for evil.  (subverting democracy and a war on the side)


He, Pat Roberts, Jerry Farwell and Fred Phelps are my first thoughts.  Religion in modernation and compassion tempered with reason can be a great thing, the problem is that the current trend is to the extreme.

I have read E.O. Wilson's Consilience (a few years ago) and it seems he made a similar (slightly grudging) point.

I have not read this, so have nothing to add.

Thanks, take care
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Zadoc on June 03, 2006, 07:43:27 AM

Does it strike you in the least bit odd that a God who made the universe can not speak direct, plainly, and coherently to the people he loves?  Is it odd that one has to have his word interpreted for your consumption?  Is not this way loaded with the possibility of manipulation by the authority figures?

  To begin with I need to restate that I am a theist, with reservations. Classically, a theist is one who believes in a Supreme Being as creator of the Universe without rejecting revelation.  Your statement above resonates quite harmoniously with my belief, i.e., that down through history the 'interpreters', the 'middlemen' if you will, have indeed manipulated peoples for various reasons to the advantage of their hierarchies; without question History bears this fact out.
  As a theist I understand how our realities have their origin inextricably grounded on that Supreme Being.
In contradistinction to the majority of my contemporaries, I see no use in continuing to refer to that Being anthropomorphically as 'He'.  Henceforth, I will refer to that Being as The Creator.
  I might add judging by what you've said in the following quote, that you may profess to be an athiest but as I see it you certainly are one with a 'deist' tendency.  For you state:  "The only God I can relate to is Nature, but that God is not conscious, cannot care if I exist, but I am a child of that God".

Quote
I have no problem with the reality of a mystical experience, that is a subjective reality.  In subjective reality anything is possible, hypnosis is an effect of subjective reality, belief is all powerful, however, when one thinks that subjective reality creates objective reality, there becomes a real problem.  In subjective reality one can fly, one can be divine, one can be and do anything his mind will allow him to believe.  Objective reality is the existence field separate from subjective reality of the individual.  Subjective reality can only effect the body of the experiencer, and his actions.  Therefore it is just plain wrong to force others to accept ones subjective reality as objective reality.  To your credit, You have not done this here to clarify.  Subjective reality has to believed before it can be experienced, Objective reality does not have to be believed before it is experienced. 

  I find your inclination to reduce 'reality' to an 'either/or' at times tedious and extremely limiting.
When I say I understand, it means I 'know'.  Now, if I 'understand' and thereby 'know' that everything about me is 'in fact' solidly based, grounded upon, and springs from the Creator, the source of all life, intelligence and spirit there is no subjectivity here, no 'belief', but true 'knowing'. 
  It seems somewhat audacious of you to continue to be dismissive of states of reality you have no experience of. 
 
Quote
When a scientist tells me all living things are made up of stardust, that is a wondrous thing to me. I understand how that stars have to die to make the heaver elements.  It is amazing to me that cause and effect of nature got it all together to create a world of life.  To me Jesus is either not the son of God or we all are. 

  In the First Epistle of John 3:1 he states:  "Behold what manner of Love God hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God".
  So I guess from at least that Christian's perspective, (an intimate of 'the Christ')....'we all are'.


Quote
  I can see that there is no way to understand the mystically inclined mind, I am greatly saddened by this.  It looks like I will forever be on the outside looking in.  Oh well... if God needs some faggot to fry for enternity, I guess I have nothing better to do...


  That you are 'on the outside looking in' is merely an illusion based upon a decision you've made consciously.  It's quite possible that during the natural process of individuation, your 'ego', your 'self' as you know it, decided to fortify the protective emotional walls most if not all of us find necessary to erect around that 'self'.  Overdoing it, can lead to a sense of isloation.....being an outsider.
  I would suggest you examine your history with an eye to finding early incidents of abuse, sexual and/or emotional, that might have prompted this 'over fabrication'.
  That there might be a connection with a sense of personal guilt you've interiorized is suggested in the statement you make immediately following the one about being 'on the outside'.  You state:  "Oh well,
if God needs some faggot to fry for eternity, I guess I have nothing better to do"!
  This certainly is suggestive of some form of victimization.

  By the way my brother, I too am a faggot.

  Still ridin' shotgun next to you...
  Your ranch hand,
  Zadoc
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 03, 2006, 03:39:57 PM

  To begin with I need to restate that I am a theist, with reservations. Classically, a theist is one who believes in a Supreme Being as creator of the Universe without rejecting revelation.  Your statement above resonates quite harmoniously with my belief, i.e., that down through history the 'interpreters', the 'middlemen' if you will, have indeed manipulated peoples for various reasons to the advantage of their hierarchies; without question History bears this fact out.

Thank You for acknowledging that, I appreciate it.  Now the question is by what criteria do you choose the parts to believe and not believe? When the religious community had it's revelation that gayness could be curied, why did you reject that, if the only criteria needed is revelation?  Do you accept revelation in any other parts of your life? Would you accept a revelation in say medicine, say the one where they thought they could cure gayness with electroshock therapy?  Looking for consistency here...  Of course you may be using a different meaning than I am, mine is "come them in a dream, or flash, or inspiration".


Quote
As a theist I understand how our realities have their origin inextricably grounded on that Supreme Being.
In contradistinction to the majority of my contemporaries, I see no use in continuing to refer to that Being anthropomorphically as 'He'.  Henceforth, I will refer to that Being as The Creator.
  I might add judging by what you've said in the following quote, that you may profess to be an athiest but as I see it you certainly are one with a 'deist' tendency.  For you state:  "The only God I can relate to is Nature, but that God is not conscious, cannot care if I exist, but I am a child of that God".

Of course,I meant that in an metaphoric way, not in the actuality, the problem of using metaphors...  I have a great appreciation of the deist theology that the some of the forefathers used.  Their understanding was that if there was a god, he was long gone now, and we are on our own.  Given what little they understood about the world around them, that is quite an accomplishment. And I freely admit there is no way for me to prove there is no god, or there is one for that matter.  I have to assume there is not one, just as I assume there is not pink elephants on the moon.  Since statics show no evidence of god influence, since evil exists, since natural disaster and disease kills the believer at the same rate as the non-believer, I have to conclude a.) god does not want to intervene, which makes him evil, and not the Christian god or b.) god does not have the power to intervene, which makes him not the Christian god or c.) does not know of the event to intervene, which makes him not the Christian god or d.) he has taken off for another part of the universe, which makes not the Christian god, or e.) he does not exist.  I do not see any other possibilities for an all loving, all powerful, all knowing God as the Christians see it.  

Quote
I find your inclination to reduce 'reality' to an 'either/or' at times tedious and extremely limiting.

Just as I find your inclination to expand "reality" to include the unproven and unknown as a factual to be tedious and extremely limiting, because nothing can be known with that model given that the law of identity is meaningless in it.  Without the law of identity there is not knowledge. There is the rub as they say...


Quote
When I say I understand, it means I 'know'.  Now, if I 'understand' and thereby 'know' that everything about me is 'in fact' solidly based, grounded upon, and springs from the Creator, the source of all life, intelligence and spirit there is no subjectivity here, no 'belief', but true 'knowing'. 

Excellent! Then you should have no problem explaining to me in detail what lets you know this, what evidence you used, what weights you gave to what and why.  I know fire burns because of the pain, and blisters it causes for example, and I can demonstrate it.  Because anything factual, and known can be demonstrated, it may take some time, but it can be demonstrated, and one does not have to be a believer first.  What is the first valid premise you are going to start with?  Mine is existence exists, yours?  I can prove mine, can you yours?

Quote
It seems somewhat audacious of you to continue to be dismissive of states of reality you have no experience of. 


Is that any more dismissive than dismissing that man came from a boil on god's leg theory of the Aboriginals?  Or that little aliens take humans away to stick probes up their butts?  Or pink elephants walk around on the moon?  It is not audacious until some valid evidence is presented.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.   Something tangible, something outside of subjective reality. Actaully, it seems to me audacious to insist that one accept, and punish if they don't, any of this without something to work with. Be that Christians or their version of God.  Would you accept the theory of atomic structure without the work done to show it?  I didn't.  I sure do not accept string theory in the state it is in at the time.
 
Quote
In the First Epistle of John 3:1 he states:  "Behold what manner of Love God hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God".
  So I guess from at least that Christian's perspective, (an intimate of 'the Christ')....'we all are'.

Then why do you  suppose that so many treat us other "christs" so badly?  May I ask why is this passage more valid and worthy of quoting than:  "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)  ?  Why does not anyone quote it, or address it?  Obviously you dismiss it as non-sense...  why?


Quote
Me-  I can see that there is no way to understand the mystically inclined mind, I am greatly saddened by this.  It looks like I will forever be on the outside looking in.  Oh well... if God needs some faggot to fry for enternity, I guess I have nothing better to do...

You-  That you are 'on the outside looking in' is merely an illusion based upon a decision you've made consciously. 

You are right, I have made the conscious decision to only believe in things that have valid evidence of existence, especially things that are able to be used as weapons. How is that wrong?

Quote
 It's quite possible that during the natural process of individuation, your 'ego', your 'self' as you know it, decided to fortify the protective emotional walls most if not all of us find necessary to erect around that 'self'.  Overdoing it, can lead to a sense of isloation.....being an outsider.
  I would suggest you examine your history with an eye to finding early incidents of abuse, sexual and/or emotional, that might have prompted this 'over fabrication'.


That is the one thing that BBM is really good at. Ok more about me if it will help you understand me...  

My earliest memory of emotional trauma was a nightmare that I had of my father chasing me to castrate me, I ran and ran, hiding behind rocks and trees, to finally awaken scared to death.  I am sure he could not figure out why for weeks I could not stand to be around him.  Of course, we had been castrating calves the day before. (contuined next post)
Quote
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 03, 2006, 03:52:05 PM


I used to have terrible nightmares, of death and destruction, of tornadoes.  Good tornadoes and bad.

One tornado formed in the east, I was running from it, I ran into a library, I could not find a place to take cover. So I ran out of the building, the tornado was closer now, trees where being chewed only a few hundred feet away, so scared, I ran into a grocery store. A guy named Rod was there, he took me by the hand running again down the street, the tornado black and angry closing in on us. We came to this old house with a set of steps leading up to the front door, there was no time, the shingles were beginning to peel.  Beside the steps was a deep window well, room enough for one of us, He told me to get in, he would find someplace else.  I crawled in, very tight, the ground was shaking... I saw Rod holding onto a tree nearby, then I heard him scream and knew he was dead.  The house above came flying apart, and boards fell on me, and the sand, was sifting in as the tornado ground above me, more sand, hard to breath.  After what seemed like minutes it was quiet, but I found myself buried in the sand no way to breath and I could not move too much weight above.  I died, blackness for eternity... then I woke up.   

Of drowning night after night, walking down a pier the water gently slapping the wood below, the pink and purples of the sun setting in the west, gentle cool breeze.  And of slipping on the slick moss, and falling into the bitter cold water, too cold to swim, holding my breath until the bubbles went up, seeing the top of the water getting farther and farther away, and the last bubble...  and then nothingness, blackness for an eternity, then waking up too frightened to sleep, night after night for years, dying over and over again.

Of being in an old warehouse, looking out the window needing to go, to get out there before it was too late...  My cousin, Randi, grabbing my hand and pulling me along almost faster than I could run.  Loosing my balance and falling on the hard pavement... to my left a large hill at the top a big steam roller slowly coming my way... Randi screaming at me to "get up, get up" . I was so scared, my movements so hard, and slow, she was pulling on me, and the roller was gathering speed, getting closer... she begging me to "get up", and then it hit me, killing me.  Blackness for an eternity, then waking up. 

I love watching clouds, a storm was rolling in from the west.  Big black angry clouds, I was standing near the farmhand tractor.  I could feel the hair on my head suddenly standing, and I knew that I was being targeted by a lightening bolt.  I dropped to the ground as fast as I could, but in the small puddles, I could see the flash coming, I was too late.  I was struck, the light so bright that no eye could stand to see it, of a thunder clap so loud no ears could have possibly withstood it, and dying, eternal blackness for an eternity,  just to wake up thinking I must be in a hospital I had a loud ringing in my ears and blue spots before my eyes for hours.  But I was home in my own bed.

Are you going to tell me that all this was real? Everythinng I knew at the time said it was... and yet, there was no evidence... besides the ringing in my ears and the big blue spots...  plenty of evidence for most it seems...

I seeked help, yeah religious, he told me I as holding my breath until I passed out, how he knew this I do not know, but he was not sure what the rest of it was, though he did say tornadoes are phallic objects... LOL!   He told me to believe in my guarden angel... The nightmares continued...  I was stabbed once... slow and painful death, blood everywhere, finally dying just outside my front door on the step.  After I died, I awake with a terrible side ache where the knife had went through... 

I remember my dreams just as if they happened to me yesterday, you?

It was years before the reality became known, I have sleep apnea, my oxygen levels get extremely low when I sleep, I was nearly dying every single night. I had to wake up to breath, hundreds of times a night. No wonder I dreamed of dying. The nightmares went away once the real problem was addressed.  See the difference between subjective reality and objective reality?

I also used to really believe that because I was so evil, being an abomination to god and all, that if I touched a bible I would burn, just like those vampires in the scary movies, you see I truly was a believer once...

I was also very traumatized by the blood test in actuality once, that our grade school said we had to have.  My blood type is different than that of all the rest of my family, so I was convinced I was adopted for the longest time, because I "knew" that parents of this blood type could not have a child of my blood type. I had just enough understanding to be dangerous. Besides such nice people could not have someone as evil as me, I compensated by being the very best little kid possible, maybe they would let me live with them anyway, if they ever found out...  It was college biology before I understood how it was possible for my blood type to be different than theirs.   This was all before I learned how to tell the difference between subjective reality and objective reality.  I am not talking out of my ass here, I do know what I am talking about.

Quote
That there might be a connection with a sense of personal guilt you've interiorized is suggested in the statement you make immediately following the one about being 'on the outside'.  You state:  "Oh well,
if God needs some faggot to fry for eternity, I guess I have nothing better to do"!
This certainly is suggestive of some form of victimization.

So let me get this right, you do not feel like a victim when you see Fred Phelps with his sign of "God Hates Fags", knowing that about 12% of the population agrees with him?  You do not feel victimized when the congress is working on passing laws to prevent you from ever having a relationship accepted?  Well, I do, I feel damn victimized by this, and the god thingo.  I feel like I am being forced to live in a world that will never see me as the loving human being I am, all because the majority are so caught up in their little delusion of the god concept and can not separate subjective reality from objective reality. 

Quote
By the way my brother, I too am a faggot.

Yep, and that is so very confusing to me. For the life of me, I can not see how a gay person can not see the contradictions when he, himself, is one, but be that as it may, it is good to have another faggot to talk to.

 
Quote
Still ridin' shotgun next to you...
  Your ranch hand,
  Zadoc

Still here driving the team...

Time we stop this, while a big part of me wants to understand, I know from past experience that is not possible... and  that is not what will lead to understanding of each other.  We need to put the differences on the back burner, and explore the common ground.  Before I chase you way with my opinions...  we will have to do what all the rest of the world does, go the inane of simplicity... and supidity...

So your are a faggot...  What kind of men do you like?  Male I assume... LOL! 

While the type I think I like look more like Jack, Ennis in this picture has me...  Not sure why exactly, perhaps it is his deep brown eyes, they so remind me of my old love.  But I would not kick Jack out of bed for eating crackers as they say... <evil grin>

Sure dry here, I think this maybe one of the driest years I have ever seen, if we do not get some rain soon we are going to have quite a crop loss.  The neighbors are already selling down their cattle heard, and are starting to look for sources of hay just to get them by for the rest of the year. 

I got my garden put in this morning, can not wait for some fresh garden produce. Ummm...  I had to water overnight just to get the ground so I could get the tiller into it, man was it hard and dry.  I was thinking of putting up some pictures of my garden on the garden thread, but have not taken the time yet.  Do you garden? 

Out in the barn I have four cats that have now had their kittens, cute little things, I think there is 15 of them.  I will be knee deep in cats by fall if they all live, which they never do. 

Well, take care shotgun sidekick...

Is this what we really want our relationships to be like? 



Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 03, 2006, 08:38:28 PM
A few more dreams, just to stop them spinning in head...

I had walked through the north grove on a mild May day, it was overcast but still bright.  Behind the north grove runs a road, and just to the west is an old cattle underpass made of railroad ties and lumber. 

As I was walking along I saw one little cloud begin to spin, and thought "a tornado"!  I ran to the cattle underpass hoping I could get there in time before the tornado hit. 

I was there for about ten minutes, all was quiet, I was wondering whatever happened to that tornado?   I peeked out, but could not see anything, so I stepped just a few steps, still could not see anything. Then there was this gentle tug at my shirt on my right shoulder, to my surprise it was the tornado, just a little thing looked like a rope hanging from the sky.  It seemed very friendly, even joyful in its movements and gentle tugging.  My fear left, and I walked out with it closely behind.  It was like an old friend, and was with me the whole afternoon, which was very pleasant. Then it was suddenly gone.

I awoke with a smile, and have never feared tornadoes since.

Another one...

I awoke to a very dark house, it was like the windows had all been covered in black.  Outside I could hear something, very faintly.   So, I stepped out onto the porch to find 10 or 12 tornadoes spinning in the yard.  Smooth quiet tornadoes of a white/gray color, about 3 feet in diameter each, spinning but standing perfectly still, all perfectly far apart only a few feet.  The Columns went up as far as the eye could see.  I was not afraid.  I walked up to one to touch it, it moved in waves, like it was ticklish or something, it made a single note of sound.  So I gently put both hands on it, it was smooth and it sang with a voice like a flute, very calming, very gentle.  I walked up to the next, it was the same, but the voice was just a little different.  I spent a few hours with them, and slowly they began to dissipate.  Then I awoke for real.

A real bad one...

It was the middle of the night, and there was a sound faintly like nails being pulling out of a stubborn board.  I stepped outside, the moon was high, you could see for miles, the air a little cool.   On the horizon I could just make out what looked like waves of water coming, strange for the flat prairie lands.  As they came the sound grew louder, the ground began to shake, the house squealed.  The waves were in the gound, an earthquake. I could see bigger ones coming, the next one knocked me down, the house crumbled behind me.  Then it looked like mountains coming, the noise was more than I could stand, then it began to rain and hail at the same time.  Now water was splashing over the high rolling hills, and I feared of drowning.  Grasping onto a big board, the ground suddenly opened up with deep cracks, and wedges of earth shot upward.  It was the end of the world, and it lasted all night long. Me struggling just to survive.  Finally, morning had come, the sun rose with pink glow on the horizon, which was all water now.  I feared I had lost my entire family, but as the water drained to the southeast, my family one by one came floating by safely on boards and broken trees, and we all had survived except my one aunt, she had died in the storm.   I awoke, late to go to class...

A good one...

I awoke about 1:30 am, at least according to the clock on the stand, it was very dark.  I love the stars, so thought, while I am up, I will step outside and see them. The air was warm, and strangely not a movement could be felt, it was like something was going to happen.  The lone cricket signing seemed almost hollow.   The moon was low in the east, and the stars where as big as saucers, so beautiful.  Then the stars began to move, like the universe was on the move.  The moon began to get bigger and bigger until it took up the entire sky.  I was shell shocked.  Then from the north Saturn moved in, it was big and oh so beautiful, how could this be?  There was comets shooting by, and other planets began to come in to eclipse the one before it. Mars, and Venus,  so close you felt you could touch them.  Other planets I had never seen before were also lining up.  I was so overjoyed, then the nebula came through it was awesome.  I felt so privileged to having seen this, and I was still so awestruck.  Then the morning sun began to fade them a little but you could still see them.  I was just so overjoyed, because I now knew that I would be able to space travel to these now close planets.   I awoke with a smile on my face, and joy all day long...

Of course, you know that if I had been alive 2,000 years ago and had wrote these dreams down, someone now would be interpreting them, and you would be looking for the secret meanings, trying to live your lives by their scared text.  Before some of you jump to any conclusions, yes I actually dreamed all of these, they are not made up stores at all, not embellished one bit. They are real experiences to me, just a real as sitting here and typing.  Does that mean they happened, of course not.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Zadoc on June 04, 2006, 09:29:21 AM

  To begin with I need to restate that I am a theist, with reservations. Classically, a theist is one who believes in a Supreme Being as creator of the Universe without rejecting revelation.  Your statement above resonates quite harmoniously with my belief, i.e., that down through history the 'interpreters', the 'middlemen' if you will, have indeed manipulated peoples for various reasons to the advantage of their hierarchies; without question History bears this fact out.
Quote
Thank You for acknowledging that, I appreciate it.  Now the question is by what criteria do you choose the parts to believe and not believe? When the religious community had it's revelation that gayness could be curied, why did you reject that, if the only criteria needed is revelation?  Do you accept revelation in any other parts of your life? Would you accept a revelation in say medicine, say the one where they thought they could cure gayness with electroshock therapy?  Looking for consistency here...  Of course you may be using a different meaning than I am, mine is "come them in a dream, or flash, or inspiration".

  I suppose I should have elaborated on my opening statement, that I am a theist with reservations.
I do not consider myself a 'classic' theist because of my skepticism regarding 'revelation'.
By revelation I mean those incidents in the Bible that illustrate God/Man encounters where God 'speaks' to Man letting us know what its will is for us, i.e., 'divine' revelation.
Your references pertain to mundane affairs. 

Quote
As a theist I understand how our realities have their origin inextricably grounded on that Supreme Being.
In contradistinction to the majority of my contemporaries, I see no use in continuing to refer to that Being anthropomorphically as 'He'.  Henceforth, I will refer to that Being as The Creator.
  I might add judging by what you've said in the following quote, that you may profess to be an athiest but as I see it you certainly are one with a 'deist' tendency.  For you state:  "The only God I can relate to is Nature, but that God is not conscious, cannot care if I exist, but I am a child of that God".

Quote
   And I freely admit there is no way for me to prove there is no god, or there is one for that matter.  I have to assume there is not one.   Since statistics show no evidence of god influence, since evil exists, since natural disaster and disease kills the believer at the same rate as the non-believer, I have to conclude a.) god does not want to intervene, which makes him evil, and not the Christian god or b.) god does not have the power to intervene, which makes him not the Christian god or c.) does not know of the event to intervene, which makes him not the Christian god or d.) he has taken off for another part of the universe, which makes not the Christian god, or e.) he does not exist.  I do not see any other possibilities for an all loving, all powerful, all knowing God as the Christians see it.

  Statistics? What statistics? 
When you say 'evil exists' are you defining evil as disaster, calamity, woe, misery, suffering, sorrow etc.?  For you follow that statement by the terms 'natural disaster and disease'.
  There is a paternalism implicit in your views about the 'God' you assume does not exist, in point 'a.)', e.g., if 'big daddy' would only come home....he'd straighten this whole mess out, but he's out again drinkin' with his buddies; he doesn't give a damn about our troubles.........bad, very bad (evil) daddy!
In point 'b.)' you state: 'god does not have the power to intervene.'
   Why do you feel 'God' should intervene when it is within our own power to fight disease and predict natural disasters, e.g., volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, earthquakes etc.?  That we incline as a species to scientific research is the solution.  Problem is, we have not advanced enough as a species to reject our nationalistic passions that set us one against the other. Those atavistic tendencies devour so much of the monetary wealth of nations that is so desperately needed in areas of scientific research.
Thus the solution to our problems is clearly simple, we need no God to intevene.

Quote
I find your inclination to reduce 'reality' to an 'either/or' at times tedious and extremely limiting.
Quote
Just as I find your inclination to expand "reality" to include the unproven and unknown as a factual to be tedious and extremely limiting, because nothing can be known with that model given that the law of identity is meaningless in it.  Without the law of identity there is not knowledge. There is the rub as they say...

  I cannot understand your phrasing here.  'Tedious', has to do with long, drawn out expositions characterized by redundancy, which I must say I find evident in your writings, though not all....!!!
  I have attempted to be as succinct as possible, upon re-examination of my post, I think you'd have to agree.
  As to my tendency to 'expand reality to include (the) unproven and (the) unknown as factual', I just don't understand how you could see that as being 'extremely limiiting', for expansion is the very antithesis of limitation.(?) 
  I most certainly understand where you're coming from regarding verification, for that is the modus operandi of Science.
  For you, if you cannot weigh it, measure it, test it, physically examine it, it does not exist.
This for you is objective reality.
  When I say that 'the Creator' communicates with me, that I 'know' the Creator, that I 'know'  real physical Love coming to me from that Creator, you put this under the category 'subjective reality'.
And due to its subjectivity, and therefore unverifiable, it cannot possibly be considered true.
  Because you don't 'get it', it has to be untrue, as evidenced by the following quote.

Quote
   Then you should have no problem explaining to me in detail what lets you know this, what evidence you used, what weights you gave to what and why.  I know fire burns because of the pain, and blisters it causes for example, and I can demonstrate it.  Because anything factual, and known can be demonstrated, it may take some time, but it can be demonstrated, and one does not have to be a believer first.  What is the first valid premise you are going to start with?  Mine is existence exists, yours?  I can prove mine, can you yours?

Quote
In the First Epistle of John 3:1 he states:  "Behold what manner of Love God hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God".
  So I guess from at least that Christian's perspective, (an intimate of 'the Christ')....'we all are'.


Quote
Then why do you  suppose that so many treat us other "christs" so badly?  May I ask why is this passage more valid and worthy of quoting than:  "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)  ?

  I didn't quote that passage about sonship out of the blue,....I did so in response to a statement you made:  ".....then either Jesus was not the Son of God, or we all are".   Seems you took the ball and ran with it...., right off the field! 
  BTW, I do believe we all have to power to realise 'sonship' and 'daughtership'!

  (There's so much I'd like to discuss with you about my being a theist.  I am not a Christian in the normal sense of the word, and very little of the Gospels have lasting meaning to me.
Having read and studied them for many years, I am familiar with all of what has been attributed to Jesus.  That does not mean I have bought Christianity 'lock, stock and barrel', much less the entire content of those Gospels!) 

  Hey Boss......., It's 11:15 AM here and I haven't had any grub yet, so I'm about to put this down 'n' go get some.
  See you round the bunkhouse!
Oh and BTW....it's masculine, butch Men I like........  Maybe you could send me off some pics of yourself?  That little avitar pic of you shows a very handsome dude!

  Your hand......
 Zadoc
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Zadoc on June 04, 2006, 01:53:46 PM
  Hello Doug,

  Here's a tale for you,.........something that happened to involve my person.
I'm mentioning it here to you because it falls somewhere in the area between subjective and objective reality as you see it.

  This is not a retelling of a dream, for in actuality  it happened to me one Saturday afternoon around 3 years ago during a trip to New Jersey with a my friend Jack who'd asked me if I'd like to take a ride with him.
  We had ridden down the Garden State Parkway about 30 or so miles when we passed a Pier 1 store. (don't know if they have any in your neck of the woods.)
  He asked if I'd ever been in this particular one, and would I like to stop.
Sure......., lots of nice things to look at being a home decorating store........so we went in.
  Now Jack and I always went our separate ways whenever we arrived at any destination we'd both traveled to........different tastes..., interests.
  The store was not crowded, with maybe 8 to 10 people milling around, checking out the merchandise.
  We had been in the store about 40 minutes when I got the urge to defecate.
At the back end of the store I saw an open doorway through which a few store employees had been coming and going through.  I could see that the room beyond the door looked like part office/part storeroom. There was only one entrance to this room.  As I made my way over to the open doorway, thinking to ask some worker inside where the toilet was, a very primly dressed middle aged lwoman whom I had seen in the store earlier, happened to get to the doorway first.
In that room there was indeed a young blond woman seated a a desk doing some paperwork.
I arrived at that door seconds after the middle aged woman got there, so I heard her ask the woman at the desk, if the toilet was in this area.  The store clerk answered that there was, and she pointed a small room behind her, walled from ceiling to floor.  She told the visitor she had to unlock the door first and did so to let her in, and then turned to me and as she looked at me I told her I needed to use the facility also.  She sat back down to continue paperwork, and I parked myself outside, leaning on the door frame.  After 2 minutes or so, the store clerk got up, she passed very close to me as she left the room and entered back onto the main floor of the store. It seemed like 4 minutes or so had now past when another young woman came next to me and asked if I was waiting for the toilet, I said yes.  She fretted around nervously, and after 2 minutes or so said huffily that she couldn't wait any longer and left.
I never moved from that doorway.  I listened to hear any sounds of movement coming from that tiny room......I heard nothing, no sink running, no paper rustling, no flushing.
The store clerk returned and I mentioned to her that something may have happened to the woman whom she had let into the toilet, for she hadn't as yet come out. 
I'd estimate the time had elapsed by then 7 minutes or so.  I suggested she'd better knock on the door which the middle-aged woman had closed behind her.
  The store clerk proceeded to knock and call 'hello' at the door.........no response.
When she opened the door, the toilet was empty.  She was surprised at that.

I had never left that doorway and hung there so I wouldn't lose my 'turn' should somebody else come up to use it.  During my stay at that spot, I was facing into the office space, my eyes glancing at the storage items inside, and upon the items on the 2 desks therein.
THERE IS NO WAY THIS PERSON COULD HAVE GOTTEN PAST ME WITHOUT ME SEEING HER........that is if she wasn't traveling at or close to the speed of light!
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 05, 2006, 10:10:15 AM
Quote
There's so much I'd like to discuss with you about my being a theist.  I am not a Christian in the normal sense of the word, and very little of the Gospels have lasting meaning to me.
Having read and studied them for many years, I am familiar with all of what has been attributed to Jesus.  That does not mean I have bought Christianity 'lock, stock and barrel', much less the entire content of those Gospels!

I am not sure what I can add to that conversation.  What are you looking for?  I can point out the contradictions, the illusions, and the pure evil, but I do not think that is what you are looking for.

Quote
Hey Boss......., It's 11:15 AM here and I haven't had any grub yet, so I'm about to put this down 'n' go get some.
  See you round the bunkhouse!

Sure enough. I have got to get to work myself I have a horse sale book to make and to print.  They finally got the information together, only a week late and now want the catalog tomorrow... just how it always works out.  No sleep for me tonight.


Quote
Oh and BTW....it's masculine, butch Men I like........  Maybe you could send me off some pics of yourself?  That little avitar pic of you shows a very handsome dude!

Oh thank you, I appreciate the compliment.  Sadly, that avitar pic of me is 21 years old, I have gained a lot of weight since the loss of Michael, and a good part of my hair has fallen out.  So, I aint cute no more.   Needless to say, I normally do not allow pictures of me, so I have nothing to send.  If you still want one, I can have one taken, not a biggie. 

Take Care ranch hand...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 05, 2006, 10:23:52 AM
  Hello Doug,

  Here's a tale for you,.........something that happened to involve my person.
I'm mentioning it here to you because it falls somewhere in the area between subjective and objective reality as you see it. <snip>

I had never left that doorway and hung there so I wouldn't lose my 'turn' should somebody else come up to use it.  During my stay at that spot, I was facing into the office space, my eyes glancing at the storage items inside, and upon the items on the 2 desks therein.
THERE IS NO WAY THIS PERSON COULD HAVE GOTTEN PAST ME WITHOUT ME SEEING HER........that is if she wasn't traveling at or close to the speed of light!

Yep, quite a contradiction to be sure.  So, I have to ask what is your choice of the resolution?  Is it she walked through the bathroom wall, went up in a puff of smoke, Scottie beamed her up, she became invisible, or turned to a fine dust?  Or is it that you are lacking some kind of information, like a back door, or closet she could have hid in, of a window she could have crawled out of. Or could it be that you lost your attention for a few seconds, especially talking to the other lady, and she did walk by you, but you thought it was someone else, or did not notice?  People can enter altered states fairly easily, and have their vision, hearing and mind tied up to the point they are not really conscious for a short time, this happens to all of us every day, especially if we are in a mode of waiting.  This is what happens when one drives, and suddenly realizes that somehow they missed that bridge, or that object, or curve in the road, but are now past it.  In answer to your question, I can only say "I do not know".  There is much information I am lacking to make a judgement.  I would have to have extraordinary proof to accept something other than normal everyday life went on there.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 05, 2006, 04:31:33 PM
Doug,

All that search and investigation I have done to understand Christianity and its relationship to me says more about me than the religion.  Christian sacred texts reveal a type of truth to many believers who never have done what I have but have come to the same place.  The Christian message is easily available to many.  However, I am a skeptic, scientifically minded, and curious about all things.  It takes a lot to convince me of anything.  Rationality would be my religion if I didn't have a powerful intuition which I am convinced does reveal some kind of metaphorical truth to me.

You very obviously apprehend only fundamentalist, literalist Christianity.  Your experience of Christianity is only as an opponent to rationality and science.  You've known it only in its most debased condition as far as I can tell.  You are also identifying Jesus and the church as the same thing.  I am not trying to convert you to belief; I am only trying to point out that there is a legitimate counter-position in Christianity that also demands love and acceptance of "faggots," not just tolerance.  My belief is that the Jesus myth is indeed telling us we are all sons of God.  We are all one thing.  Life is of a piece -- one unified piece.  We are all stardust.  If this is the truth that the Christ story tells, then necessarily I am you and you are me and I am to treat you/love you as myself.  If the truth of Christianity is realizing our one natures as children of God and even as the divine itself, I can't act other than to seek justice for you as myself, care for you as myself, accept you as I ask to be accepted, and to demand that you be fed, honored and loved as myself.  I completely understand that too many so-called Christians don't do that or believe that.  That does not mean that that was not Jesus' message.

My heavily anti-authoritarian streak is the reason I began to try to understand on my own.  No one tells me what to think or how to believe.  While the Church may be authoritarian, Jesus wasn't.  He was the sheep.  I'm not supposed to be.  I won't make of science a god either.  Science can tell me many important and profound things; it can't tell me everything there is to know about reality.  And, even scientists admit that there is no such thing as true "objectivity."  Einstein knew that when it came to certain scientific realities, to observe something is to change the outcome or to affect it.  And how to explain matter that exists as waves when perceived from one angle but as something else when perceived from another?  There are many paradoxes recognized by science.  The belief is that science doesn't have enough information to explain them yet.  That doesn't mean that a paradox is a delusion.  It means we can't ever or haven't yet explained it.

Our brains can know concepts and ideas.  If you say that there is nothing that can exist that is not a concept or idea, then you are stating a belief not an objective fact, IMO.  My belief is that there exists a reality beyond the purview of concepts and ideas.  Myths, like Christ myths, try to give you an approximation of the realness of the experience.  If the human brain works through concepts, and something is beyond a concept, it doesn't mean it's not real.  It means we will never be able to fully know or understand it, puny, primitive humans that we are.  You cannot prove there is no god.  I cannot prove there is.  Alll philosophical and scientific arguments hit this brick wall in the end.  It's a leap of faith either road you take.  I'm still standing at the crossroads.  I haven't made a choice yet.  I just acknowledge that there is one to be made.

The scientifically minded have no problem accepting that there are things we will not know for we don't know how long.  Why is it so outrageous to believe the same when it comes to spiritual matters?  There are more things in heaven and earth than we know.  This will always be true.  Scientists may one day satisfactorily explain my yearning for an unnamed thing, an unmapped home, a unity that has been sundered.  Until then, I acknowledge my yearning and do the best I can to explain it.

The original Christian message had nothing to do with "fag" hating, damnation, fire and brimstone, intolerance, hypocrisy, woman-hating, hierarchy, or authoritarianism.  It had to do with communalism, shared meals, equality, tolerance, sharing, love and justice.  It had to do with life in the here and now and living according to the loving impulses in our hearts not the ones that separate, judge, and divide into class, gender, or rationality.  Jesus and his followers might not have known what makes the stars shine in the heavens, but they knew about the deep-rooted needs of human beings and about what makes a fulfilling, good and peaceful life.

As for extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary proof, said like a true skeptic.  I'm with you dude.  However, it is for me an extraordinary claim to proclaim that science can describe all the reality that there is and every way that reality exists.  While I am a lover of science, I'd call that faith instead of science.  At least, ultimately.


 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Gonzo on June 06, 2006, 10:26:47 AM
For so long I vacilated, calling myself an agnostic.  I was talking with someone who was an atheist and I questioned him about a problem I had with atheists.  Isn't it equally arrogant to insist there is no god as to insist there is one.  He very plainly said that all we know about god is made by man.  No divine inspiration, only man and the need to control the population.  The explanation was so undeniably clear, it had just never occurred to me, that I immediately adopted the title atheist.  I can't possibly say there is no god, but I can say that religions have almost nothing to do with god.  Man created what we know as god not the other way around.  Now this is not to say that some unifying principle governing the universe does not exist, some greater being, but that is just way too out there for me to understand.  It's like asking a dog what god is, it's a waste of time and you irritate the dog.  LOL.  Prayer is another subject.  Many people believe prayer works, although some recent studies refute this claim.  Prayer, though is an innately human characteristic and I don't think any "thing" listens to prayer and acts upon it.  Shit, half of our prayers are to vanquish our enemies.  Perhaps, it is effective in a humanist kind of way but that remains to be seen and may never be seen.

Ultimately, I think that all religions are an attempt to recreate the child/parent dynamic we had as children.  As children, we were protected by and sought comfort from our parents.  As adults, who is there to comfort and protect us?  I say we then created god to do just that.  A being that knows and understands the world better than we do.  As children we could say that our parents know better for us.  We dutifully go to school because Ma and Pa say it is good for us.  As adults, we do much the same with religion.  There is the old saying "God moves in mysterious ways."

Now, religion, IMO has very little to do with spirituality.  Many may say that I am both spiritual and religious and that may be, but I don't think you need religion to have spiritual feelings.  At my worst, I think religion actually interferes with spirituality.

Can I have one last cigarette before you tie me up to that pole and shoot?  LOL.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: helen_uk on June 06, 2006, 10:29:27 AM
At my worst, I think religion actually interferes with spirituality.

That's me at my best!   :D
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 06, 2006, 08:17:14 PM
Doug,

All that search and investigation I have done to understand Christianity and its relationship to me says more about me than the religion.  Christian sacred texts reveal a type of truth to many believers who never have done what I have but have come to the same place.  The Christian message is easily available to many.  However, I am a skeptic, scientifically minded, and curious about all things.  It takes a lot to convince me of anything.  Rationality would be my religion if I didn't have a powerful intuition which I am convinced does reveal some kind of metaphorical truth to me.

I see. 

Quote
You very obviously apprehend only fundamentalist, literalist Christianity. 

No, not really, it is the fundamentalist that proves the point the best.

Quote
Your experience of Christianity is only as an opponent to rationality and science.  You've known it only in its most debased condition as far as I can tell.  You are also identifying Jesus and the church as the same thing.  I am not trying to convert you to belief; I am only trying to point out that there is a legitimate counter-position in Christianity that also demands love and acceptance of "faggots," not just tolerance.  My belief is that the Jesus myth is indeed telling us we are all sons of God.  We are all one thing.  Life is of a piece -- one unified piece.  We are all stardust.  If this is the truth that the Christ story tells, then necessarily I am you and you are me and I am to treat you/love you as myself.  If the truth of Christianity is realizing our one natures as children of God and even as the divine itself, I can't act other than to seek justice for you as myself, care for you as myself, accept you as I ask to be accepted, and to demand that you be fed, honored and loved as myself.  I completely understand that too many so-called Christians don't do that or believe that.  That does not mean that that was not Jesus' message.

Yeah, most of my experience of Christianity is that an opponent of rationality.  We are all stardust, I agree with.   You know, I have no idea anymore what the message of Jesus is, when people say love at the same time putting you down as filth. Just look at what our congress and prez is doing now.  Besides the gay Christians from MCC I have never met any that openly state they support gay people, but I have met plenty who have no problem of locking all gays away forever without a thought.


Quote
My heavily anti-authoritarian streak is the reason I began to try to understand on my own.  No one tells me what to think or how to believe.  While the Church may be authoritarian, Jesus wasn't.  He was the sheep.  I'm not supposed to be.  I won't make of science a god either.  Science can tell me many important and profound things; it can't tell me everything there is to know about reality.  And, even scientists admit that there is no such thing as true "objectivity."  Einstein knew that when it came to certain scientific realities, to observe something is to change the outcome or to affect it.  And how to explain matter that exists as waves when perceived from one angle but as something else when perceived from another?  There are many paradoxes recognized by science.  The belief is that science doesn't have enough information to explain them yet.  That doesn't mean that a paradox is a delusion.  It means we can't ever or haven't yet explained it.

Exactly true, science is not a god, nor does it have all the answers, however, I am forever hearing people saying that somehow justifies a mystical reason.  Nope, it just means it is unknown, unknown does not equate to a god.  We are not all knowing, therefore there are things that look like a paradox, but is it really? The premise of waves and particles being separate entities, are now looking more and more like two sides of the same coin.   

Quote
Our brains can know concepts and ideas.  If you say that there is nothing that can exist that is not a concept or idea, then you are stating a belief not an objective fact, IMO.  My belief is that there exists a reality beyond the purview of concepts and ideas.  Myths, like Christ myths, try to give you an approximation of the realness of the experience.  If the human brain works through concepts, and something is beyond a concept, it doesn't mean it's not real.  It means we will never be able to fully know or understand it, puny, primitive humans that we are.  You cannot prove there is no god.  I cannot prove there is.  All philosophical and scientific arguments hit this brick wall in the end.  It's a leap of faith either road you take.  I'm still standing at the crossroads.  I haven't made a choice yet.  I just acknowledge that there is one to be made.

I agree, our minds can know concepts and ideas.  I do not say that there is nothing that can exist this is not a concept or idea, I say there is nothing that can exist that is not either mass or energy, or a combination thereof.  Absolutely there is a reality that exists beyond concepts and ideas, and even perception.  The atomic structure comes to mind, and the gravity field is also one, these we can not perceive, or understand completely, that does not introduce a god.  The problem of a concept that is beyond a concept is that it violates the law of identity. If it is different than a concept, it is not a concept.  If it can not be defined, it is meaningless, of what use is something that defies definition? How do you use it, it is an unknown, as an unknown, it is of unknown use, of unknown value, of unknown merit. 

Quote
The scientifically minded have no problem accepting that there are things we will not know for we don't know how long.  Why is it so outrageous to believe the same when it comes to spiritual matters? 


Because the beliefs of the spiritual matters fly into the face a couple of laws that rationality is derived from.  Some of them being the law of identity, consciousness is conscious, existence exists, non-existence does not exist, and reality is absolute.  Without these being honored, nothing can be known, nothing can be understood.  If the spiritual was taken consistently, one would die in a fairly short time, but none take them consistently, so they live on.

Quote
There are more things in heaven and earth than we know.  This will always be true.  Scientists may one day satisfactorily explain my yearning for an unnamed thing, an unmapped home, a unity that has been sundered.  Until then, I acknowledge my yearning and do the best I can to explain it.

Absolutely true that there are more things in heaven and earth than we will ever know or understand.  I satisfy that yearning with the awe of nature, the bigness of the night sky, filled with billions upon billions of stars, far away suns, around which planets rotate, and upon them?  Who knows?  I get a kick out of the opposite, the explanations science comes up with the structure of the smallest of the small.  But my main satisfaction is being around trees, running water and small creatures.  I find them very interesting, and a feeling of kinship flows both ways. I have a very strange affect on creatures, they tend to really like me, but then I like them too.  It is too bad I can not have that feeling of kinship with my fellow man, but, alas, it has not been that easy...

Quote
The original Christian message had nothing to do with "fag" hating, damnation, fire and brimstone, intolerance, hypocrisy, woman-hating, hierarchy, or authoritarianism.  It had to do with communalism, shared meals, equality, tolerance, sharing, love and justice.  It had to do with life in the here and now and living according to the loving impulses in our hearts not the ones that separate, judge, and divide into class, gender, or rationality.  Jesus and his followers might not have known what makes the stars shine in the heavens, but they knew about the deep-rooted needs of human beings and about what makes a fulfilling, good and peaceful life.

So what happened then?  Why this terrible perversion that we are hit with daily? Why is the thrust now the afterlife, everything thing else is to be sacrificed?  See the contradictions?  As someone who searches for the equality, tolerance, sharing, love and justice I can not find it in the bible nor from those who say they follow it, it is a book of contradictions, prime for use by those that would pervert it for their own purposes. The average Joe has to have the bible interpreted.  The same is true for science and law it has to be interpreted for the average Joe, and it fraught with danger of being misused as a weapon.  The thing about science is it is fairly good about self correcting when the contradictions are resolved. 

Quote
As for extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary proof, said like a true skeptic.  I'm with you dude.  However, it is for me an extraordinary claim to proclaim that science can describe all the reality that there is and every way that reality exists.  While I am a lover of science, I'd call that faith instead of science.  At least, ultimately.

I would too.  I have never held that science will ever be able to describe all of reality, and understand every nuance of reality, however that being said, the vast majority of the normal everyday reality is very well understood, and since that is where we live, it should be used.  And none of that requires an angry, brainless consciousness trouncing people it does not approve of.  "I do not know " is not a dirty concept that must be covered up by the mystical.

But hey, I would have no problem at all with anyone believing what they want, as long as they do not make laws, rules and social pressure to force their beliefs on anyone else.  That is religious freedom afterall, and supposedly they all claim to believe that too...


Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 06, 2006, 09:05:14 PM
For so long I vacilated, calling myself an agnostic.  I was talking with someone who was an atheist and I questioned him about a problem I had with atheists.  Isn't it equally arrogant to insist there is no god as to insist there is one.  He very plainly said that all we know about god is made by man.  No divine inspiration, only man and the need to control the population.  The explanation was so undeniably clear, it had just never occurred to me, that I immediately adopted the title atheist. 

I do not know what to think of this, it seems so simplistic compared to what I have had to go through.  I guess I am envious...  I question everything, I find it hard to accept anything like this.  I would question how he knew that it was all man made, I am fairly sure it is, but I would need more, much more.  There is just so many that believe, how could they all be wrong?  They are, but just giving you my odd thought process. I worked a lot of it, then I found Ayn Rand, which helped a lot, and I read others as well.  I came across a web site just the other night while looking up law of identity, it has it quite nicely but together.    http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Chart.html

Quote
I can't possibly say there is no god, but I can say that religions have almost nothing to do with god.  Man created what we know as god not the other way around.  Now this is not to say that some unifying principle governing the universe does not exist, some greater being, but that is just way too out there for me to understand.  It's like asking a dog what god is, it's a waste of time and you irritate the dog.  LOL.  Prayer is another subject.  Many people believe prayer works, although some recent studies refute this claim.  Prayer, though is an innately human characteristic and I don't think any "thing" listens to prayer and acts upon it.  Shit, half of our prayers are to vanquish our enemies.  Perhaps, it is effective in a humanist kind of way but that remains to be seen and may never be seen.

Your common sense is strong, that is for sure.  I had to struggle more, but agree with our take.  The internal cry for help of a parent like figure when we are distressed is innate.  And I do not think that is a totally human trait, when a animal gets into a place where it fears for it's life it calls out as well, and it sure sounds similar to what a little one calls for it's mother in fear. 

Quote
Ultimately, I think that all religions are an attempt to recreate the child/parent dynamic we had as children.  As children, we were protected by and sought comfort from our parents.  As adults, who is there to comfort and protect us?  I say we then created god to do just that.  A being that knows and understands the world better than we do.  As children we could say that our parents know better for us.  We dutifully go to school because Ma and Pa say it is good for us.  As adults, we do much the same with religion.  There is the old saying "God moves in mysterious ways."

That could be a big part of the dynamics.  To me God is the Santa Clause that adults get to have.  He promises hope, love and a place to belong, like the candy of adults, but you gotta be good, because you know he is checking his list twice and all the bad boys and girls go to hell, or get no presents...

Quote
Now, religion, IMO has very little to do with spirituality.  Many may say that I am both spiritual and religious and that may be, but I don't think you need religion to have spiritual feelings.  At my worst, I think religion actually interferes with spirituality.

I tend to agree.  Though there a couple of versions of spirituality, and it depends on which one is meant.  If you mean the one of awe for nature, of companionship with creatures, of other people, I totally agree.  If you mean the version of spooks in every tree and rock, then I do not agree.

Quote
Can I have one last cigarette before you tie me up to that pole and shoot?  LOL.

Sure, smoke away, second hand smoke is another one of those illusions that needs to be dispelled.  Need a light? Here... 

Now since I have you all tied up and all, can I be naughty??? Tickle... tickle...  LOL!  <evil grin> 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Desecra on June 07, 2006, 01:24:08 PM
I've only just found this thread - I thought the non-believers were very much in the minority!  I'll try to catch up with the posts here and  I'm looking forward to joining in :).
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 07, 2006, 02:36:44 PM
I've only just found this thread - I thought the non-believers were very much in the minority!  I'll try to catch up with the posts here and  I'm looking forward to joining in :).

Hi Welcome! 

Join in or lurk, whatever works for you.  It does seem the non-believers are in the minority, but I think that has more to do with their independent nature, rather than actual numbers.  I am told there was quite a few non-believers in at first, but they seem to have moved on.  Such a shame...

Again, Welcome!

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 09, 2006, 04:15:57 PM
Now this is not to say that some unifying principle governing the universe does not exist, some greater being, but that is just way too out there for me to understand.  It's like asking a dog what god is, it's a waste of time and you irritate the dog.

<growling> Occam’s parsimony just makes sense.  I’m not sure which is more irritating: Omniscient, Omnipotent beings outside of space/time, or String Theory.  </growling>  The Franciscans are one of my favorite orders.

Prayer, though is an innately human characteristic and I don't think any "thing" listens to prayer and acts upon it.  Shit, half of our prayers are to vanquish our enemies.  Perhaps, it is effective in a humanist kind of way but that remains to be seen and may never be seen.

People usually pray as a group, in a church.  Whether you call it meditation or prayer, I would like to think there are benefits to building a sense of community.  However, most prayers I’ve read about embody that request that all parents are familiar with: “Send Money!”
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: All4one on June 09, 2006, 05:56:06 PM

People usually pray as a group, in a church.  Whether you call it meditation or prayer, I would like to think there are benefits to building a sense of community.  However, most prayers I’ve read about embody that request that all parents are familiar with: “Send Money!”


It's not surprising that most of the prayers we would read about are like that. That kind of prayer is to prayer what the relationships we see on Jerry Springer-type shows are to love.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: All4one on June 10, 2006, 09:23:52 AM
I was in a grocery store, pushing my cart ( avocados 5 for $5 ! ) when I realized how unkind and unfair this analogy must seem.

I didn't mean to criticize either those who pray for money or the folks who fight on the show. In a sense, they are all like children, calling out for what they think they need.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 12, 2006, 04:25:10 PM
I love all you non-believers.  I'm one at least half the time.  I have to say this though, just to keep us all clear-eyed and clear-thinking.  To be a true skeptic is to also be skeptical about your own beliefs.  Skepticism itself cannot exclude itself from the rule of skepticism.

That being said, are you interested, Doug, in discussing Brokeback Mountain as an existentialist piece of cinema?  A discussion could also be had about how Brokeback Mountain does not employ Judeo-Christian motifs typically found in many Westerns, if that is true.  Non-believers could discuss what the movie means to them in light of their non-belief.  Was your non-belief strengthened by this movie?  What does the movie say about religion, if anything at all?  Maybe we could apply secular humanist doctrine/ideas to this film.

Or, it would be very interesting just to continue hearing why people profess non-belief and how they got to the place they are.  That is profoundly enthralling as well.  I think there are many non-believers here because there are many thinking people here.  They are fascinating, one and all.  I get to hear from believers all the time.  It is a rare opportunity to get the infidel's point of view from the infidel's own mouth. LOL  I imagine you have as many different opinions and experiences and philosophies as Christians do.



Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 12, 2006, 07:21:37 PM
I love all you non-believers. 

We love all you believers as well, we just hate the belief... <wink>.

Quote
I'm one at least half the time.  I have to say this though, just to keep us all clear-eyed and clear-thinking.  To be a true skeptic is to also be skeptical about your own beliefs.  Skepticism itself cannot exclude itself from the rule of skepticism.

Very true. 

Quote
That being said, are you interested, Doug, in discussing Brokeback Mountain as an existentialist piece of cinema? 

Sure I am up for that.  I am not sure what I can add, but what the hey?   You will have to define "existentialist" for an answer to that one. 

Quote
A discussion could also be had about how Brokeback Mountain does not employ Judeo-Christian motifs typically found in many Westerns, if that is true. 

Brokeback does not use nearly as many Christian motifs directly as does many Westerns, however, they are a strong underlying message through out this movie.  There is fear of anything "not normal" through out the movie, Ennis shows his the most.  Only a highly religious nut of a father would drag his sons to see a gruesome murder to prove his point that homosexuality is wrong.  Both of our guys seek marriage as way out of the feelings they feel.  They assume that a good woman will fix them, yet it does not.  Ennis shows that he may have broken through this illusion when Alma wants to go to a church social, and he does not want to hear the fire and brimstone. Yet, Ennis hangs on to the belief that being out will get you tire ironed, and this sick movie proves that he is correct.  What a message that is to anyone who has this fear!  The message is undeniably that gay people deserve what they get.  Once again, only religion teaches that message as just.   I feel that both of our guys suffered greatly at the hands of the religious dogma, and hatred to gay people, as we all do.
 
Quote
Non-believers could discuss what the movie means to them in light of their non-belief. 


This movie was a real earthshaking monster to me.  It drug up such a remembrance of past events in my life that mirror what happened to our guys.  This movie brings up those past feelings and slaps you in the face with them.  Perhaps it is time to deal with the emotions so hidden away because they just hurt too much at the time to deal with.  It was such a shame to loose a loved one, and in such a violent and sick way.  While I was never gay bashed, I had a friend that was and he only left the bar I was in a few minutes after me, and that was in a gay part of town...  The tire iron fear is very real, and does limit ones ability to be out and free.  Now that I am back into the jaws of the devil himself, the bible belt, the tire iron fear is ever present.  Yet, this is my home.

Quote
Was your non-belief strengthened by this movie? 

Not strengthened, but not diminished any either.  It just proves, as in real life, that what is is.  Ennis, Jack, the fears, the realities, the mountains, the poverty, death, everything happened just by cause and effect, there was no magic, no miracles, just human love and trials.  A lot of those trials directly caused by other peoples beliefs, pushed upon innocent others.  It would be nice to see a movie where the guys meet, fall in love, have a few struggles, then have a very normal loving life together, and are actually the bedrock romance that others look up to.  But, no, like the majority of gay movies the faggots in the end have got to suffer and die.  If I had known that was the way this one ended, I very well might not have seen it.  Though I am sure I am better off having to deal with my inner demons that this movie drug to the surface.  I least I hope so...

Quote
What does the movie say about religion, if anything at all? 

It says that its got a strangle hold on the morality of right and wrong, and its wrong.  It says it's premises are wrong.   Though you will never get a believer to see that.

Quote
Maybe we could apply secular humanist doctrine/ideas to this film.

I am not sure of what the humanist doctrine/ideas are.  However, I would love to see a world of where people was not defined by a label, but instead defined as loving, conscious humans. 

I have a problem with the first tent scene, where it looks like Jack put Ennis in a very tough spot.  I would have rather seen that scene as Jack saying, "Ennis is that what I think it is?" " Ah, sorry" Ennis shuffles away a little. Then Jack reaches over to take Ennis's hand to show him that there was nothing to be sorry about.  None of the this extreme pull back.  For as the scene is now, it seems to say that even though Ennis pulls back extremely, his actions actually means "Yes", that is a stupid standard to live to.  IMHO.  I can see very scared straight men... this is just the proof they need to justify the illusion that all gay men are after them.

I loved the second tent scene and it showed way more of the love that I think should exist between lovers.  I love the scenes of them holding each other... god I miss those days...  I miss not being greeted with a hug and a kiss, I miss not having whole afternoons holding my love and watching a movie.  I miss having someone to enjoy talking to, to care for, and to care for me.  Yep... this movie drug up a lot of miss, the same miss I see in Ennis's eyes in the closing scene.  It drug up the fight we had before he died, as Ennis and Jack, how if I had just been able to understand I would have done his last days so very different... regret for something that I had no power over... Yes, I am crying again... damn...

Today I decided to go through one of the bags of clothes of his.  I look at them and remember him wearing them, most of them make me chuckle.  He loved the strange in tee shirts.  He was part of a group called "Emerson St Ladies garden club", which is what their tee shirts said... even though there was not a lady in the group. I am kinda thinking of putting a couple of his items together in a frame so I can put them up on my wall.  A lot of it I threw away today, as that time is gone, so very gone. 

I also looked up to see when the gay rodeo is that I used to go to.  July 7th... maybe, just maybe I will make an effort to go, it would be good to see gay men again, perhaps stumble upon an old friend or two.  Perhaps even stumble back into our old bar, I see it still exists.   

I have a problem with Jack's complaining about the job that he agreed to do.  If it was going to be such a problem he should not have taken it, or as Ennis says, stand it.  I have not problem with them trading jobs, but they should have honored their the jobs they agreed to do, as best as they could.  Perhaps they did...

I see both of our guys not able to listen or talk things out very well.  Just one example is when Jack suggests Ennis needs to move, maybe to Texas, the rant that Ennis went on had nothing to do with what Jack suggested.  Jack should have stopped him then and there, and had him explain his jumping to the conclusions he did.  Nor does Jack listen to Ennis when Ennis tells him it is not going to be that way, Jack needed to find a way to satisfy Ennis's need to be safe, even if that was only in Ennis's imagination.   Which the story line tells us later it was not.  Perhaps Jack needed to rent a ranch and have Ennis as the main ranch hand...  The vast majority of their problems was this lack of communication, this not exposing the illusions that the other could see in his lover, they both had the opportunity to dispel the illusions of the other.  Of course, we are expected to believe that they never talked about much during those week fishing trips, which I find a little hard to imagine. 

Quote
Or, it would be very interesting just to continue hearing why people profess non-belief and how they got to the place they are.  That is profoundly enthralling as well.  I think there are many non-believers here because there are many thinking people here.  They are fascinating, one and all.  I get to hear from believers all the time.  It is a rare opportunity to get the infidel's point of view from the infidel's own mouth. LOL  I imagine you have as many different opinions and experiences and philosophies as Christians do.


Perhaps, I do not know...  I am just an infidel afterall... <wink>

I sure wished we could get this thread moved up to the same folder as the believers, my guess is many non-believers look there, see they are not represented and move on.  Just a thought...



Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Desecra on June 13, 2006, 12:27:52 PM
This is partly an answer to the comment above about the difference between being agnostic and atheist.

I've always called myself an atheist, and for me it's quite simple.  Being agnostic, to me, implies that I would think that God [or gods?] might exist, or might not - in other words that I'd be giving equal weight to the ideas that he did or didn't exist.  However, I don't think these ideas DO have equal weight.   Just because we don't know something FOR SURE, doesn't mean that the alternative has equal weight.  As an example, I could never absolutely prove for certain that my dog isn't an alien from Mars, or that Father Christmas doesn't exist, etc.  That doesn't mean that the ideas that my dog is an alien from Mars, or that Father Christmas exists, have any validity for me. 

So I'm stuck with being an atheist.  I'll need at least some shred of evidence to the contrary for me to change my mind :).
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on June 13, 2006, 12:50:05 PM
I'm an agnostic, not an atheist, but when I found this topic, I shouted for joy! I'll be reading past pages and posting  in the future for sure. Thanks for a great conversation!
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 13, 2006, 01:47:40 PM
This is partly an answer to the comment above about the difference between being agnostic and atheist.

I've always called myself an atheist, and for me it's quite simple.  Being agnostic, to me, implies that I would think that God [or gods?] might exist, or might not - in other words that I'd be giving equal weight to the ideas that he did or didn't exist.  However, I don't think these ideas DO have equal weight.   Just because we don't know something FOR SURE, doesn't mean that the alternative has equal weight.  As an example, I could never absolutely prove for certain that my dog isn't an alien from Mars, or that Father Christmas doesn't exist, etc.  That doesn't mean that the ideas that my dog is an alien from Mars, or that Father Christmas exists, have any validity for me. 

So I'm stuck with being an atheist.  I'll need at least some shred of evidence to the contrary for me to change my mind :).

Exactly! I agree totally.

However, I need more than a shred of evidence, though that would be nice start.  I think for me, a god or gods would have to set down, have a cup of coffee, and be open to conversation.  I would need to know why he/she/it is worthy of my worship.  If fear is their only method of getting worship, then from me they only would get contempt.  I absolutely abhor fear being used as a weapon.  Fear is the mind killer.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 13, 2006, 01:49:18 PM
I'm an agnostic, not an atheist, but when I found this topic, I shouted for joy! I'll be reading past pages and posting  in the future for sure. Thanks for a great conversation!

I look forward to your input!  Welcome!
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 16, 2006, 07:58:25 PM
Doug,

I'm just going to respond to some of the astounding things you said about this movie in your post to me above.  I don't think we saw the same movie, and I don't think it had a thing to do with whether I'm a believer or not.

Did you really mean you think this is a "sick" movie?  I must say I saw one of the most beautiful films with one of the "healthiest" points of view I have ever had the privilege to experience.

The "message" of this movie (I don't believe it was a message movie) was not that being out will get you tire-ironed.  It's message was not that gay people deserve what they get.  You must be mixing this movie up with something you saw aired on the 700 Club.  The point was the opposite of what you say.  To reject love and not be who you are in accord with your deepest self is the catastrophe here.  Self-hatred and lack of self-acceptance is the weakness that prompts the tragedy.  No one in this entire movie was shown to get what they deserved.  In fact, it showed how harsh life in general is, how unjust society and conventional values can be, and how much more all these main characters deserved.  The movie is humane in tone, humanistic in "message," and is in no way judgmental.

You say many unfair things about religion in relationship to this movie IMO.  Religion is mostly absent from this movie and in these characters' lives.  In fact, they apparently know little of the religion that they have inherited.  The person we've been led to believe is the most religious is Jack's mother who shows herself to be one of the kindest, gentlest, nurturing, most accepting and loving characters in this movie.  Religion is not seen as the source of the homophobia.  Conventional notions of masculinity are seen as the main culprit.  No one in this movie quotes scripture or even mentions god as a motivation.

And, dude, Christianity as I know it teaches us to turn the other cheek, to do unto others as you would have them do unto you, to feed the hungry, give to the poor, and in general make yourself a peaceful, loving servant of others.  I can only speak for Christianity, but there is no scriptural authority undergirding this religion sanctioning tire-ironing or suggesting "gays" are getting what they deserve when they are abused.  If you want to talk about Pat Robertson, okay.  But, he's a reprehensible and ignorant man.  He is not the Christian religion.  He has made up his own religion.  Christians can't help what he calls it.

I also think you are mistaken about the scene by the river when Jack suggests Ennis move to Texas.  I think it is clear that Ennis correctly deduced what Jack meant.  I also disagree with your contention that it is unrealistic to think Jack and Ennis did not talk a lot on their fishing trips.  I can imagine with no reservation two men on a fishing trip not having a whole lot to say to each other.  If I applied my personal experience to the whole world I would inequivocally state that men never talk, at least not to the people they are in a relationship with.

Moreover, there is no way this movie implies that "no" means "yes."  Jack's got Ennis figured out and knows exactly what Ennis means.  "No" means "I'm scared shitless even though I want you as much as you want me."  "No" means, "please don't make me love you."  "No" means "I am over the moon for you but I don't know what to do with this feeling."  Ennis' subsequent actions show Jack was right.    Neither is the scene proof to all straight men that gay men are after them.  Holy cow.  The ensuing deep, moving and profound love these two find for each other proves this movie can't be about a stereotypical gay man attempting to seduce a typical straight guy.  If the movie is misconstrued, the fault lays at the feet of the brain dead straight guy who bought the movie ticket.  Dude, it's time to watch this movie with your objective scientist's hat on.  No preconceived notions belong in the screening room.  No modern sexual politics belong in the theater.

As for this movie being about how "faggots in the end have to suffer and die," I protest such a notion.  Not all homosexual deaths are equal.  This is a point where many in the gay community go off the rails.  When the death of a gay character results from a movie studio's cowardice, callowness or cynicism, then we have the basis for offense.  But, dude, when the art form requires it as the basis for its truth, then there can be no legitimate offense.  Jack isn't dead because he's gay.  He's dead because this movie is a tragedy.  If he had been a straight woman, the straight woman would have had to have died in the end to be truthful to the revelation of the art form.  The movie would not have worked in its significant and meaningfully artistic way if Jack had lived.  It would have been another Hollywood mediocrity.  We'd all be saying, "Who cares?"  If they ride off into the sunset together, it's unbelieveable camp.  If they merely break up, what is the point?  I choose Truth over what's politically correct or "inoffensive" anyday.  The art determines the outcome, not the dogma of the gay community.  And, I would say the same thing if any other minority or feminists or anyone else made an equivalent point about their particular group having to die in a movie.

One final defense of the movie and Christianity:  my "belief" is not in conflict with anything, and I mean anything, this movie has to say.  It is human, humane, compassionate, loving, accepting and tolerant.  It does not give succor to the violent, the prejudiced, the intolerant, or the unjust.  It is fierce in its defense of love and in its love for justice.

That being said, Doug baby, I am sorry about the sorrow and regret this movie has evoked in you.  I am even more sorry that you have had such a personal loss.  Any anger, guilt, or unconsolable loss you feel is a natural response to this movie.  It doesn't mean the movie is maleficent.  It means the movie got to the truth of things.  Darlin', the truth of things is hard.  The truth of things hurts like a son of a bitch.  The only cure is to dive right in and feel it, invite it, accept it, and move right on along to the next step.  Fighting it is no way to bring peace.  But, then you've got to be done with the pain.  Wear it, but don't drown in it.  You've still gotta lotta livin' to do.  (Yes, I'm an Elvis fan.)

I would remind you of Christ's love and mercy, but what would an infidel do with them?  Besides I don't feel qualified to speak for Jesus or God.  I'll just send you my kind thoughts as one human to another, because since I saw a certain film classic I feel your heartache as my own.




Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 16, 2006, 10:57:01 PM
Doug,

I'm just going to respond to some of the astounding things you said about this movie in your post to me above.  I don't think we saw the same movie, and I don't think it had a thing to do with whether I'm a believer or not.

Sounds good.

Quote
Did you really mean you think this is a "sick" movie?  I must say I saw one of the most beautiful films with one of the "healthiest" points of view I have ever had the privilege to experience.

Healthiest?  My God, how in the world can you call this a healthy movie?  It tears your heart out and leaves you totally destroyed...  It is just like a drug, I can not get it out of my mind.  I was fool enough to buy the DVD and paperback, it plays every waking moment, and I cry every time, though not as hard as the first 20 times I saw it.  I am not sure what it is doing to me, either it is going to cure me or kill me I do not know which.  Maybe the crying is good, maybe this is going to clear out those old cobwebs, maybe...  Maybe it is the beauty that is killing me, the healthy point of view... I just know it has me but good.  

Quote
The "message" of this movie (I don't believe it was a message movie) was not that being out will get you tire-ironed.  It's message was not that gay people deserve what they get.  You must be mixing this movie up with something you saw aired on the 700 Club.  The point was the opposite of what you say.  To reject love and not be who you are in accord with your deepest self is the catastrophe here.  Self-hatred and lack of self-acceptance is the weakness that prompts the tragedy.  No one in this entire movie was shown to get what they deserved.  In fact, it showed how harsh life in general is, how unjust society and conventional values can be, and how much more all these main characters deserved.  The movie is humane in tone, humanistic in "message," and is in no way judgmental.


I agree the movie is not judgmental.  I agree the point is to reject love and not be who you are in accord with your deepest self is the catastrophe here, the question is why are not Ennis and Jack not in accord?  Do you not see the obvious connection to what keeps Ennis from giving his love?  He knows his Daddy did not approve, he knows that being out will get the wrath of those who can not stand others who are different.  He is trying to resolve this in his mind and it causes the self-hatred, the lack of self-acceptance, the inability to let go of his fear.  Do you actually think that Ennis gets this from nowhere, he has had this shoved down his throat since he was little, as we all have.  This movie shows just how harsh life is, and how badly it can mess with a persons mind when the unjust society and conventional values come knocking.  Ennis fearing the tire iron treatment, then having that as the cause of Jacks death because he was more out there is definitely a message that Jack deserved it for being out more.  

Quote
You say many unfair things about religion in relationship to this movie IMO.  Religion is mostly absent from this movie and in these characters' lives. 

Nope, not so, even Jack when he sings it is one of the only songs he knows, a religious one.  Just because they do not do the church thing, does not mean they are not highly impacted by the religion around them, the religion that tells them they are not worthy.  Jack, again, states that he and Ennis will be marched off to hell.  Ennis had not sinned yet, but just that evening...  Jack is in a better place, freer to love, because he has already accepted that he is headed to hell.  

Quote
In fact, they apparently know little of the religion that they have inherited.  The person we've been led to believe is the most religious is Jack's mother who shows herself to be one of the kindest, gentlest, nurturing, most accepting and loving characters in this movie. 

This is true, she does seem really wonderful in spite of her husband.  But I have to wonder if she has put it all together as what Ennis was to Jack. Many people will not see the connection simply because that means what they believed to be true was not, they have a daughter-in-law and a grandson after all.   Jack's Dad seems to suspect, and perhaps that is part of his source for being the heel that his is.

Quote
Religion is not seen as the source of the homophobia.  Conventional notions of masculinity are seen as the main culprit.  No one in this movie quotes scripture or even mentions god as a motivation.

And the source of conventional notions of masculinity?  Where does that come from?  Where does the idea that the man rules the house, and the wife is subservient come from?  Listen to any church service for awhile you will find it there.  There you will find the extreme fear of gay people.  If it was not for religion, for what reason would any straight man have to fear a gay man?


Quote
And, dude, Christianity as I know it teaches us to turn the other cheek, to do unto others as you would have them do unto you, to feed the hungry, give to the poor, and in general make yourself a peaceful, loving servant of others.  I can only speak for Christianity, but there is no scriptural authority undergirding this religion sanctioning tire-ironing or suggesting "gays" are getting what they deserve when they are abused.  If you want to talk about Pat Robertson, okay.  But, he's a reprehensible and ignorant man.  He is not the Christian religion.  He has made up his own religion.  Christians can't help what he calls it.

God I wished I could believe that!  Yet, all I have to do is listen to the tv or radio... to Rush, to Bill OReilly, to Michael Savage, to Lars Larson, to Fox news, to Pat Robertson, to Jerry Farwell, to Dobs Dobson, to our president, to a large part of our congress, to even the local clowns... they all spout the same trash.  Do not tell me that they do not represent Christians, otherwise they would be kicked off the air and thrown out of office in milliseconds.  Do not tell me they do not use Christianity like a laser to cut and dice the rest of us as so much useless trash.  Yes, I am in the Bible belt and this is the only thing I can get on my stations.  OReilly made the statement that this movie is only about "humanizing the homosexual" , forgetting entirely that homosexuals ARE humans.  How many times have I heard that AIDS is God wrath upon gay people? A thousand or more? Only by streaming on my computer can I get some decent talking points about this movie.

And you are wrong about there not being scriptural authority sanctioning tire-ironing or suggesting gays deserve what they get.  Even though we are equivalent to shellfish, we are an abomination in the eyes of the lord.  God and Jesus make it very clear that they sanction violence against anyone they consider "the enemy".  Jesus tells us to be happy to dash little ones against the rocks, their crime being born to the enemy.  Jesus tells us to murder those who would pull the believer away from him.  Jesus tells us he comes to bring war not peace, and to not question war.  God tells us he is both good and evil.  I can get you the passages if you need.    

Quote
I also think you are mistaken about the scene by the river when Jack suggests Ennis move to Texas.  I think it is clear that Ennis correctly deduced what Jack meant.  I also disagree with your contention that it is unrealistic to think Jack and Ennis did not talk a lot on their fishing trips.  I can imagine with no reservation two men on a fishing trip not having a whole lot to say to each other.  If I applied my personal experience to the whole world I would inequivocally state that men never talk, at least not to the people they are in a relationship with.


We both know this was not fishing trips, as Alma told us that the tackle still had it's price sticker after 5 years, the line had never been wet. Hmmm, I guess that may be a difference between you and me.  I talk, I want to know what was meant.  The more I watch this movie the more I find myself nearly shouting at it.  What the does that mean Ennis?  You can not stand it any more? Do you want me to leave you alone then?  I sure can do that.  Jack why did you not ask Ennis if Alma or someone suspected, or why all the pointed questions, obviously Ennis wanted to air that. Yet, used his rant to back away from it, Jack should have not let him.  This movie is more about poor communication that anything else.  I know that look on Jack's face as Ennis drives away, he was not planning on ever seeing Ennis again, enough is enough.  That cold shutter that runs from head to toe...  I have been there, done that.  
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 16, 2006, 11:06:57 PM
Quote
Moreover, there is no way this movie implies that "no" means "yes."  Jack's got Ennis figured out and knows exactly what Ennis means.  "No" means "I'm scared shitless even though I want you as much as you want me."  "No" means, "please don't make me love you."  "No" means "I am over the moon for you but I don't know what to do with this feeling."

Exactly, no means yes...  I do not play these games, they are only a path to hurt.  I was so very proud of Jack not starting it the second night, or the kissing later after Ennis wed, honoring Ennis's right to no. Ennis was making it very difficult to live, with his "come here, come here, go away, go away" game.  If you have ever loved one of those, it will make you insane.  Yep, had one for a time until I kicked his ass out, I never cried as many tears and hurt more than with that idiot.

 I just do not like the first nights actions by Jack simply because I did not see any reason for him to assume Ennis was into anything.  Maybe I missed the gaydar thing, I never was any good at that.  I used to have friends that was very good at that, wished someone gave lessons...

Quote
Ennis' subsequent actions show Jack was right.

And if he was wrong?  Is this not exactly what we see in straight movies with women that is so damaging? Is this not the image that straight men fear that the gay guy will hit on them?     

Quote
Neither is the scene proof to all straight men that gay men are after them.  Holy cow. 


The two are straight looking, acting men what other conclusion can they make? Though this is minor "a" point, not "the" point.  Do not sweat it. 

Quote
The ensuing deep, moving and profound love these two find for each other proves this movie can't be about a stereotypical gay man attempting to seduce a typical straight guy. 

Yeah, there is the rub, as long as the straight guy can tell the gay guy from the rest he can steer clear of him , or threaten him, but when he suddenly discovers that he can not tell them apart for any other guy, then all guys can be a threat.  And you see that as a part of our society now, fear to hug, to show any emotion another man, because some other guy might mistake it as a clue for gayness.  It makes it hell for the closeted gay.

Quote
If the movie is misconstrued, the fault lays at the feet of the brain dead straight guy who bought the movie ticket.  Dude, it's time to watch this movie with your objective scientist's hat on.  No preconceived notions belong in the screening room.  No modern sexual politics belong in the theater.

My objective scientist's hat is always on... <evil grin>  I thought you wanted to discuss this film in the light of the atheist perspective.  Also, I tend to look from the 10,000 foot level, rather than at the eye level.  At eye level I agree with you.   

Quote
As for this movie being about how "faggots in the end have to suffer and die," I protest such a notion.  Not all homosexual deaths are equal.  This is a point where many in the gay community go off the rails.  When the death of a gay character results from a movie studio's cowardice, callowness or cynicism, then we have the basis for offense.  But, dude, when the art form requires it as the basis for its truth, then there can be no legitimate offense.  Jack isn't dead because he's gay.  He's dead because this movie is a tragedy.  If he had been a straight woman, the straight woman would have had to have died in the end to be truthful to the revelation of the art form.  The movie would not have worked in its significant and meaningfully artistic way if Jack had lived.  It would have been another Hollywood mediocrity.  We'd all be saying, "Who cares?"  If they ride off into the sunset together, it's unbelieveable camp.  If they merely break up, what is the point?  I choose Truth over what's politically correct or "inoffensive" anyday.  The art determines the outcome, not the dogma of the gay community.  And, I would say the same thing if any other minority or feminists or anyone else made an equivalent point about their particular group having to die in a movie.

I agree, but man, oh man, I was not prepared to live this death.  For some reason I had it in my head this was a "love story", not a "love tragedy", is that not what they said over and over again?  These guys are as real to me as anyone I have ever known or loved, so the pain is just as powerful, this movie is just too real, it feels like I have lived it a number of times and ways.  My problem, I will stand it like I always do.  I just loved the way that "Making Love" ended, that in the end all would be ok. So few gay movies end with an ending saying it will all work out, love will win out. 

Quote
One final defense of the movie and Christianity:  my "belief" is not in conflict with anything, and I mean anything, this movie has to say.  It is human, humane, compassionate, loving, accepting and tolerant.  It does not give succor to the violent, the prejudiced, the intolerant, or the unjust.  It is fierce in its defense of love and in its love for justice.

God I wished I could see that...  It is human, absolutely.  It is humane, except for the intolerable punishment of both our guys for being different, that punishment self inflicted.  It is compassionate, except for the extreme pain inflicted upon the women, upon our guys with their hiding and fearing being found out.  It is loving.  It is accepting, except for Ennis and his denial, for Alma and her feelings of betrayal, except for LD and his superiority, Jack's Dad and his sickness, and the fear of rejection from society in general.  It is tolerant of little, the love has to be hidden, the time together has to be taken in secret, fear is everywhere.   It does give in to the violent, the prejudiced, the intolerant and the unjust in what Ennis's Father did, what Jack's attackers did, and the fear around all of that.   It is fierce in showing love being the meaning of life itself, that one must strive for it, but it does not defend it, nor is there justice, just like real life. 

Quote
That being said, Doug baby, I am sorry about the sorrow and regret this movie has evoked in you.  I am even more sorry that you have had such a personal loss.  Any anger, guilt, or unconsolable loss you feel is a natural response to this movie.  It doesn't mean the movie is maleficent.  It means the movie got to the truth of things.  Darlin', the truth of things is hard.  The truth of things hurts like a son of a bitch.  The only cure is to dive right in and feel it, invite it, accept it, and move right on along to the next step.  Fighting it is no way to bring peace.  But, then you've got to be done with the pain.  Wear it, but don't drown in it.  You've still gotta lotta livin' to do.  (Yes, I'm an Elvis fan.)

I am sorry too about the sorrow and regret this movie has evoked, I am so sorry for myself and Ennis, we both suffered the loss, and the last fight before it, and now live with the guilt and extreme loss. 

I am sorry Ennis lost most of his chance at true love because of the internal demons that was forced upon him, just as I am sorry for mine. 

I have anger that we as gay people have it so much harder to find love than straight people, they can not hold 50% of their relationships together and they have every conceivable thing going for them, and then wonder why we have such a hard time with relationships when each and every step is challenged, from outside and inside. 

I have some guilt in that I did not trust my love over his doctor, I choose the "expert" and caused a lot of pain for the both of us before his death.

My inconsolable loss is the potential that was there, the love that is forever gone, the missing... 

I feel for Ennis, yet damn him, I would have dropped him long before Jack did, but that is now, back when I held on for dear life, I had to be hurt over and over to learn my lesson, and I can tell you it still hurts.  I came to a point I wonder if love was worth it.  The truth is this movie is way, way too close to home and am having a hell of a time dealing with it.  I would much rather it was more of a dream come true love story rather than the nightmare that one can never awaken from love story.

Quote
I would remind you of Christ's love and mercy, but what would an infidel do with them?  Besides I don't feel qualified to speak for Jesus or God.  I'll just send you my kind thoughts as one human to another, because since I saw a certain film classic I feel your heartache as my own.

The infidel would wish he could see and experience Christ's love and mercy, so he could accept it.  Instead, of course, he sees man using Christ, God, and the Bible as a weapon.  One that cuts to the quick, and never heals.  One that steals love and makes it dirty, evil, one that makes fear righteous, has no mercy, and is relentless.  How in the hell do I get over seeing that?  I can not pretend it is something it is not.   So the kind thoughts are very welcome.  Kind and warm thoughts back at you.


Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 18, 2006, 12:56:57 AM
As for this movie being about how "faggots in the end have to suffer and die," I protest such a notion.  Not all homosexual deaths are equal.  This is a point where many in the gay community go off the rails.  When the death of a gay character results from a movie studio's cowardice, callowness or cynicism, then we have the basis for offense.  But, dude, when the art form requires it as the basis for its truth, then there can be no legitimate offense.  Jack isn't dead because he's gay.  He's dead because this movie is a tragedy.  If he had been a straight woman, the straight woman would have had to have died in the end to be truthful to the revelation of the art form.  The movie would not have worked in its significant and meaningfully artistic way if Jack had lived.  It would have been another Hollywood mediocrity.  We'd all be saying, "Who cares?"  If they ride off into the sunset together, it's unbelieveable camp.  If they merely break up, what is the point?  I choose Truth over what's politically correct or "inoffensive" anyday.  The art determines the outcome, not the dogma of the gay community.

Haven’t there been enough tragedies?  It’s something of a cliché too.  I don’t know about you but I’ve had “tragic faggot” hurled at me as an epithet.  Sure death is what makes tragedy, but check out Vito Russo’s Celluloid Closet.  When you see the clips from all the tragedies starting in the 50’s, The Children’s Hour, Rebel Without a Cause, The Killing of Sister George and on and on in which the faggot dies, isn’t it time yet for another genre?

And conversely, why, in your mind, is a positive ending “unbelievable camp”?  Is that a failure of imagination?  If they lived, why wouldn’t you or anyone else care?  I’m glad you’re choosing “Truth” over merely PC, but what “Truth” does this film illustrate?  Bigotry, Fear and Ignorance kills?  Why can’t the characters find their way out?  Wouldn’t a better truth be to have at least suggested some solution, some way out?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 18, 2006, 09:25:14 AM

Haven’t there been enough tragedies?  It’s something of a cliché too.  I don’t know about you but I’ve had “tragic faggot” hurled at me as an epithet.  Sure death is what makes tragedy, but check out Vito Russo’s Celluloid Closet.  When you see the clips from all the tragedies starting in the 50’s, The Children’s Hour, Rebel Without a Cause, The Killing of Sister George and on and on in which the faggot dies, isn’t it time yet for another genre?

And conversely, why, in your mind, is a positive ending “unbelievable camp”?  Is that a failure of imagination?  If they lived, why wouldn’t you or anyone else care?  I’m glad you’re choosing “Truth” over merely PC, but what “Truth” does this film illustrate?  Bigotry, Fear and Ignorance kills?  Why can’t the characters find their way out?  Wouldn’t a better truth be to have at least suggested some solution, some way out?

This is what I was talking about. The hope that all is not a lost cause, the hope that others of decent moral character, of decent being exist for us.   How are gays portrayed these days?  Our "positive" movies and series are always either extremely tragic or they are drug addicts, and /or mindless whores.  The two that come to mind is Will and Grace, such mindless drivel, and Queer as Folk, what shameless druggies they are.  I crave decent role models, where the gay relationship is the bedrock, no drag queens, no drugs, no extra marital sex, maybe this is a little far, but if you will a "Ozzy and Harry" type of show.   

I can imagine one where a family of man, wife, six children, very caring and loving parents, and a loving gay bother of one of the parents with his loving partner, then the tragedy of a car accident killing the parents, and the children all moving in with the uncle.  The uncle and his lover being the loving bedrock against which the events unfold, but in the end always, always the love of the two overcomes the trials, and holds their family together.  Just a thought... 

BBM was so close, this is why it hurt so much, it had all the elements of being a great love story, it was only lacking the ending where love conquers all.  So instead is a great love tragedy.  So many of the gay community has lived first hand their own love tragedy, so they are needing a love story, they need the uplifting hope that love truly conquers all... 

In support of our heroes, I rented "Jarhead" and "Casanova" yesterday.  Jarhead was marginal, I am not a fan of war movies, would never normally rent one, but for Jake, he really filled out for this movie, a good look.  Nor am I a fan of womanizing movies, but for Heath... but I must admit that I did enjoy the light heartedness of "Casanova" and have watched it a couple of times.  We will know we have arrived when there can be a mixed gay movie of the same light hearted fun, and with the same love wins in the end.  It was good to see them in other characters, it took a little of the edge off BBM. 

((Hugs))  Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 18, 2006, 04:30:57 PM

So many of the gay community has lived first hand their own love tragedy, so they are needing a love story, they need the uplifting hope that love truly conquers all... 


amen to that, bro
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 18, 2006, 04:53:35 PM
The movie would not have worked in its significant and meaningfully artistic way if Jack had lived.  It would have been another Hollywood mediocrity.  We'd all be saying, "Who cares?"  If they ride off into the sunset together, it's unbelieveable camp.  If they merely break up, what is the point?  I choose Truth over what's politically correct or "inoffensive" anyday.

Quijote,  I don't mean to argue with you over this comment.  I believe it merely reflects popular cultural norms.  We can't yet imagine a happy ending that won't be parodied and insulted.  It could only be "unbelievable camp".  But Hollywood does have a long tradition of depicting repressed unrequited love without resorting to the extreme of death.  Your point about the lack of self-acceptance in the story would have been tragedy enough.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 19, 2006, 11:29:37 PM
I guess if what I have already said doesn't persuade you to my point of view, nothing more will do.  I just know that without the death of the main character the deepest depths of our compassion could not have been reached.  A love affair gone wrong does not come close to touching our capacity for mercy or sense of justice as does a devastating, unnatural and unjust death.  Your typical love story could never have had the same effect on your lives.  A different movie could not have awakened the slumbering hero in each of you.  You may have wanted a pretty picture; the folks who made this movie were aiming for something a little more life-transforming.

I repeat, the homosexual character does not die because of a conventional moral code imposed on the movie business.  He does not die because it was convenient for morally deficient movie producers and writers.  He doesn't die because of a perverse desire of the majority to hurt gay folks.  He doesn't die because we are to see the two lovers' relationship as wrong, impossible or immoral.  He didn't die to make straight people feel comfortable.  It is just the opposite.  We are made to feel personally devasted by Jack's death, both gay and straight, male and female, because we are made to love him, we are made to believe in his love, and his homosexual relationship is shown to be so right and beautiful.  We are made to feel how profoundly wrong the death is.  This is the difference between the typical movie death of the typical gay character and the death in this movie.  Tell me again, how does using a character's death to help me and everyone else find our own moral code, our own sense of justice and mercy, and to find our own compassion (I discovered the gay Jack and myself are one) invite the distraste of the gay community?

The fact is, the people involved in making this movie treated gay folks as completely equal, subjecting them to the very same rules that govern the art form of the tragedy for everyone.  A gay couple has never, ever in the history of mainstream cinema been treated with such unprejudiced and loving eyes.  Never has the level of respect for their manhood or their humanity been so high.  A gay character's death has never been felt as deeply  either.  I know gay folks everywhere want a feel good movie about two gay lovers.  I agree that their hopes are not realized in this movie.  However, that doesn't mean this movie is anything other than beautiful in its truth.  In no way was the gay character's death governed by any rule other than those arising from the discipline of art.  You may have wanted a feel-good love story with little emotional investment to muck up your hearts, but what you got is a film for the ages and a work of art that will inevitably create a seismic shift in perception.  I think Jack's death may be worth it.

I say none of this out of anger or upset.  I just love and respect this movie so much for what it has tried to do that it's frustrating when people don't see it the same way I do.  Brokeback is nothing but good.  I feel protective of it.  It is one of the few works of art in my lifetime that has spoken to me.  I want to share that with all you gay folks because your beating hearts make this film live for us all.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Boris on June 20, 2006, 07:22:21 AM
I have to say that I'm with quijote on this one. Brokeback Mountain is one of the most daring attempts to break the stereotypical image of gays, gay life (or death) and a man's love and passion toward another man. The death was in the original story so of coure it is in the movie. The movie that plays out as classical tragedy. The sadness of the story speaks to sadness in us, but in my mind the sadness it brought up in me wasn't about hopelessness, on the contrary. This movie sets a challenge of hope, it doesn't destroy it. To call BBM a movie about how the faggot dies is grave injustice to the folks who did it and to the movie itself. No faaggot died in the movie because there were no faggots in the movie.

Are you suggesting that the movie shouldn't have been made at all?



Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 20, 2006, 10:31:18 AM
I guess if what I have already said doesn't persuade you to my point of view, nothing more will do.  I just know that without the death of the main character the deepest depths of our compassion could not have been reached.  A love affair gone wrong does not come close to touching our capacity for mercy or sense of justice as does a devastating, unnatural and unjust death.  Your typical love story could never have had the same effect on your lives.  A different movie could not have awakened the slumbering hero in each of you.  You may have wanted a pretty picture; the folks who made this movie were aiming for something a little more life-transforming.

I understand your point, I was trying to show there is more, much more.  If this movie was made for the straights and religious, then this is exactly what it takes to reach them, this I agree.  However, if it was made for the gay community it is like using a cannon to splat a fly, they already have the capacity for mercy and a sense of justice. IMHO.

Quote
I repeat, the homosexual character does not die because of a conventional moral code imposed on the movie business.  He does not die because it was convenient for morally deficient movie producers and writers.  He doesn't die because of a perverse desire of the majority to hurt gay folks.  He doesn't die because we are to see the two lovers' relationship as wrong, impossible or immoral.  He didn't die to make straight people feel comfortable.  It is just the opposite. 

You are comparing apples to oranges.  You are seeing the people outside of the movie, not the people represented in the movie.  The people who produced this, the actors, etc are heroes in my book, though I question their goal, their point.  I have to assume their point was to manipulate straights and religious, which it was very successful.  Definitely, the whole point of the movie was that conventional moral code, the desire of the majority to hurt gay folks they do not understand, nor want to understand, that the majority see the two lover's relationship as wrong, and immoral, if they were to know, therefore our guys hide, they try to satisfy those standards with marriage and children, and of course, the extreme pain that causes.  However, Jake, Heath, Ang and all involved, I have no doubt their intention was caring and loving and it shows in the film.   

Quote
We are made to feel personally devasted by Jack's death, both gay and straight, male and female, because we are made to love him, we are made to believe in his love, and his homosexual relationship is shown to be so right and beautiful.  We are made to feel how profoundly wrong the death is.  This is the difference between the typical movie death of the typical gay character and the death in this movie.  Tell me again, how does using a character's death to help me and everyone else find our own moral code, our own sense of justice and mercy, and to find our own compassion (I discovered the gay Jack and myself are one) invite the distraste of the gay community?


Sure, no problem. First a point, not the point, why do we NEED to be made to feel devastated by death to know that his homosexual relationship is right and beautiful?  Know that his death is profoundly wrong, especially by beating to death by tire iron?  I know my moral code, sense of justice and mercy, my compassion this only reinforces them, not define them to me. 

The point, think from the point of view of the religious right, that homosexuality is immoral, evil, sick, homosexuals are sexual deviants, predators, child molesters, pathetic creatures. Now look at this movie, Jack is evil because he pulls reluctant Ennis into this sick life of perversion, Jack therefore deserves godly punishment by tire iron in the end, and Ennis deserves his crushing punishment of eternal sadness and loneliness because he did not fight harder against it.  It also proves that homosexual love, no matter how intense, how beautiful, always ends in despair, disaster.  You are only seeing this movie from a loving, caring person, that is commendable, but sadly, that is not the only type of person in the world.

Quote
The fact is, the people involved in making this movie treated gay folks as completely equal, subjecting them to the very same rules that govern the art form of the tragedy for everyone.  A gay couple has never, ever in the history of mainstream cinema been treated with such unprejudiced and loving eyes.  Never has the level of respect for their manhood or their humanity been so high.  A gay character's death has never been felt as deeply  either. 

I agree.  I just wonder why they thought the gay community needed another tragedy. 

Quote
  I know gay folks everywhere want a feel good movie about two gay lovers.  I agree that their hopes are not realized in this movie.  However, that doesn't mean this movie is anything other than beautiful in its truth.  In no way was the gay character's death governed by any rule other than those arising from the discipline of art.  You may have wanted a feel-good love story with little emotional investment to muck up your hearts, but what you got is a film for the ages and a work of art that will inevitably create a seismic shift in perception.  I think Jack's death may be worth it.

Some may, I only wanted some sign of hope of gay love being triumphant in the end.  To leave Ennis in eternal sadness and loneliness is so very harsh.  In the original short story, he began to dream of Jack, waking up happy or sad, with the pillow wet from tears, so very sad.

Quote
I say none of this out of anger or upset.  I just love and respect this movie so much for what it has tried to do that it's frustrating when people don't see it the same way I do.  Brokeback is nothing but good.  I feel protective of it.  It is one of the few works of art in my lifetime that has spoken to me.  I want to share that with all you gay folks because your beating hearts make this film live for us all.

I say none of what I say out of anger either, maybe a little frustration.  I absolutely love this movie and respect this movie, I just do not like the ending, that is a personal problem I understand this.  It is most likely because it hits so terribly close to home.  If I was in a long term relationship at this time, it would not be nearly as powerful on me as it is.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 20, 2006, 10:53:48 AM
I have to say that I'm with quijote on this one. Brokeback Mountain is one of the most daring attempts to break the stereotypical image of gays, gay life (or death) and a man's love and passion toward another man. The death was in the original story so of coure it is in the movie. The movie that plays out as classical tragedy. The sadness of the story speaks to sadness in us, but in my mind the sadness it brought up in me wasn't about hopelessness, on the contrary. This movie sets a challenge of hope, it doesn't destroy it. To call BBM a movie about how the faggot dies is grave injustice to the folks who did it and to the movie itself. No faaggot died in the movie because there were no faggots in the movie.

Yes, if you are looking from the perspective of a loving, conscious being, but look from the point of view of those who believe any gay tendency is a faggot.  Look from the point of view that this movie was a movie to "humanize homosexuals" as Bill ORielly stated.  Look from the perspective that god hates fags, does this movie then proclaim that gay love is valid, is a just love, and is not condemned by god?  No, it supports their perspective that no matter how "great" it is, in the end it will always end in disaster, even if it takes some of the righteous to weld a tire iron.

Quote
Are you suggesting that the movie shouldn't have been made at all?

Not at all, I think it needs about 5 minutes more to end it with an ending that is a little more hopeful is all, even a miracle would be great, something that would proclaim that gay love can endure, deserves to endure in spite of the odds. 





Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Desecra on June 20, 2006, 11:01:48 AM

I understand your point, I was trying to show there is more, much more.  If this movie was made for the straights and religious, then this is exactly what it takes to reach them, this I agree.  However, if it was made for the gay community it is like using a cannon to splat a fly, they already have the capacity for mercy and a sense of justice. IMHO.


I just want to point out that some straight people and religious people have the capacity for mercy and a sense of justice :).
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 20, 2006, 11:07:16 AM
Quijote and Boris, I agree with you guys.  BBM is a beautiful film, beautifully made.  I have no argument with that.   Annie Proulx kills off a lot of characters in her collection of short stories, and frequently in absurd, senseless or meaningless ways.   That’s one way she creates the sense of a harsh uncaring environment.  I truly enjoy her writing.  The movie is much more than her story.

You know all those tragedies in the 50’s were made with the best of intentions as well.  They’re all classic, enduring films meant to illustrate the inhumanity of prejudice and ignorance.  The Death is an assertion of a character’s common humanity.  If you cut me, do I not bleed?  I guess I’m frustrated with the fact that it’s 50-60 years on and we’re still having to make movies with the same basic assertions.  Gee, homosexuals are human too.

The alternatives are endless.  I’m not asking for soppy “feel good” anything. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on June 20, 2006, 11:09:10 AM

I understand your point, I was trying to show there is more, much more.  If this movie was made for the straights and religious, then this is exactly what it takes to reach them, this I agree.  However, if it was made for the gay community it is like using a cannon to splat a fly, they already have the capacity for mercy and a sense of justice. IMHO.


I just want to point out that some straight people and religious people have the capacity for mercy and a sense of justice :).

Yea no kidding, I am straight and religious!   ;D  We are having the same conversation over in a thread about re-writng the movie.

  davecullen.com forums
  YOUR SPACE
  Start Your Own Threads (Moderators: killersmom, Nick_F)
  Brokeback Movie Remake - your version of the story.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 20, 2006, 11:34:39 AM
Quote
I just want to point out that some straight people and religious people have the capacity for mercy and a sense of justice :).

Of course, the ones I was thinking of would not be caught dead on this sight. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: sactopete on June 20, 2006, 12:30:11 PM
 ;D  We are having the same conversation over in a thread about re-writng the movie.

Thanks Lola, I'll check out that thread.  Personally, I'm not looking to remake the film.  It is what it is, and I enjoy a good tragedy at times, and BBM certainly is that.  I just wish that by now the "big gay film" was something else.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 23, 2006, 03:06:30 PM
Just wanted to say that this has been a wonderful conversation.  It's always great to listen to what others have to say and why they say it, especially when how they say it is so thoughtful and respectful.

My final thought on this is that while you, Doug, aren't happy with the idea that this movie might have been intended for us straights because your community already gets that gay love is good love, I would like to suggest that this movie was not just for us straights or the religious.  This movie was for human beings.  Its message was taken in by each of us depending on where we are and depending on the condition of our souls.

Consider that maybe the compassion and justice I was talking about was a personal experience that was needed by you non-straight humans, too.  I believe you need as much as we do to find that kind place in your own hearts for yourselves.  This movie was intended to help you, as well as me, find a little mercy and love -- for ourselves.  Tragedy ignores division and heads straight to the ties that bind us all; that's why we all were able to find a little tenderness for our cowardly, weak, guilt-ridden, puny little selves.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 24, 2006, 12:11:10 AM
Just wanted to say that this has been a wonderful conversation.  It's always great to listen to what others have to say and why they say it, especially when how they say it is so thoughtful and respectful.

Thank You, I do try hard...  As time passes I am becoming more at ease with this movie.  I spent the day reading the captions thread, I must say it was wonderful!  I REALLY needed a good laugh or two.   I truly think this world is way too devoid of laughter, of good clean fun, and good feelings.  That is one of the major things I miss from times before, I used to laugh a lot, and often, now it has been years since I laughed as hard as I did today.

Quote
My final thought on this is that while you, Doug, aren't happy with the idea that this movie might have been intended for us straights because your community already gets that gay love is good love, I would like to suggest that this movie was not just for us straights or the religious.  This movie was for human beings. 


It was? Perhaps...  I am open to that possibility...  All I know is this movie had a profound impact on me, I am not sure if it is good or bad, yet.  Jack and Ennis are on my mind nearly 24-7, they are the last thought of the day, and the first the next morning. When they are not there, my old past comes to haunt me like a movie playing, I find myself reliving this or that event things I have not thought of for years. I am not sure why this is happening, it is annoying to say the least.   I know that I want to find others to talk to, before I was happy doing my thing.  I had my plans figured out and was on my path.  This movie has been disastrous to the work I was doing before the movie, I can not concentrate long enough to even get started again.  Hopefully, that will pass soon.  At least that absolute rage, the severe crying, I had on day one and two is just about under control again.  It is slowly becoming just a movie, just a couple of actors and not a loss of two of my very best friends, or past loves, or possibilities lost, or guilt, or damnation by others, or whatever it was that was so triggered. 

Quote
Its message was taken in by each of us depending on where we are and depending on the condition of our souls.


Or was it a message taken in depending on our past experience, our personality, and outlook? For a soulless infidel, this hit awefully hard. 

Quote
Consider that maybe the compassion and justice I was talking about was a personal experience that was needed by you non-straight humans, too.  I believe you need as much as we do to find that kind place in your own hearts for yourselves.  This movie was intended to help you, as well as me, find a little mercy and love -- for ourselves.  Tragedy ignores division and heads straight to the ties that bind us all; that's why we all were able to find a little tenderness for our cowardly, weak, guilt-ridden, puny little selves.

Of course, us non-straight humans need compassion and justice, I just do not see being beat to death with a tire iron as compassion or justice, I do not see that leaving poor Ennis to suffer for the rest of his life to be either compassion or justice either.  Yes, this movie leaves one absolutely craving, crying, pleading for compassion, justice, mercy and love, which is not the same. Actually finding it is the hard part.

If what I read about what Annie wanted, then the movie personal, they intended to hurt us so bad we had to reach out of our self imposed prisons to get some relief, shock treatment... it works, because I am here, but at what price I have to wonder? And what happens to these people when they figure out that it is just as sad as they had remembered?

Yes, it was done out of love, and good intent, and it very well may prove to be the very thing I need, I just do not know yet. I am very much in a absolute love/hate relationship with this movie, which makes it more like a drug, the more I get the more I want. I actually love Jack and Ennis, and I want so much to protect them from the pain, the funny thing is, is that no matter what I think of for them to say, what endings I create for them, what love I see them having, the movie always ends the same.  Such extreme hopelessness, and sadness.  I would not blame Ennis if he killed himself at some point, for what does he have to live, especially if he believes Jack is waiting for him someplace?   
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on June 24, 2006, 07:53:52 PM
Doug, you and I live on different planets.  That's ok.

That being said, the same laws of physics rule us both.  Have you seen the May/June issue of Skeptical Inquirer?  I read an article entitled, "Is Physics Turning into Philosophy?" and I couldn't help but think of you.  The article's author discusses the repercussions of the fact that "heavyweight physicists" claim "to have proven the existence of parallel universes 'even though there is no chance of observing them.'"

Here are some tasty morsels:

"currently fashionable ideas in physics and cosmology, such as multi-verses or string theories, are characteristic of a discipline where 'faith in theory tends to trump evidence.' Take string theory, for example:   it is a mathematically beautiful construct that has the potential of unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics.  The problem is that -- at the moment -- it also is entirely untestable empirically, which makes it an interesting philosophical position but not science." 

Also:

"...it may very well be the case that we will never find a way to test the idea that there are multiple universes out there.  Just because we are curious animals, there is no guarantee that nature behaves in a way that allows us the possibility to get answers to any mystery we are intrigued by."

Finally:

"Strings and multiple universes are certainly logical possibilities, since they are features of mathematical theories (assuming that math doesn't contain mistakes).  What we don't know is whether they are also empirically possible and, if so, whether they have in fact been realized.  It is the search for an answer to the latter two questions that distinguishes science from logic/mathematics (and philosophy).  Yet, neither string theory nor the possibility of multiverses have yet crossed the conceptual line separating logical from empirical possiblity.  if we pretend that such a line is irrelevant to scientific practice, we risk turning physics into an exercise in faith...."


How do these representative samples of the article speak to you, soulless infidel?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 25, 2006, 11:34:19 AM
Doug, you and I live on different planets.  That's ok.

In understanding yes.  However, I seem to have to endure living on the same planet when it comes to others making laws, rules and social pressures to ensure their belief systems...  That being said, I am now coming to the conclusion that perhaps I put way too much stock into what other people think, or the actual dangers therein.  If I suddenly disappear, figure I got tire ironed... 

Quote
That being said, the same laws of physics rule us both. 
 

They do?  The laws of physics says that objective reality is absolute,  yet I see so many that deny that and create their own little versions. The laws of physics says that contradiction is not possible since it requires something to exist and not exist at the same time, yet the vast majoirity insist that contradiction is nomal and even necessary.  The laws of physics says that the mental map of reality in our head is not the same as the actual objective reality, yet the vast majority do not have a clue of that difference.  The laws of physics says that because someone believes something that it is real, does not make it real.  The laws of physics says that the universe is mass and energy and all things flow from cause and effect from that, yet many insist that the effect come first, or that something has no cause, or god is the cause.  Yes, the same laws applies to us, it is just that most deny those laws and create an illusion to justify their contradictions, and beliefs.

Quote
Have you seen the May/June issue of Skeptical Inquirer?  I read an article entitled, "Is Physics Turning into Philosophy?" and I couldn't help but think of you.  The article's author discusses the repercussions of the fact that "heavyweight physicists" claim "to have proven the existence of parallel universes 'even though there is no chance of observing them.'"

No I have not seen the Skeptical Inquirer for some time, do not have time to read much these days.  But I must ask, how does one "have proven" something without the prerequisite scientific observation?   Yes, physics at it outer fringes is always going to be nearly philosophy, where the data and theory ends and the speculation begins.

Quote
Here are some tasty morsels:

"currently fashionable ideas in physics and cosmology, such as multi-verses or string theories, are characteristic of a discipline where 'faith in theory tends to trump evidence.' Take string theory, for example:   it is a mathematically beautiful construct that has the potential of unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics.  The problem is that -- at the moment -- it also is entirely untestable empirically, which makes it an interesting philosophical position but not science." 

This is an absolutely true statement.  String "theory" is not theory at all, not science either, but a unprovable hypothesis of how to combine the theory of large objects and the theory of extremely small things.  Where these two theories meet conflict, therefore the efforts of a mathematical construct.  Just because the numbers are needed to make it work does not mean that is how it actually works.  Someday, a simple elegant thought will combine these two theories and string theory will be history, IMHO.

Quote
Also:

"...it may very well be the case that we will never find a way to test the idea that there are multiple universes out there.  Just because we are curious animals, there is no guarantee that nature behaves in a way that allows us the possibility to get answers to any mystery we are intrigued by."

Yep.  At this point there are limits to what we know, what we can do, and what we can test for.  However, that does not mean that the things we do know, can do, and test for is not valid.  The laws of physics and chemistry at the everyday level are rock solid.  It always amazes me that just because the nitty gritty is not understood, that somehow that invalidates the everyday.  That is like saying that because one does not understand the nitty gritty of fuel injection that driving the car to get the kids is invalid. 

Of course, using the same analogy, the religious would say that god makes the car go, they always substitute god for anything unknown, and that does not invalidate driving it to get the kids, which is true if they would stop there, but no, they always have to make others sacrifice to appease their god, fearing that someone, somewhere, doing something, will make their car not run.

Quote
Finally:

"Strings and multiple universes are certainly logical possibilities, since they are features of mathematical theories (assuming that math doesn't contain mistakes).  What we don't know is whether they are also empirically possible and, if so, whether they have in fact been realized.  It is the search for an answer to the latter two questions that distinguishes science from logic/mathematics (and philosophy). 

Exactly, note they are not saying it is factual, just a mathematical indicated possiblility. There is nothing wrong in searching for answers, that is how knowledge grows.

Quote
Yet, neither string theory nor the possibility of multiverses have yet crossed the conceptual line separating logical from empirical possiblity.  if we pretend that such a line is irrelevant to scientific practice, we risk turning physics into an exercise in faith...."


Yep, exactly.  The difference is when that line is crossed it is no longer valid as fact, it is just speculation, faith/belief to accept as reality, which does not make it reality.  Then to create massive followings, official interpreters, and to make laws, rules and social pressures to force others to adhere is religion.


Quote
How do these representative samples of the article speak to you, soulless infidel?

They speak the truth, the reality, the how it is. You?

 Here is a couple of Bible verses I would like the same respect and answers, your interpretation,  I have given you above, please.

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household." (Matthew 10:34-37)

To me this is the definition of evil. 

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." (Psalms 137:9, KJV)

Any god that suggests such a thing to me is evil, and not worthy of worship.  What do you think? 

"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)

Since I do not hate my father, mother, brethen, sisters or my own life I do not feel I can be a disciple or follower.  You?

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)

Does not this passage answer the question of why natural evil exists?  If a god creates a flood that kills all in it's wake, just and unjust alike, is he someone worthy of worship? 

"Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles; Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong." (Joel 3:9-10)

I know about the peace loving passages that are always quoted giving the impression that there is no other side of god/jesus, how come we never hear of these?  Does this not justify making weapons, making war? Speaking of war...

"The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name." (Exodus 15:3)

How does one expect peace on earth when the god worshipped is a war god?  Would not a follower president then strive to be a war president?

From your words I do not think you believe these passages are true, yet how do you dismiss these and accept others? Which are truth and which are not, why?  When one takes on the name "Christian" does he/she not implicitly accept these passages as well as the rest? 

Believe it or not, I do enjoy being challenged on my thoughts, it makes me be honest and to know what I am thinking.  Thanks for being gentle and kind about it.

Take Care.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 28, 2006, 06:52:17 PM
Here is something like what I thought BBM would have been.
Everything the same up to the kitchen scene with Ennis and Alma.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_384)
Alma: Ennis, do you know a Jack?
Ennis: Why?
Alma: A post card came for you today, looks interesting.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_387.jpg)
Alma: Did you cowboy with him or something?
Ennis: Him and me herded sheep one summer, and did a little fishing. He is a good fishing buddy.

Card Reads: "Friend this letter is long over due. I rented the old Nelson Ranch,
and I am in desperate need of a good ranch hand. Drop me line if you would be interested.  Jack"

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_389.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_393.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_412.jpg)
"Good to have you aboard.  I will be driving in from Lightening Flats on the 24th,
will meet you at the ranch to discuss terms. I may be late, please make yourself at home
if you get there before me. Jack"

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_400.jpg)
Ennis arrives early just to make sure he does not miss Jack.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_397.jpg)
He waits impatiently, having a cigarette and a beer he found in the fridge.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_651.jpg)
Bored, and looking around, Ennis finds Jack's Bloody shirt and his hidden inside.
Ennis suddenly realizes that Jack cares even more than he had thought.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_671.jpg)
As a symbolic gift to Jack, Ennis puts his shirt over Jacks, and returns it to where he found it.
Ennis (thinking): When Jack finds this, he will know that I know, and what I think about it.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_407.jpg)
Ennis hears and then sees Jack pulling up to the bunk house.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_683.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_684.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_685.jpg)
Jack Fucking Twist!

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_686.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_687.jpg)
Jack: Son of a bitch.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_688.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_689.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_690.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_692.jpg)
Ennis (whispering): Let's go upstairs.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_691.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_693.jpg)
Jack:  I have been thinking about you.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_446.jpg)
Ennis begins work on the little cow/calf operation, which he enjoys very much.
The pay is good, and the hours are excellent.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_362.jpg)
Ennis: Alma, the boss needs me at the ranch, we have heifers that have begun to calf.
Please take the girls.
Alma: But you was going to watch the kids, I have 3 hours before my shift is over.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_368.jpg)
Ennis: I have to be there when the cows calf, that is my job.
Alma: What about my job?
Ok, I will see if my sister can watch them.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_694.jpg)
Ennis: Ok, see you in a couple of days.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_695.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_696.jpg)
Alma: I am so sorry, Monroe, I will make it up to you.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_697.jpg)
Ennis: Jack, this is my wife Alma. Alma this is my new boss, Jack.
Alma: Nice to meet you.
Jack: Same here.  You got kids? 
Ennis: Yeah, two girls, Alma Jr and Jenny.
Jack: I have one, a boy, smiles a lot, married the cutest little gal in Childress.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_441.jpg)
Ennis takes care of the herd, the quiet outdoors reminds him of the times in the mountains.
Of course, Jack is around as well.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_508.jpg)
Alma tearfully tells Ennis that her and Monroe have taken up, and she is now pregnant.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_449.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_448.jpg)
Judge: Del Mar divorce granted this 6th day of November, 1975.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_699.jpg)
Ennis (thinking): The cows sure look good this year.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_563.jpg)
Jack: I sure am glad that 5 day cattle roundup is done, what a long few days.
Ennis: I will take the horses back to the ranch, and will meet you there.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_700.jpg)
Ennis: Jack, before you go, I have something I need to talk about.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_577.jpg)
Alma is taking the girls away.  They are moving to North Carolina.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_583.jpg)
I may never get to see them again.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_593.jpg)
I can not loose them, how can I live without them?  Jack...

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_595.jpg)
Jack: It will be alright, it will be alright.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_514.jpg)
Ennis: Jack, this was a good idea to get out here again for a time.
Jack: With all you are going through,
I thought it might be a way to get your mind off of it.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_516.jpg)
I am not sure what I would do if Lureen tried to take Bobby away.
I sure feel for you. 

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_556.jpg)
Jack (teasing): So, you have not found anyone in all this time to marry?

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_558.jpg)
Naw, but you would not believe this little gal in the bar the other night,
I had to put the blocks on that one.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_559.jpg)
Jack: Yeah, know what you mean, I was accused of sneaking off with the foremans wife a couple of times.
Thought for sure I was going to get shot or something either by her husband or Lureen.
Ennis (evil grin glowing): You probably deserved it. 

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_561.jpg)

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_660.jpg)
A couple years later Alma Jr shows up, all growed up.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_664.jpg)
Alma Jr: I am getting married.  I was hoping you could come.
Ennis: Well, I think I have to be down at the roundup about that time.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_701.jpg)
Ennis: Well, guess we'll just have to get another cowboy.
My little girl getting married, now that is not something that happens every day.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_666.jpg)
Alma Jr: Thanks, Daddy. 


(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_565.jpg)
Ennis: Jack, I am getting tired of driving in every day, and driving back to my trailer every night.
What do you think about me moving to the ranch?
Jack (teasing): Well, I do not know...
(suddenly serious) What about your tire iron story? Have you changed your mind?
Ennis: I have thought and thought about that, and I have come to the conclusion
there are things worse than death, like living on without you.

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_601.jpg)
Jack remembers the first time he wanted Ennis to move in with him...

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_227.jpg)
Ennis: Alma Jr is getting married November 7th. 
Jack (teasing): You know what that means don't you?
Ennis: What Jack?
Jack: Well, soon you will be a wrinkled old ass grandpa...
Ennis: If I am a grandpa, what does that make you?
Jack: A wrinkled old grandma? haha
Ennis: Jack, that is real smart.  Next I know you will
have your hair in a bun, wearing high heels and a pink
flowered dress.  Jack fucking twist, really thinking there...
Jack, I swear...










Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on June 30, 2006, 01:23:18 AM
Doug2017, the whole sequence above--screencaps, dialog--just fucking BRILLIANT! Thanks for that warm glow in my heart! (I wish it could really be that way. Sigh...)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on June 30, 2006, 04:45:19 AM
Hey Doug2017,

interesting thread you started here.

Noticed your action over at the Photo Captioning and thought "here's a guy whose thoughts I like!" so I had to ferret you out a bit. Not much surprise you'd be hosting a thread like this.

I've been an absolute atheist since I was about 8 and there's been nothing since that has changed my mind. If anything, life has only strengthened my belief on that.

Anyway, read through the whole thread, and made lots of quotes. I won't post them all, with my own thoughts, in one go. Wouldn't want to "inflict" that on anyone. Suffice to say, I'll be around.

Vic

Btw. The above story would mirror my own idea about a happy ending, with some differences, of course. Well done!

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on June 30, 2006, 05:30:46 AM
Quote
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household


Hi Doug! I love your thread. In regards to the above quote. Does it make more sense to you if you think Of Jesus as a revolutionary who wanted to overthrow Roman authority? That would have really been at odds with the Jewish authority at the time. So maybe he's talking about breaking away from the status quo which would put one at odds with their community and family. I know when I read that quote now the first thing  I think about is our war on terrorism and how that quote above is something I can picture a radical Islamist saying.
It's that take no prisoners in the war against the infidel because God is on our side attitude. Pretty scary.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 09:11:30 AM
Doug2017, the whole sequence above--screencaps, dialog--just fucking BRILLIANT! Thanks for that warm glow in my heart! (I wish it could really be that way. Sigh...)

Hi Jer009,

Welcome!

I do not know how brilliant it is, but I needed to come up with another way, I needed to see if the fear of Ennis could not have been more subdued by the loving Jack, and yet, Jack gets more of what he needs from Ennis.

Then there is the kissing scene and Alma, no Ennis I have ever met would make that mistake, no matter how hot he was to see his Jack, so while it was dramatic, it is not something that likely to happen in the real world, so I wanted to change that in my version of the story.  Also, Ennis taking up with Cassie seems really far fetched to me, from the original book, it seemed obvious to me that they where teasing each other, so changed it to a teasing scene. I also see Ennis as an extremely loving and giving father, so it seemed natural that as many divorces go with gay fathers, the mother takes the kids away, even if that is not by malice, but with moving on to a new place in the world.

I found it strange that Jack did not see that Ennis will/had to work for anyone so desperate he was for income, the only thing he knew will was cowboying, the very same area that Jack wanted to be in, they both dreamed of a ranch, just not together in Ennis's mind.  It just seemed natural to me that Jack would find a small ranch, rent it, so there was no big outlay of commitment in case Ennis totally refused to work for him. I know ranches get rented out all the time, hell I rent mine out.

When I get a little down now, I can come back here and read that story again and feel better about what Jack and Ennis have together.

Yeah, I wished the story could have been different, but as it is, it has a terrible need for justice, a need for love to win, therefore getting us to create this forum for us to interact, that is worth the pain, I guess.  Some even have found love here, that is fantastic!

I am just now starting to get that, probably because I created my own version so I could see the more positive of the original.

Or I am just nuts... LOL!! 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 09:40:17 AM
Hey Doug2017,

interesting thread you started here.

Thank You! and Welcome!

Quote
Noticed your action over at the Photo Captioning and thought "here's a guy whose thoughts I like!" so I had to ferret you out a bit. Not much surprise you'd be hosting a thread like this.

I have enjoyed your captions as well.  Not much surprise huh? What gave me away? LOL! 

Quote
I've been an absolute atheist since I was about 8 and there's been nothing since that has changed my mind. If anything, life has only strengthened my belief on that.

Please tell me more!  What happened at about 8 that got you out of the illusion that ensnares so many, or did it just not make sense to you?     

Quote
Anyway, read through the whole thread, and made lots of quotes. I won't post them all, with my own thoughts, in one go. Wouldn't want to "inflict" that on anyone. Suffice to say, I'll be around.

Oh, oh, I am in trouble now. LOL!  Please remember that this movie really hit me, so my thoughts were all over the place for a time.

I REALLY look forward to talking to you.  Seems there is far too little representation of atheists in the world.  Gay ones... forget it... Which is really odd to me, seeing how embracing that which wishes to destroy you seems more like suicide to me.

Quote
Vic

Btw. The above story would mirror my own idea about a happy ending, with some differences, of course. Well done!

Thank you.  If you get some time I would like to hear about the differences, and your thoughts about them.  I questioned in mine where Ennis decides to move to the ranch, but the photos were just so good. 

I knew a few couples of guys that maintained two complete households, one would come "visit" the other once or twice a week. At gay get togethers they identified as a couple.  They said it was easier to keep their love on track, because they each then had their own space, their own stuff, and it kept questions down to a minimum.  I can see Ennis living in his own trailer, and Jack at the ranch, and each coming and staying with the other when they needed some share time, with the excuse, should someone ask, "he is my boss, we needed to go over a few things and it got late", etc.  I can see them still camping together in their beloved Brokeback Mountains as well.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 10:11:55 AM
Quote
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household


Hi Doug! I love your thread.

Hi Jason, Welcome!  Thank You, I appreciate the kind words.

Quote
In regards to the above quote. Does it make more sense to you if you think Of Jesus as a revolutionary who wanted to overthrow Roman authority? That would have really been at odds with the Jewish authority at the time. So maybe he's talking about breaking away from the status quo which would put one at odds with their community and family.

Jason, you are the first! The first to actually take time to think, and write it out in a well thought out answer.

Yes, that very well might be what this passage means.  Yet, that is not what is meant when the main stream talk about Jesus.  They show him as an ever loving, ever giving, ever knowing and ever powerful god. One that needs to be loved, yet feared.  Yet, that flies in the face of this passage.  Where here, if you are right, he is a revolutionary telling the people this could get a little messy, please hold on to your hat.  A great man to be sure, if he existed, but not a god.  IMHO.   

Quote
I know when I read that quote now the first thing  I think about is our war on terrorism and how that quote above is something I can picture a radical Islamist saying.  It's that take no prisoners in the war against the infidel because God is on our side attitude. Pretty scary.

Exactly! Man, you stated that with the precision of a surgeon.  I can not see one wit of difference between the radical Islamist and the radical Christian, they are both pure evil.  They both have no problem sacrificing innocent human lives to ensure their strangle hold on the masses.  Damn scary if you ask me. 

Even more scary to me, I saw a television documentary the other day where they were talking to radical Christians.  These people are actively working towards Armageddon, they WANT the end time wars thinking that God is coming for them soon after.  They WANT the blood bath between them and all others they dislike.  I really see that as an underlying thread through out the wars on terriorism, on drugs, and the general war on rational thought.  When we accepted the "first strike" premise, coupled with "righteousness", it is all on that trail to that ending.  We had better wake up soon, or it will be too late.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: mountain boy on June 30, 2006, 11:27:18 AM
(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/PDVD_666.jpg)

Alma Jr: Thanks, Daddy.  Uncle Jack already promised he'd be there too!!

Thanks Doug!!     :) :'( :)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on June 30, 2006, 12:16:07 PM
Quote
Exactly! Man, you stated that with the precision of a surgeon.  I can not see one wit of difference between the radical Islamist and the radical Christian, they are both pure evil.  They both have no problem sacrificing innocent human lives to ensure their strangle hold on the masses.  Damn scary if you ask me. 

Even more scary to me, I saw a television documentary the other day where they were talking to radical Christians.  These people are actively working towards Armageddon, they WANT the end time wars thinking that God is coming for them soon after.  They WANT the blood bath between them and all others they dislike.  I really see that as an underlying thread through out the wars on terriorism, on drugs, and the general war on rational thought.  When we accepted the "first strike" premise, coupled with "righteousness", it is all on that trail to that ending.  We had better wake up soon, or it will be too late.



And here is another parallel. Most people think of Judas Iscariot as a demon who betrayed Christ. But if you look at Jesus and his disciples as revolutionaries bent on overthrowing Rome in the name of God, he doesn't come off so bad. Jesus tells him to go to what he must do. So, it's my opinion that the whole thing was planned by Jesus & Judas in hopes that the arrest of the popular rabbi would rouse the oppressed against the oppressor. Maybe Jesus never really planned to die or thought the Romans would not carry out his execution for fear of what the Jewish population would do. But they underestimated Pontius Pilate one of the most brutal executioners Rome had at the time. Perhaps that explains the quote"My god why have you forsaken me."?
  Anyway, Bin laden released a video today praising Al zarqwai, even though it is my understanding, they never really liked each other. But only the cause is important to zealots and Laden is praising him now to rally the faithful. Perhaps the disciples did the same with resurrection stories? To keep the cause going?  I'm just asking. It seems possible to me.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 12:20:18 PM

Alma Jr: Thanks, Daddy.  Uncle Jack already promised he'd be there too!!

Thanks Doug!!     :) :'( :)

Oh, Man!  You do not know how MUCH I wanted that to be true for our heroes!

((Hugs))

Thanks WJD!  You made my day!   
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: mountain boy on June 30, 2006, 12:21:09 PM
Hi Doug! I love your thread.
:)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 12:55:07 PM

And here is another parallel. Most people think of Judas Iscariot as a demon who betrayed Christ. But if you look at Jesus and his disciples as revolutionaries bent on overthrowing Rome in the name of God, he doesn't come off so bad. Jesus tells him to go to what he must do. So, it's my opinion that the whole thing was planned by Jesus & Judas in hopes that the arrest of the popular rabbi would rouse the oppressed against the oppressor. Maybe Jesus never really planned to die or thought the Romans would not carry out his execution for fear of what the Jewish population would do. But they underestimated Pontius Pilate one of the most brutal executioners Rome had at the time. Perhaps that explains the quote"My god why have you forsaken me."?

Have you seen the new documents that recently came up that showed Judas just this way?  That he was not the evil his is accused of, but a loyal follower who did what he was told?  Seems Jesus did not have the inside straight on that action. Would a all knowing, all powerful god, make this mistake? That is exactly why he cries out "My god why have you forsaken me?" He sees his mistake at the last moment, when it is too late. IMHO

Then the nagging question for me is why does an all powerful, all knowing god, all loving god, NEED to murder his own son to forgive sins?  Could he not do what us pathetic humans do, forgive in spite of the crime against us?  When someone does us wrong, even if they get no justice, it only harms ourselves to hold that hatred.  The best is to forgive, but not forget, and move on. 

Quote
Anyway, Bin laden released a video today praising Al zarqwai, even though it is my understanding, they never really liked each other. But only the cause is important to zealots and Laden is praising him now to rally the faithful. Perhaps the disciples did the same with resurrection stories? To keep the cause going?  I'm just asking. It seems possible to me.

Seems likely to me as well, especially if you take into account the most important part of the bible the resurrection, and you can not reconcile the stories. Would you not think that an all powerful god would have made sure at least that part was absolutely correct, being the bedrock of the faith? 

And what about the passage where god says he is both good and evil?  Could that not mean then the devil is the other side of his personality? Would that not explain why natural evil, when taken from the perspective of an all loving god, does not save the believers, and condemn the non-believers? Wild fires, floods, hurricanes destroy the lives of the faithful just as much as the unfaithful. Seems to me there should be a difference if an intervening, loving god was present.

What better tool to keep the cause going than having a martyred hero, who gives you kudos after you are dead?  Why worry about dying then? Why worry about who gets killed in the cause then? Why worry about killing those who are damned anyway then? They will be awarded later for their loyalty, if they deserve it.  I guess it all just looks like a perfect way to have war eternal.

Thanks again for a well thought out post, Jason
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on June 30, 2006, 01:36:19 PM
Quote
What better tool to keep the cause going than having a martyred hero, who gives you kudos after you are dead?  Why worry about dying then? Why worry about who gets killed in the cause then? Why worry about killing those who are damned anyway then? They will be awarded later for their loyalty, if they deserve it.  I guess it all just looks like a perfect way to have war eternal.


Exactly! And if I were God I sure would make sure that resurrection stories if  it happened would be written right away and not sixty to seventy years after the event!
                      The greatest fear we have is death and religion plays right into that fear. The great reward for believing is some sort of of eternal life. That's one of the most effective control mechanisms ever invented by man. But here is what  Idon't get. If you are a believer and think you are going to heaven, why give a damn about what others believe. it's just more room in heaven for you! I think religion is all about control.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 02:12:07 PM
Quote
What better tool to keep the cause going than having a martyred hero, who gives you kudos after you are dead?  Why worry about dying then? Why worry about who gets killed in the cause then? Why worry about killing those who are damned anyway then? They will be awarded later for their loyalty, if they deserve it.  I guess it all just looks like a perfect way to have war eternal.


Exactly! And if I were God I sure would make sure that resurrection stories if  it happened would be written right away and not sixty to seventy years after the event!
                      The greatest fear we have is death and religion plays right into that fear. The great reward for believing is some sort of of eternal life. That's one of the most effective control mechanisms ever invented by man. But here is what  Idon't get. If you are a believer and think you are going to heaven, why give a damn about what others believe. it's just more room in heaven for you! I think religion is all about control.

Ahh, but that is the genus of this!  The reason they worry about so many others is they are told to.  They are told if they love, then you must pull in others, save them, even if you must make them suicidal with misery. Ever read the book "But Lord they are gay"? That woman in her zest to save more or less murdered the young man who committed suicide over the stress she put on him, of course, killing himself he was sent to hell anyway. 

You can not cheat and get in early by killing yourself, you go to hell for that, you can not help someone else die, even if they are in dire need of release, no you must suffer as long as possible, and make sure others do as well, to be eligible for heaven.  Even the pope was quoted saying "suffering is good", when god lets a tornado destroy their home, kill family members, it is all good, because suffering is good. They are trained not to question the obvious, much less the well hidden. They are trained to never question why god is never responsible for evil, for natural disasters he could stop, if he did not create them in the first place.  Yet, their mantra is personal responsibility...

I saw a storm chaser show the other day, they showed the tornado, then went into the devastation to find an old woman tell them "god saved me, it was a miracle" and at the same time a young lady from next door comes up carrying her dead baby.  What gall it takes to think that a loving god would save her old wrinkled ass, thinking it was more worthy of saving and murder an innocent baby, by doing nothing.   Absolutely it is about control. IMHO  Anyway... I am rambling... sorry about that.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on June 30, 2006, 02:29:22 PM
Quote
You can not cheat and get in early by killing yourself, you go to hell for that, you can not help someone else die, even if they are in dire need of release, no you must suffer as long as possible, and make sure others do as well, to be eligible for heaven.


So here is the irony of the above view on suicide. let's for a moment believe that Jesus was the Son Of God with all the power to heel and see the future. Christians believe Jesus knew he was to be sacrificed for our sins so willingly met his death. Sounds like suicide to me! If  I willingly put myself in a position where the outcome is my certain death that's suicide. Ever hear of suicide by cop? where someone points a gun at policemen hoping to get shot? suicide by cross? I'm just saying.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 02:51:46 PM
Quote
You can not cheat and get in early by killing yourself, you go to hell for that, you can not help someone else die, even if they are in dire need of release, no you must suffer as long as possible, and make sure others do as well, to be eligible for heaven.


So here is the irony of the above view on suicide. let's for a moment believe that Jesus was the Son Of God with all the power to heel and see the future. Christians believe Jesus knew he was to be sacrificed for our sins so willingly met his death. Sounds like suicide to me! If  I willingly put myself in a position where the outcome is my certain death that's suicide. Ever hear of suicide by cop? where someone points a gun at policemen hoping to get shot? suicide by cross? I'm just saying.

Excellent point, that I have not thought of before!  But would it be suicide if you knew you was going to rise from the dead? No harm no fowl? What was the point of the exercise anyway? Is this a place where the power of tragedy was used before BBM?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on June 30, 2006, 03:31:01 PM
I have seriously difficulty in believing anyone to be a "son of god" or even his prophet, for that matter. I think Jezus, Mohammed and Buddha were some of the best humanity has yet brought forth, and in that respect I can believe, understand and even follow many of their teachings.

But I have even more difficulty in believing the corruption of their teachings as put forth by the organized religions of today, such as Christianity and Islam. In this respect only Buddha's life seems to have been recorded truthfully as the discrepancies in the telling differ very little from one scholar to the next. And it is also the only religion where it is accepted that anyone can become a buddha (boddhisatva) as he is the only one of the three to have remained fully human. Buddha himself may be called "divine" but that is in reference to his enlightenment, not his affiliation with anything godlike. And no, I'm not a buddhist.

Neither do I believe that suicide is a sin. If you don't have the right to take your own life, no one has. So if governments can impose death penalties, suicide and euthanasia should certainly be allowed. But then I don't believe in an afterlife either so I need not fear death other than the reluctance of leaving life.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 04:13:58 PM
I have seriously difficulty in believing anyone to be a "son of god" or even his prophet, for that matter. I think Jezus, Mohammed and Buddha were some of the best humanity has yet brought forth, and in that respect I can believe, understand and even follow many of their teachings.

I do think that is where so many people get taken, they take it that if there is truth, or reality, in part of it, then it all must be truth, not realizing the very best lies are mostly true.  It is much easier to get people to swallow the poison if it is mostly candy, yet even a little poison mixed with anything is still poison. 

Quote
But I have even more difficulty in believing the corruption of their teachings as put forth by the organized religions of today, such as Christianity and Islam. In this respect only Buddha's life seems to have been recorded truthfully as the discrepancies in the telling differ very little from one scholar to the next. And it is also the only religion where it is accepted that anyone can become a buddha (boddhisatva) as he is the only one of the three to have remained fully human. Buddha himself may be called "divine" but that is in reference to his enlightenment, not his affiliation with anything godlike. And no, I'm not a buddhist.

I fail here, sorry, I do not know much about Buddha.  However, to me the more they align with known reality, the closer to truth they are.

Quote
Neither do I believe that suicide is a sin. If you don't have the right to take your own life, no one has. So if governments can impose death penalties, suicide and euthanasia should certainly be allowed. But then I don't believe in an afterlife either so I need not fear death other than the reluctance of leaving life.

Well put! The way I have always looked at this is this way: If I own my body then I should have the right to use it as I see fit, even if that means me destroying it.  If I do not own my body, then I do not have true freedom, period.  I contend there should not be laws to protect the stupid from themselves, because those same laws prevent me from freedom and personal responsibility.  What may be stupid for one person, may not be so for another.

I do not fear death at all, it is just non-existence, and at some point it might be a real relief.  Until that time I want to live as long and healthy as possible.  Too bad religion has held us back for so long, I really think we would have figured out biological immortality by now if we was not fighting wars, and the illusion that one must die on cue to go to an afterlife.   
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on June 30, 2006, 04:42:29 PM
Quote
I do not fear death at all, it is just non-existence, and at some point it might be a real relief.

I like the idea of non-existence. What's the point of a limited life span on earth only to have some weird eternity where we all dress in white, have wings, sing hymns et al? I find the whole idea of heaven and hell too ridiculous to consider. Which is one of the reasons I gave up early on organized religion.

I was brought up Roman Catholic but, because of life experiences of both my parents, they had already lost their faith in the Catholic Church long before I came along. They never forced us though we did go to Catholic primary schools. I didn't like the nuns and brothers very much. Corporeal punishment is wasted on me! I'm incorrigible!

 ;D
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on June 30, 2006, 08:33:46 PM
Quote
I do not fear death at all, it is just non-existence, and at some point it might be a real relief.

I like the idea of non-existence. What's the point of a limited life span on earth only to have some weird eternity where we all dress in white, have wings, sing hymns et al? I find the whole idea of heaven and hell too ridiculous to consider. Which is one of the reasons I gave up early on organized religion.

Can you imagine eternity in heaven with Pat Robertson, Jerry Farwell, and Oral Roberts?  That would be hell.  Or in Hell with Hitler, Phil Pot, Ben Laden, and Saddam?  That would be hell as well.  Nope, non-existence is better me thinks.   

Quote
I was brought up Roman Catholic but, because of life experiences of both my parents, they had already lost their faith in the Catholic Church long before I came along. They never forced us though we did go to Catholic primary schools. I didn't like the nuns and brothers very much. Corporeal punishment is wasted on me! I'm incorrigible!

Hmmm... good to know.  Well, there goes my spanking fantasy.... damn...   Only kidding!

I was raised Methodist, but Mother was Roman Catholic at one time. Her parents was real upset when she left the church, oh the nasty things my Grandpa called my folks... My first insight how "loving" these people can be.   Sunday school was mandatory, but it was insane to me.  They kept telling me that there was this little door in my heart, that someone was knocking at it and I was to let him in.  WTF? Oh, and this is the murdered guy from 2,000 years ago...  And the Easter bunny lays colored chicken eggs... yeah, riiiigghttt...  What are you people sniffin' again? Santa Clause went up in flames soon after that too, you just can not trust those lying adults... <wink>
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 01, 2006, 07:04:10 AM
Quote
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (


 Hi Doug! Hope you are having a good Saturday! The above quote again convinces me that Jesus was more a revolutionary than anything else. I interpret this as meaning any Jew be it your mother father wife etc. who complies with the laws of our oppressors(Rome) is not worthy and  if you yourself are satisfied with such a life you are not worthy to be my disciple.  It's really fascinating when you think of what's happening in Iraq today. I mean can you not imagine the insurgency in Iraq thinking and saying a similar thing?  And like Jesus, their fuel against us is religion.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 01, 2006, 09:22:12 AM
Quote
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (


 Hi Doug! Hope you are having a good Saturday!

It is a very nice Saturday so far.  Got the garden hoed again, and everything is looking pretty good.  Can not wait until the cucumbers begin to produce.

Quote
The above quote again convinces me that Jesus was more a revolutionary than anything else. I interpret this as meaning any Jew be it your mother father wife etc. who complies with the laws of our oppressors(Rome) is not worthy and  if you yourself are satisfied with such a life you are not worthy to be my disciple. 

Now that is a very interesting interpretation, but it seems to have much more to it than what is in the passage.  I do not see anything about Roman rule, but whats more that convinces me that this is not the case, that is "and his own life also".  If someone was wanting to be a disciple, then he would have to want to be against the Roman rule in the first place, separating him from the rest of the family.  Reading more in context, this is Jesus having a tantrum, more like a spoiled child, which, in my book makes him unworthy of worship.

Of course, I would have to be convinced there was a Jesus in the first place.  Then there is the problem of an all powerful, all knowing god, not being able to state anything in a clear, concise manner, it all has to be interpreted, which opens the doors for corruption.

Quote
It's really fascinating when you think of what's happening in Iraq today. I mean can you not imagine the insurgency in Iraq thinking and saying a similar thing?  And like Jesus, their fuel against us is religion.

Absolutely, this war has its roots, on both sides, in religion, just like the majority of wars.  They have no problem sacrificing the innocent to meet their ends, just like many here do not have any problems sacrificing the innocent to meet their ends.  Both claim religious righteousness.  Allah is on their side, God is on ours, and the people caught in the middle bleed and die just the same... is it not strange that when a bomb blows up, it does not matter if you are from Kansas or Iraq, which god you trust, it tears and burns your flesh leaving you just as dead? Of what good are these gods if they are not going do anything? What is the difference in outcome if both gods exist or no gods exist?  None that I can see... IMHO Sorry for the rant...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 01, 2006, 09:40:24 AM
I do think that is where so many people get taken, they take it that if there is truth, or reality, in part of it, then it all must be truth, not realizing the very best lies are mostly true.  It is much easier to get people to swallow the poison if it is mostly candy, yet even a little poison mixed with anything is still poison.

Absolutely. But then organized religion, like their bedfellows governments, are well aware that most people prefer to leave the thinking to others. The RC church has a reason why they use the words "shepherd" and "flock" and so on. Baaaaah.

Quote
I fail here, sorry, I do not know much about Buddha.  However, to me the more they align with known reality, the closer to truth they are.

It might interest you, as he was all about the best humans can be. His twelve guidelines basically run across any religion or belief.

Buddhism is approx. 500 years older than Christianity, 1300 older than Islam. They have gone through all the cycles these other religions are still going through. After spending two years in Thailand, and having a number of interesting conversations with some of the buddhist monks there, I did come to appreciate buddhism much more. Not that I didn't see them as another organized religion, they are, i.e. (selfish old) men wielding power over the masses. You'd be surprised how fat you can get by being a beggar monk... :)

Quote
I do not fear death at all, it is just non-existence, and at some point it might be a real relief.  Until that time I want to live as long and healthy as possible. 

Yes, that is more or less the way I see it. Liberation at last!

Quote
Too bad religion has held us back for so long, I really think we would have figured out biological immortality by now if we was not fighting wars, and the illusion that one must die on cue to go to an afterlife.

Quite unbelievable, yes. Well, there's no hope for me, then. And, as you said before, why would I want to join a belief system where I, as a homosexual, am already condemned to hell? I'm perfectly capable of getting there on my own, thanks.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 01, 2006, 03:34:33 PM

Absolutely. But then organized religion, like their bedfellows governments, are well aware that most people prefer to leave the thinking to others. The RC church has a reason why they use the words "shepherd" and "flock" and so on. Baaaaah.

Yep, exactly.  That is why I call them "sheeple". 

Quote
Quote
I fail here, sorry, I do not know much about Buddha.  However, to me the more they align with known reality, the closer to truth they are.

It might interest you, as he was all about the best humans can be. His twelve guidelines basically run across any religion or belief.

Buddhism is approx. 500 years older than Christianity, 1300 older than Islam. They have gone through all the cycles these other religions are still going through. After spending two years in Thailand, and having a number of interesting conversations with some of the buddhist monks there, I did come to appreciate buddhism much more. Not that I didn't see them as another organized religion, they are, i.e. (selfish old) men wielding power over the masses. You'd be surprised how fat you can get by being a beggar monk... :)

Interesting.  Yes, it always seems to come down to getting something for nothing, at the expense of the innocent.

Quote
Quote
I do not fear death at all, it is just non-existence, and at some point it might be a real relief.  Until that time I want to live as long and healthy as possible. 

Yes, that is more or less the way I see it. Liberation at last!

As things are now, these bodies are going to wear out, disease, age is going to take it's price. At that point non-existence will be welcome.

Quote
Quote
Too bad religion has held us back for so long, I really think we would have figured out biological immortality by now if we was not fighting wars, and the illusion that one must die on cue to go to an afterlife.

Quite unbelievable, yes. Well, there's no hope for me, then. And, as you said before, why would I want to join a belief system where I, as a homosexual, am already condemned to hell? I'm perfectly capable of getting there on my own, thanks.

Since do not believe it exists, I am not concerned about it.  As for no hope, I think there is always hope as long one is still taking in breath, though it might be diminishing...

Have you ever heard of Neo Tech?  Until they went off the deep end, they was a very interesting group. 

Of course, I am sure you have heard of Ayn Rand as well?  I like a lot of her ideas, though a couple of them do not ring true to me. 

Anyway, a couple of points open for discussion.  You also said you had a lot of quotes from me you wanted to discuss.  When you get time, I am open to any and all.

Take Care my Friend,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 01, 2006, 03:44:28 PM
Quote
You also said you had a lot of quotes from me you wanted to discuss.  When you get time, I am open to any and all.

I was hoping to get to that before you brought it up!
;D

(first a couple of caps)

8)
Later,
Vic

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 01, 2006, 03:45:27 PM
Quote
It is a very nice Saturday so far.  Got the garden hoed again, and everything is looking pretty good.  Can not wait until the cucumbers begin to produce.



“we must [simply] cultivate our garden.”--Voltaire ;)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 01, 2006, 04:05:13 PM
My ego just won't let me grasp the idea of there being nothing after I die. I think hope there is something afterwards because I want to be me forever. What's that song? "I gotta be me" :D  I do think that if there is an afterlife it's nothing like any religion has imagined .
           Now, a question for Doug and Vic. If you believe there is nothing afterwards do you also believe that
no one should choose an easy life? Is it our moral obligation to become activists against societal wrongs and injustices because if we don't do it no God will and we only have one shot to do something? 
     
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 01, 2006, 04:06:44 PM
Quote
It is a very nice Saturday so far.  Got the garden hoed again, and everything is looking pretty good.  Can not wait until the cucumbers begin to produce.



“we must [simply] cultivate our garden.”--Voltaire ;)

Yep, and it is good to get out in the fresh air.  Enjoy the warm breeze and see life doing it's thing. 

Besides if I do not keep up with the garden I just get a big lot of weeds, not very helpful to the grocery budget. <wink>

Here is a couple of pics so you get an idea...

(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/garden002.jpg)
(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/garden007.jpg)


Take Care,
Doug

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 01, 2006, 05:46:27 PM
(http://www.carrsthisnthat.com/bbm/garden007.jpg)


Very nice Doug!  :)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 01, 2006, 08:02:26 PM
My ego just won't let me grasp the idea of there being nothing after I die. I think hope there is something afterwards because I want to be me forever. What's that song? "I gotta be me" :D  I do think that if there is an afterlife it's nothing like any religion has imagined.

Understand.  It is hard for the mind to gasp that it's consciousness will not exist forever, because there has never been a time it is aware of that it was not there.  If you have ever been put under sedation, you would understand, perhaps, that once the mind is not functional, there is no consciousness.  Being dead there is no functional mind, therefore no consciousness.  All illusions of consciousness without a functioning brain is just that, illusions. 

Quote
Now, a question for Doug and Vic. If you believe there is nothing afterwards do you also believe that
no one should choose an easy life? Is it our moral obligation to become activists against societal wrongs and injustices because if we don't do it no God will and we only have one shot to do something? 

One should not choose an easy life, if they are capable of more, one then is just cheating themselves. Having said that, many people have such a hard life, do not see any other choices, and really wished there was an easier way.  I see Ennis caught here.

No, it is not our moral obligation to become activists against societal wrongs and injustices. It is our moral obligation to be as happy and productive as we can be, what ever that means to one.  Happiness is the goal of life, not sacrificing for the good of others. If social activism is your thing, then by all means be active, however if it is not, then support them with your funds, with what you can and be knowledgeable so you can at least vote in a way that is knowledgeable of the consequences. 

There are many times I see "activism", and I cringe, because the message being sent has nothing to do with what the majority of the people the activists are representing really want, and therefore backfires with more resistance from the opposition. 

There are more than one way to be an "activist", just supporting BBM so that more of these movies are made is just one small way, and maybe not so small from the looks of things.  Just being your conscious loving self does way more to change minds than all the drum beating shouting "ho ho we are homosexuals, so and so has got to go" ever will.

Of course, these are just my humble options, others may disagree. 

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 02, 2006, 12:53:50 AM
Now, a question for Doug and Vic. If you believe there is nothing afterwards do you also believe that
no one should choose an easy life? Is it our moral obligation to become activists against societal wrongs and injustices because if we don't do it no God will and we only have one shot to do something? 
Yes.

I had the feeling Doug would give you the longer answer. :)
And he is right. A simple yes is too simple.

And I'm not sure about moral obligation. Sounds like something others want from you. Sounds like something a priest or politician would say!  :-\

You need to decide for yourself how and at what level you want to get involved, if at all. Personal situations differ. It's different for everyone. For me it's a Yes because it has to do with my upbringing and character. But that's me, it may not be you.

But it's also a No. I don't do things because I'm worried or concerned about an afterlife. I don't believe in one so why should I base my life on something I don't believe in either way?

My decisions have made my life difficult on many occasions, true. I do things because I believe they're the right thing to do, and deciding what to do can be difficult enough. And often enough I question my decisions because life would have been easier if I had decided otherwise.

I do believe however that you should get the best out of the life you have been given, that you make it the best you can in terms of personal growth and development without hurting others in the process. Some people turn out to be Jezus, others Hitler. I don't want to be either. I'll pass unknown like all those other billions of humans before me and that would be fine by me. As long as I have the feeling I have made some little differences for the better here and there, I'm okay with that.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 02, 2006, 09:20:51 AM
Quote
I do believe however that you should get the best out of the life you have been given, that you make it the best you can in terms of personal growth and development without hurting others in the process. Some people turn out to be Jezus, others Hitler. I don't want to be either. I'll pass unknown like all those other billions of humans before me and that would be fine by me. As long as I have the feeling I have made some little differences for the better here and there, I'm okay with that.



Good Morning Doug and Vic!  I want to say that I agree with the above statement. The world would be so much better if we just concentrated on making our lives the best it can be. With religion it seems people want to make the world and the lives of others into whatever vision they think their God wants. And that causes so many problems. As Voltaire said, if we could only stick to cultivating our own gardens, the world would look more like the "kingdom of heaven" the religious are always talking about.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 02, 2006, 05:10:11 PM
Hey Doug,

I said I would come back to my original post, so okay.

Quote
I live way out in the boonies, so I had to wait for BBM to be on satellite before I could see it.  Here, none of the movies that would be interesting to see are ever allowed to be displayed.  I am still waiting to see Fahrenheit 911, someday.

Got broadband?

Quote
While the more religious go on and on about how wonderful Jacks love is and how this is a story about love conquers all.  I do not see it that way, I see it as more of a story about how to waste your life trying to change someone else, instead of changing yourself.  Wasting your life denying the reality in front of you, because you would rather believe in a fairy tail.

Agreed. Love may conquer all but it also fails all attempts to conquer it. If you don't do something at one point it will destroy you.

Quote
I guess the problem I have with that is that religion in ethical dilemmas can not decide based upon reality, it has to decide on tradition set forth by authority.  It also has to decide based upon interpretation, rather than knowledge, which leaves a whole lot of room for manipulation.

Islam is all about interpretation. If Mohammed, or Jezus for that matter, would have known how much killing and suffering would be done in their name, would they still have chosen the path they took? I doubt it!

Quote
If I remember correctly, was it not 5 million suspected gay people also put to death at that same time?  They with the pink triangle...  one does not ever hear much about them, the jewish gays...

It wasn't just the Jewish gays, it was ALL gays. And gypsies, and the Down Syndromes, etc. Hitler was half Jewish, by the way, and one of his major arm suppliers was Jewish (one of the richest men in the country, Adolf NEEDED him and protected him).

Quote
Exactly, and people forget that the religion we see today did not exist until Billy Graham started it.  Before that religion was more or less a private thing, even the founding fathers stated that religion was between the man and his god.

And so it should be always.

Quote
Though I have to admit to having no gaydar at all, a talent I really wished I could acquire.

Mine is notorious for failing me. Must be the battery or something. :)

More to come..

 8)
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 02, 2006, 05:14:38 PM
By the way, although is thread is called Non Believers... I am not a non-believer, I believe in a great many things, just not organized religion.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 02, 2006, 08:05:56 PM
Quote
Got broadband?

Yes, I do.  DSL, our local phone company has done wonders in this area.

Quote
Islam is all about interpretation. If Mohammed, or Jezus for that matter, would have known how much killing and suffering would be done in their name, would they still have chosen the path they took? I doubt it!

I do not know.  I know absolutely nothing about Mohammed, other than what I have heard, that says he was insane.  Also from what I have read, Jesus never existed as a god, only very little evidence exists that he might have been a compilation of many men.

Quote
Quote
If I remember correctly, was it not 5 million suspected gay people also put to death at that same time?  They with the pink triangle...  one does not ever hear much about them, the jewish gays...

It wasn't just the Jewish gays, it was ALL gays. And gypsies, and the Down Syndromes, etc. Hitler was half Jewish, by the way, and one of his major arm suppliers was Jewish (one of the richest men in the country, Adolf NEEDED him and protected him).

I thought that was the case, but I knew for sure it was at least the jewish gays, could not remember for sure on the rest.

Quote
Quote
Exactly, and people forget that the religion we see today did not exist until Billy Graham started it.  Before that religion was more or less a private thing, even the founding fathers stated that religion was between the man and his god.

And so it should be always.

Should be, but isn't any more.

Quote
Quote
Though I have to admit to having no gaydar at all, a talent I really wished I could acquire.

Mine is notorious for failing me. Must be the battery or something. :)

ROTFL!
I used to have a couple of friends had excellent gaydar, so would employ them at times.  LOL!

I used to get so mad at them, they would tell me that so and so, or that guy was interested and I never knew, man I wished I'd known. Oh well, we have to work with what we got.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 02, 2006, 08:15:51 PM
By the way, although is thread is called Non Believers... I am not a non-believer, I believe in a great many things, just not organized religion.

Vic


I see. 

Yeah, I struggled for a title to this thread.  Atheists Who Love Brokeback Mountain seemed a little too limiting, seems Non-believers is too limited as well, but I settled for Non-Believers.

I believe in a great many things as well, but nothing with a consciousness disconnected from a functioning physical brain. Nothing paranormal. Other than that... <grin>

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 02, 2006, 08:41:44 PM
I was thinking about being an activist while I was milking this evening.

When I was in college, a friend of mine and I joined a newly formed group.  We called ourselves the "Gay Rap Group".  We got together once or twice a month to discuss current events, to lend support to each other, and to just have a few laughs.  One of the things we did was create "The Gay Rap Line", a single phone number wired into 5 different houses, one was mine.  We took turns answering the phone 24/7.  There was a few who came out by calling, a few travelers who wanted to know about the gay life in our small town, one that called to say they was going to kill himself, and many, many religious nuts who called to threaten our lives, or call names. Some of those calls still haunt me to this day.  At that same time I had a straight housemate.  He had at least 2 to 3 different women in his room every week. The screamers I really hated...  Oh, he is a minister now... LOL!   In my room I printed the The Gay Rap Newsletter, a couple of the others wrote the stories, I printed it.  My straight housemate never ever suspected. 

I then moved to Denver. Met other people, and we created another small group whose purpose it was to get a gay pride parade in Denver.  There was 5 of us, we got the bars to let us have special dances, which we got part of the income, I created the logos, we had them printed on t-shirts, and buttons and sold them.  And with donations from the gay businesses, and individual persons, we got the permit to have a "march" down Colfax to the civic center for a quick speach, then on down to the Fox Hole bar where we set up booths for the vendors to sell their wares.  After the second year, we where kicked out by another group who had better support.  That ended my involvement with the community. 

Was I an activist?  No, not in my thinking, if someone would have told me that, I would have denied it, it would have probably scared the dickens out of me. To me I was just helping, doing something that needed to be done.

Point?  Do what you think needs to be done, and you will be an activist without trying.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 03, 2006, 02:18:53 AM
Yeah, I struggled for a title to this thread.  Atheists Who Love Brokeback Mountain seemed a little too limiting, seems Non-believers is too limited as well, but I settled for Non-Believers.

Non-Believers is perfectly fine. The implied reference is clear.

I tend to pick and choose from all sorts of beliefs, as long as it rings true (to me). Which is what I liked about your objective and subjective realities. It's how you see the world from your own eyes, your own experience, background, etc.

I'm more of a Gaian than anything else, I suppose. The power of nature.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 03, 2006, 07:31:01 AM
Yeah, I struggled for a title to this thread.  Atheists Who Love Brokeback Mountain seemed a little too limiting, seems Non-believers is too limited as well, but I settled for Non-Believers.

Non-Believers is perfectly fine. The implied reference is clear.

I tend to pick and choose from all sorts of beliefs, as long as it rings true (to me). Which is what I liked about your objective and subjective realities. It's how you see the world from your own eyes, your own experience, background, etc.

I'm more of a Gaian than anything else, I suppose. The power of nature.

Vic


Understand that, if I was to call something a god it would be nature, but that would be a god without a consciousness, not even close to what the average person is calling god.

I am a firm believer in the power of the mind.  That the mind/body connection is many times stronger than most believe, especially the medical community.

Love your photo captions this morning! 

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 03, 2006, 08:12:45 AM
Understand that, if I was to call something a god it would be nature, but that would be a god without a consciousness, not even close to what the average person is calling god.

Yes, Gaia's consciousness, if she has any that we can define, would run in aeons, but I believe in that. S/he can see the long term, we're too short-lived to be aware of anything but our own puny little selves and our little petty concerns.

Quote
I am a firm believer in the power of the mind.  That the mind/body connection is many times stronger than most believe, especially the medical community.

Considering Western medicine is only about 200 years old, absolutely! Coming back to Christian/Judeo manipulation. The whole Inquisition was based on the strategy to remove all old knowledge from Europe, by declaring and prosecuting anyone with that knowledge as heretics, witches, etc. It is then that the RC brought "the Devil and his cohorts" into play. Needless to say, it worked extremely well. For sure, if I had lived then, I would have been burned at the stake.

Quote
Love your photo captions this morning!

Thanks!

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 03, 2006, 08:32:51 AM
Quote
Was I an activist?  No, not in my thinking, if someone would have told me that, I would have denied it, it would have probably scared the dickens out of me. To me I was just helping, doing something that needed to be done.

Point?  Do what you think needs to be done, and you will be an activist without trying.

Doug

Very well said Doug. You're a good person. :) I also really enjoy reading the dialog between you and Vic. I learn a lot! It's like watching My Dinner With Andre. have either of you seen that movie?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 03, 2006, 09:29:07 AM
I also really enjoy reading the dialog between you and Vic. I learn a lot! It's like watching My Dinner With Andre. have either of you seen that movie?

Thanks. Not sure, from when was it? And what was it about?

Doug, you're getting me heated up about the RC Church now!
If I think of all the suffering they've caused over the centuries... unbelievable. Not to mention in my own family these past generations that I know of. For me, if they were ever to get into my good graces, they would all have to become beggar monks for the next thousand years. Maybe then, and only maybe, will I even be willing to consider anything they have to say as valid.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 03, 2006, 09:59:40 AM
Very well said Doug. You're a good person. :) I also really enjoy reading the dialog between you and Vic. I learn a lot! It's like watching My Dinner With Andre. have either of you seen that movie?

Thanks.

Nope, never even heard of that movie.  But then again, I have never been a big movie fan, with the exception of sci-fi.  Even that the last few years has waned in it's interest.  I saw "War of the Worlds" the  other day, it was not nearly as good as the original I thought, awful a lot of blood.  But then again, after BBM, all movies seem rather hollow.

Take Care,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 03, 2006, 11:03:04 AM
I also really enjoy reading the dialog between you and Vic. I learn a lot! It's like watching My Dinner With Andre. have either of you seen that movie?

Doug, you're getting me heated up about the RC Church now!
If I think of all the suffering they've caused over the centuries... unbelievable. Not to mention in my own family these past generations that I know of. For me, if they were ever to get into my good graces, they would all have to become beggar monks for the next thousand years. Maybe then, and only maybe, will I even be willing to consider anything they have to say as valid.

Naw, I do not think that you would consider validity based upon being a monk, not from what I have seen of you thus far.  I do not know what your family has done, if you want to talk about something I am here.

In my family, Mother was RC, when she left her parents came over and called my parents anything but white.  That us kids was being raised as heathen wild animals.  Funny, I still had to go to sunday school in the methodist church.  This was my first taste of religious thinking.

Then Sunday school was another strange experience for me. They told me I had a small door in my heart, someone was knocking at it, and I was to let him in.  This guy, a murdered dead guy from 2,000 years ago.  Yeah... riighttt...  My heart is a muscle that pumps blood, no little doors, thank you.   Then the easter bunny laid colored chicken eggs... and a murdered dead guy got up three days later and floated into the sky.  I still wonder what the hell they was smoking...  Santa Clause crashed and burned soon after as well.

I think I know what you mean, just think of all the alternative health benefits lost because they were too stupid to accept the results. Think of how much different our world would be now if they had not killed off most of the innovators, the people who could think, would we be enjoying a world of clean alternative energy, a world of loving health way into our 140's, a rational world of checks and balances between government, personal responsibilities, profits and planet health?  No way to know, but once the world was well on it's way to a rational world of just that, then the dark ages came, a world ruled by religion, by hateful manipulators.  It has taken centuries to repair the damage, and from the looks of things, we are once again on the brink of another dark age, due to the same cause. 

Things are being done and said now that just 10 years ago would have been unthinkable.  Preemptive war, based very little evidence is one.  The sacrificing of freedom to secure freedom is another.  When I saw the 911 families begging for more security, I thought "What they do not understand is the only way to make the security they are begging for is to become a police state."  The security they was begging for can only be provided if they are caged, everyone is caged, everything that touches them is known.  Sadly, we have people all too willing to provide just such security, it will only cost you everything you hold dear.

While you seem to separate out RCC, I see it much wider than that.  RCC was the main player in the past, these days we have a whole new set of cats.

Take Care,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 03, 2006, 11:56:58 AM
Quote
While you seem to separate out RCC, I see it much wider than that.  RCC was the main player in the past, these days we have a whole new set of cats.



 You got that right! It's what I call those remote control Christians. They get their religious values from the likes of the Pat Robertson Show, Jerry Falwell and that Trinity Baptist Network. Those shows and networks were a piece of work during the elections spewing their anti gay hatred, pro life--pro war agenda. And their viewers just ate it up.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 03, 2006, 12:14:25 PM
Naw, I do not think that you would consider validity based upon being a monk, not from what I have seen of you thus far.

<lol> No, you're right. Hell and damnation is more my game. They know all about that, it should be good for them. Suffering is good for the soul, right? While I fade peacefully into non-existence.

Quote
That us kids was being raised as heathen wild animals.

Mom's from devout Portuguese roman catholics, dad's a mix of German Calvinists and Java village healers. We were called heathens. Heathens? True believers, I'd say.

I hear you on the next two paragraphs!

Quote
No way to know, but once the world was well on it's way to a rational world of just that, then the dark ages came, a world ruled by religion, by hateful manipulators.  It has taken centuries to repair the damage, and from the looks of things, we are once again on the brink of another dark age, due to the same cause.

Unfortunately not enough people see it this way. The masses don't care, they don't think further than their stomachs, dicks and wallets, and those in power know how to rally them.

Quote
Things are being done and said now that just 10 years ago would have been unthinkable.  Preemptive war, based very little evidence is one.  The sacrificing of freedom to secure freedom is another.  When I saw the 911 families begging for more security, I thought "What they do not understand is the only way to make the security they are begging for is to become a police state."  The security they was begging for can only be provided if they are caged, everyone is caged, everything that touches them is known.  Sadly, we have people all too willing to provide just such security, it will only cost you everything you hold dear.

I'm not American, though I lived and studied there and I have come to love many things American, and I don't know where your government is taking you, but I'm certainly no fan of the corrupt Eurocrats that are wielding power in Europe now but here's a quote from one of your founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, with whom we both seem to agree:

"Any society that would give up
a little liberty to gain a
little security will deserve
neither and lose both.

Quote
While you seem to separate out RCC, I see it much wider than that.  RCC was the main player in the past, these days we have a whole new set of cats.

The RCC is of course the group I/my family know most about. But I do see the wider picture, and I don't think they're new cats, just the new generation of the same old evil ones.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 03, 2006, 12:35:07 PM
You got that right! It's what I call those remote control Christians.

LOL Excellent term. Have to remember that!

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 03, 2006, 01:25:49 PM
This article I'm providing a link for is what really makes me mad about the priorties of Congress! Thanks You Mr. & Mrs. Christian Right! Gas prices are bad, the war is floundering, etc. etc. etc. but let's take a look at a why a "christian" movie has a PG rating! >:(



http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/03/christian.movie.rating.ap/index.html
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 04, 2006, 11:33:27 AM
While it's obvious I am not at all interested in the RC church or any other organized religion I do want to make it clear that I have no quarrel with anyone's belief. It's a subject I generally never bring up in conversation, like politics, because I know that people's beliefs and opinions differ tremendously, and I am a firm supporter of freedom of belief and speech. This, of course, doesn't mean I would forego such a discussion if someone else were to bring it up.  ;)

There is one group in particular that keeps rearing its head wherever I am and that is the Jehovah's Witness. It's really funny, but since I was a teenager, there has always been that knock on the door, that ring on the bell, and guess who is on my doorstep! Amazing when you consider they showed up in some of the remotest places I have been to. Now what's with that? Feels like I've got some kind of homing chip in me that they seem to track! Of course, the interaction is generally of the 1 minute duration.

Other than that, I can't say I've had any real trouble with any religious group lately, except for the occasional hell and damnation remark or some biblical quote about Sodom and Gomorrah when I confront them with homosexuality. When I was younger I would launch into a full debate but over the past years I have more control and just ignore them, walk away or tell them to piss off, whichever is more suitable to the moment, particularly enjoying the latter.

 :)
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 04, 2006, 05:22:08 PM
Quote
Other than that, I can't say I've had any real trouble with any religious group lately, except for the occasional hell and damnation remark or some biblical quote about Sodom and Gomorrah when I confront them with homosexuality. When I was younger I would launch into a full debate but over the past years I have more control and just ignore them, walk away or tell them to piss off, whichever is more suitable to the moment, particularly enjoying the latter

Hi Vic & Doug! I hope you both are enjoying the 4th! I want to comment on the above statement. I have trouble with the religious right. They have the freedom to practice religion how they want but they aredoing more than that. They are engaged in a calculating cultural war against who I am. They use Gay rights as a divisive issue in elections and they use it to rouse the ignorant against us. There are people who voted for Bush on the single issue of Gay Marriage. So , yeah I really have trouble  with that religious group. They want to deny me my rights and hate my very existence.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 05, 2006, 04:41:06 AM
Hi Jason,

I also have a problem with any  extreme right group, be it religious or political or both. What I don't have a problem with is anyone who practices their belief or religion in the way they see fit without forcing it on everyone else. This is still the largest group of people luckily. And all of my friends whom I love dearly are part of this group. (They wouldn't be my friends if they weren't.)

And yes, of course I fight against being discriminated. I am familiar with that throughout my life. Being of mixed heritage I was either not blonde enough or not dark enough. From a military family that moved around a lot, my father didn't believe in the schools at the base, we always had to attend local schools. So there too I have plenty of memories of being discriminated -- always the new kid on the block. Always being picked on, always having to defend myself. And as homosexuals we all know what discrimination tastes likes, it's nasty. So yeah, I can be very activist, when someone's out to get my goat! But I refuse to let it define me. I am more than that.

As I said before, I don't know where the current American government is going, but at least here in Europe, though I will never trust the Eurocrats in Brussels and Strasbourg, civil rights are being extended rather than curtailed. New EU laws will require ALL member nations to uphold the rights of homosexual men and women as equal rights. Countries like Poland and Slovakia have already filed protests because it is in conflict with their "Family Laws" but they face potential court action if they refuse to comply.

Belgium has just accepted a law that homosexual men and women, as well as singles have the right to adopt. Even Spain, a traditionalist religious country by far, has accepted gay marriages as legal and is extending them the same adoption rights as hetero parents. So there is progress here rather than regression.

I think the difference between the U.S. and Europe on these issues is our recent history with selective extermination, not only the (Jewish) holocaust of World War 2 but also the ethnic cleansing practices in the former Yugoslavia. I would like to believe we, as Europeans, have learned something from that. But there is still plenty of work to do here as well.

I certainly agree with you, we need to be aware of what is happening, and sometimes we need to make a stand. More so now in the U.S. than in Europe especially.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 05, 2006, 08:10:58 AM
This article I'm providing a link for is what really makes me mad about the priorties of Congress! Thanks You Mr. & Mrs. Christian Right! Gas prices are bad, the war is floundering, etc. etc. etc. but let's take a look at a why a "christian" movie has a PG rating! >:(



http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/03/christian.movie.rating.ap/index.html


Yep, they are having a fit.  I bet they would have the opposite fit if the religion was any other than their "non-violent" Christian faith, how would they react to Islam religion being portrayed? Oh my!  With some items like this I think they should GET their way only with a different religion than theirs.  Much like the thought Vic had, since they are so good at suffering, they should get it.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 05, 2006, 09:06:16 AM
While it's obvious I am not at all interested in the RC church or any other organized religion I do want to make it clear that I have no quarrel with anyone's belief. It's a subject I generally never bring up in conversation, like politics, because I know that people's beliefs and opinions differ tremendously, and I am a firm supporter of freedom of belief and speech. This, of course, doesn't mean I would forego such a discussion if someone else were to bring it up.  ;)

As you I rarely bring up either politics or religion in normal everyday life, mostly because I know that I am so diametrically opposite of most people on these subjects.  Experience has taught me that it is of little use to argue with these people. 

I want to make it clear I have no problems with people's beliefs, AS LONG AS they do not make laws, rules and social pressures to force their options upon innocent others.  But as Jason's link proves, they are all about forcing their stuff upon innocent others.

Quote
There is one group in particular that keeps rearing its head wherever I am and that is the Jehovah's Witness. It's really funny, but since I was a teenager, there has always been that knock on the door, that ring on the bell, and guess who is on my doorstep! Amazing when you consider they showed up in some of the remotest places I have been to. Now what's with that? Feels like I've got some kind of homing chip in me that they seem to track! Of course, the interaction is generally of the 1 minute duration.

They must have a chip, they even show up here once or twice a year.  They always arrive in a car with at least 4 people in it, two stay in the car and two attack the house.  I have no idea how far they are driving in, I know of no home bases in the area.  They do not take "not interested" as an answer.  Most times now we see them coming, and do not answer the door.  The nerve of these people is beyond the pale.

Quote
Other than that, I can't say I've had any real trouble with any religious group lately, except for the occasional hell and damnation remark or some biblical quote about Sodom and Gomorrah when I confront them with homosexuality.

And you do not call that trouble?  Seems like a real big problem to me, what other group has to endure such behavior?  Would they accept the same if one was to start calling them names?  No, I think not.  This is just the type of behavior that gets me upset.

Quote
When I was younger I would launch into a full debate but over the past years I have more control and just ignore them, walk away or tell them to piss off, whichever is more suitable to the moment, particularly enjoying the latter.

Tell them to piss off, bet that does get under their skin.  They deserve so much more than "piss off", they deserve a solid punch in their filthy mouths.  Yeah, I get hot when self righteous nuts think they can impose their bull shit upon innocent others.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 05, 2006, 09:24:24 AM
Quote
Other than that, I can't say I've had any real trouble with any religious group lately, except for the occasional hell and damnation remark or some biblical quote about Sodom and Gomorrah when I confront them with homosexuality.
And you do not call that trouble?  Seems like a real big problem to me, what other group has to endure such behavior?  Would they accept the same if one was to start calling them names?  No, I think not.  This is just the type of behavior that gets me upset.

Sticks and stones, etc.

I like to tell them that either Jezus was gay, what with 12 guys on his ass all the time, or that he was married to Mary Magdalene (a whore by their own words)... they can take their pick. No trouble at all.

;D
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 05, 2006, 09:26:22 AM
Hi Vic & Doug! I hope you both are enjoying the 4th!

I had a very nice July 4th, took the day off and enjoyed some family time. I hope you both had a very nice 4th as well.

Quote
I want to comment on the above statement. I have trouble with the religious right. They have the freedom to practice religion how they want but they aredoing more than that. They are engaged in a calculating cultural war against who I am. They use Gay rights as a divisive issue in elections and they use it to rouse the ignorant against us. There are people who voted for Bush on the single issue of Gay Marriage. So , yeah I really have trouble  with that religious group. They want to deny me my rights and hate my very existence.

Exactly!  They are FAR from innocently just believing, they are ACTIVELY destroying other peoples freedoms.  They identify themselves as Christian, so I react to anyone who claims that same title, innocent or not.  In fact, most that identify with that term will vote, or at the very least do nothing, to stop the laws and rules these people will inflict on others, therefore are just a guilty as the active ones. IMHO.  Of course, this why I stayed off the Believers thread, I would be compelled to protect myself.  My hopes are they will wake themselves up enough to change, but I do not hold my breath.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 05, 2006, 09:46:01 AM
My hopes are they will wake themselves up enough to change, but I do not hold my breath.

Fundamentalists never wake up, they will die first, as we see with the muslim fundamentalists. You cannot change their mind and they cannot change my mind.

And you are both right, that it is worrying that these groups, in Christianity as well as Islam, are gaining political power. That is bad news. But it isn't against homosexuals only, it's against abortion, single parents, hell, anyone who has sex before marriage, wearing skirts, etc. etc. ad nauseum. They always find ways to make themselves seem (morally) superior than everyone else while they're not. They're hypocrites of the worst sort because they refuse to embrace humanity in all its variety.

But Mr. Bush and his cronies are doing other things equally bad - passing a law (I think it was in 2003) that obliges public libraries to collect the names of those that take out books considered as anti-establishment is no small thing. That one really shocked me.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 05, 2006, 09:51:55 AM

I also have a problem with any  extreme right group, be it religious or political or both.

I also have a problem with any extreme left group, religious or political, as well.  There is no difference in the out come from extreme right or extreme left, loss of individual freedom.

Quote
As I said before, I don't know where the current American government is going

It is changing into a taliban style government, with religion being the foundation of laws and corrupt religious leaders making the decisions.  The Religious Right is actively working towards the end times war, I fear they may suceed.  We will know if they are going to suceed by our Nov 2006 elections, if there are not sweeping changes in our representation you will know that this planet is not for long. 


Quote
but at least here in Europe, though I will never trust the Eurocrats in Brussels and Strasbourg, civil rights are being extended rather than curtailed. New EU laws will require ALL member nations to uphold the rights of homosexual men and women as equal rights. Countries like Poland and Slovakia have already filed protests because it is in conflict with their "Family Laws" but they face potential court action if they refuse to comply.


Add the US to Poland and Slovakia. 

Quote
Belgium has just accepted a law that homosexual men and women, as well as singles have the right to adopt. Even Spain, a traditionalist religious country by far, has accepted gay marriages as legal and is extending them the same adoption rights as hetero parents. So there is progress here rather than regression.

I wished I could report the same here, but we are sliding back 50 years over the last 5 or so.  Only pockets of enlightenment still exist, those of the major cities on the east and west coasts. 

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 05, 2006, 10:02:18 AM
Yes, it's very bad and very sad. My worry is that because the U.S. is so blindly followed by many other nations that you may be right in that it will get worse before it gets better.

When I was in Australia in 2004 I saw both happening. On the one hand many Australians made homosexuality a non-issue, becoming a modern nation and, on the other hand, led by the current administration in part, was a return to homophobia and extreme conservatism.

Vic

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 05, 2006, 10:21:17 AM
My hopes are they will wake themselves up enough to change, but I do not hold my breath.

Fundamentalists never wake up, they will die first, as we see with the muslim fundamentalists. You cannot change their mind and they cannot change my mind.

Absolutely right.  However, the ones who are not fundamentalists, but identify themselves as either, are the ones who allow these radicals have the power to do their damage.  They are the ones that have to wake up.  They are the vast majority, but as sheep they follow the radicals.

Quote
And you are both right, that it is worrying that these groups, in Christianity as well as Islam, are gaining political power. That is bad news. But it isn't against homosexuals only, it's against abortion, single parents, hell, anyone who has sex before marriage, wearing skirts, etc. etc. ad nauseum. They always find ways to make themselves seem (morally) superior than everyone else while they're not. They're hypocrites of the worst sort because they refuse to embrace humanity in all its variety.

Exactly! That is why it is so hard to understand people who also claim to be "christian" or "islam" do not stand up against these monsters and take back their dignity.  There would not be war in Iraq now if all the normal islam believers were to take actions to marginalize their monsters, we would not be in war now either if our normal christian believers were to actions to marginalize their monsters.  But no, both do things to support them, mainly because they do not want to be accused of being non-religious, non-patriot, etc. 

Quote
But Mr. Bush and his cronies are doing other things equally bad - passing a law (I think it was in 2003) that obliges public libraries to collect the names of those that take out books considered as anti-establishment is no small thing. That one really shocked me.

That was just the begining.  It has now be proven he has taken to listening in on private phone calls, capturing emails, etc, which is against the law, but he does not care. He claims war president special rights.  He thumbs his nose at needing court permission for such actions, he is above the law he thinks.  Yet, we impeached a man for having consentual sex with another over the age of 21, but a man that has broken the laws, has made up stories to get into a war, we give a pass.  The reason? The sex with Clinton upset the religious, and the rest did not with Bush, thus my contention that religion is the main problem.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 05, 2006, 10:27:32 AM
I should take more time but, before I sit down for my dinner, I do want to answer first. :)

Here in Europe they are approaching mass control from a slightly different angle -- they tax you to death. So much so that all your time and thought is spent on making ends meet (as in the average worker and family). Meanwhile the fat cats devise ever more ways to enrich themselves, taking control of huge corporations that can make or break a nation, for example. So they let us have sex with who we want and probably will legalise a variety of drugs in the long term, it still comes down to controlling the masses in favour of the few.

Most people will do nothing.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 05, 2006, 12:49:15 PM
I should take more time but, before I sit down for my dinner, I do want to answer first. :)

Here in Europe they are approaching mass control from a slightly different angle -- they tax you to death. So much so that all your time and thought is spent on making ends meet (as in the average worker and family). Meanwhile the fat cats devise ever more ways to enrich themselves, taking control of huge corporations that can make or break a nation, for example. So they let us have sex with who we want and probably will legalise a variety of drugs in the long term, it still comes down to controlling the masses in favour of the few.

Most people will do nothing.

Vic


Yep, there you go.  The problem with extreme leftism as well, it will always lead to enslavement of the individual, just like extreme rightism does, it just uses a different mechanism, but has the same outcome.  Extreme left takes away the individuals freedom in favor of "the society" and state, while the extreme right takes away the individuals freedom in favor of big business.  The place where the individual has the most freedom is absolute center, where state and society obligation is small, state's only job is boarder control, and military for the protection of the people and business is only tied to the individual, has no rights only the owner has rights, and religion is kept to between the man and his god.  Laws are few and objective.

See you bring up the big lie, that left and right politics are opposites, they are not, they are the same place, just different routes to get there.  Instead of a line like they always draw, it should be a circle.  One side of the circle individual freedom, the opposite individual enslavement. Taking the left direction from individual freedom, you will find sacrifice for the society, for the state; taking the right direction from individual freedom, you will find sacrifice for business.  Both throw in sacrifice for religion, for protection of the stupid, and protection for good measure.  The commonality is sacrifice of the individual.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 05, 2006, 02:13:33 PM
Well put! And how true. Caught between the ship and the quayside.

The way it looks, we've got all three on our backs at the moment:

- those in government, mostly busy with their own power games and mutual back rubbing,
- religions, struggling to hold on through power by manipulation of people's beliefs,
- the corporations, catering to both for personal profit and power.

Where to begin? :)

It seems the west is heading for a corporate future, the middle east is struggling for a religious renaissance, or at least some form of secularity, and the far east is going for what they always go for, property, wealth and expansion. None respect personal liberties, privacy or choice. All utilize the power of technology.

"The more things change the more they stay the same."

Don't know if you have seen "V for Vendetta" but it's a clear warning. The British haven't had fascism but I'm sure there are some there that would love to have a go at it. But I suppose for homosexuals and other groups the religious right is the greatest danger. As long as we obey the law and spend our money we're "safe" from the other two for now.

As far as religion and Brokeback Mountain is concerned (to stick to this thread ;) ), it's obvious the American Mid-West was not conducive to tolerant socialism back then, and hasn't changed much since. How is it where you are?

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 05, 2006, 09:03:00 PM
Well put! And how true. Caught between the ship and the quayside.

The way it looks, we've got all three on our backs at the moment:

- those in government, mostly busy with their own power games and mutual back rubbing,
- religions, struggling to hold on through power by manipulation of people's beliefs,
- the corporations, catering to both for personal profit and power.

Seems so. 

Quote
Where to begin? :)

It seems the west is heading for a corporate future, the middle east is struggling for a religious renaissance, or at least some form of secularity, and the far east is going for what they always go for, property, wealth and expansion. None respect personal liberties, privacy or choice. All utilize the power of technology.

Absolutely right.  Once we accepted corporations as human beings, that gave them powers that no business should have.  The rights of individuals should always trump business, but not anymore when the corporation IS a human being according to law.  Not just any human being mind you, but a rich one with access to super law representation. Of course, religious intolerance has always been a disaster.

Quote
"The more things change the more they stay the same."

In a way, but it looks to me like they are making great headway and the average Joe can not get a concept of it.

Quote
Don't know if you have seen "V for Vendetta" but it's a clear warning. The British haven't had fascism but I'm sure there are some there that would love to have a go at it. But I suppose for homosexuals and other groups the religious right is the greatest danger. As long as we obey the law and spend our money we're "safe" from the other two for now.


The religious right is by far the greatest danger, but the others are not something to let out of our attention.  No, I have not seen "V for Vendetta".

Quote
As far as religion and Brokeback Mountain is concerned (to stick to this thread ;) ), it's obvious the American Mid-West was not conducive to tolerant socialism back then, and hasn't changed much since. How is it where you are?

Remember that young guy in Wyoming was strung up on a fence and murdered just after BBM was shot.  If what I hear said here is any indication, they are not above killing a gay person if they are found out.  Ennis had it right, it is dangerous for anyone who is not perceived as being one of them.

Correction:  I has been brought to my attention that I was wrong about the timing of the murder in Wyoming, that event happened just about a year after BBM was in the New Yorker, not shot as a movie.  Sorry, I did not check before posting on that one. - Doug
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on July 06, 2006, 03:04:43 AM
Doug2017--
The recent comments on this thread mentioned Buddhism, and the fact that the Buddha never claimed to be a god. This didn't prevent his followers from building a religion out of his teachings, however, complete with prayer wheels and prayer flags and other assorted trappings of religion.
Still, Buddhism is the closest to my beliefs, as I am an agnostic rather than an atheist.
The follwing is from the flyleaf of "Buddhism Without Beliefs: A Contemporary Guide To Awaking" by Stephen Batchelor:

"In Buddhism Without Beliefs", author Stephen Batchelor reminds us that the Buddha was not a mystic...What the Buddha taught, says Batchelor, is not something to BELIEVE IN but something to DO..."

Buddhism is not so much a religion but what amounts to a psychology of the spirit, together with techniques to quiet the mind so that the practitioner can get beyond the chatter of the mind and strive toward spirit. The Buddha specifically taught that anything he said was not to be taken on faith, but to test it and see if it works. If it doesn't, throw it out. That's a refreshing attitude for someone presumed to be a god to take, wouldn't you say?

Alas, with the years even Buddhism has strayed from its agnostic roots, especially in sexual matters, and here's the quasi-Brokeback connection. In the November 1, 1996 issue of Tricycle, The Buddhist Review we read the follwing: (I would have to subscribe to the magazine to get any more, but this will give you the gist.)

"So far we have received some fifty responces to the anti-gay letters published in the previous issue. To provide a brief synopsis: In issue #20, we published an interview with Tibetan scholar Jeffrey Hopkins with experts from his revision of a famous text, "The Tibetan Arts of Love" into a manual for gay practitioners. In issue # 21, we published a sampling of the anti-gay letters  that we have received in which the Hopkins material..."


That's all they provided free, but the very idea that American Buddhists would rouse themselves from their meditation cushions and be motivated enough to write a letter--I don't know the state of email in 1996, probably nonexistant, or they would've recieved those, too-- a HATE letter to a Buddhist journal is extraordinary to me. It truly reminds me of a pack of snarling Baptist Bible-thumpers, or of  "Reverend" Phelps' minions holding horrific signs outside of AIDS funerals. Even with the stroke I had in August 2001, I still remember reading those letters of hate, it was that ugly a memory.

Of course, many things have changed since 1996, and Brokeback Mountain was a part of  the gradual return to sanity in this area (still very much a work in progress). But the religious extremists are frightened by gays' advances, and you know what they say about a  animal when it's cornered: it's more dangerous than ever.

Just goes to show that homophobia exists were you would least expect it...as well as the usual suspects.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 06, 2006, 09:21:01 AM
Doug2017--
The recent comments on this thread mentioned Buddhism, and the fact that the Buddha never claimed to be a god. This didn't prevent his followers from building a religion out of his teachings, however, complete with prayer wheels and prayer flags and other assorted trappings of religion.

Sadly, I know very little about Buddhism. So I will take your word on that.

Quote
Still, Buddhism is the closest to my beliefs, as I am an agnostic rather than an atheist.

Understand, not a problem. Acknowledging the possibility of a god is not the same as saying there is a god.  Actually, most people labeled atheist will probably fall in this category.  In reality no one can say "there is no god" based on science, because science can not prove a negative.  Science can only test and prove a positive statement, therefore science has to assume the negative when there is not evidence to prove the positive. 
 
Quote
The follwing is from the flyleaf of "Buddhism Without Beliefs: A Contemporary Guide To Awaking" by Stephen Batchelor:

"In Buddhism Without Beliefs", author Stephen Batchelor reminds us that the Buddha was not a mystic...What the Buddha taught, says Batchelor, is not something to BELIEVE IN but something to DO..."

Buddhism is not so much a religion but what amounts to a psychology of the spirit, together with techniques to quiet the mind so that the practitioner can get beyond the chatter of the mind and strive toward spirit. The Buddha specifically taught that anything he said was not to be taken on faith, but to test it and see if it works. If it doesn't, throw it out. That's a refreshing attitude for someone presumed to be a god to take, wouldn't you say?

Very refreshing indeed!  That is perfect advice for anyone "not to be taken on faith, but to test it and see if it works, if it doen't, throw it out".  That is exactly how I came to the place I am at now in my understanding.

Quote
Alas, with the years even Buddhism has strayed from its agnostic roots, especially in sexual matters, and here's the quasi-Brokeback connection. In the November 1, 1996 issue of Tricycle, The Buddhist Review we read the follwing: (I would have to subscribe to the magazine to get any more, but this will give you the gist.)

****Guys/Gals- This is my thread, there does NOT need to be a connection to BBM to post.  The only connection needed is you have come to this thread, that is enough.  Just something I wanted to clear up.  Sorry to have interrupted the flow here. ****

Quote
"So far we have received some fifty responces to the anti-gay letters published in the previous issue. To provide a brief synopsis: In issue #20, we published an interview with Tibetan scholar Jeffrey Hopkins with experts from his revision of a famous text, "The Tibetan Arts of Love" into a manual for gay practitioners. In issue # 21, we published a sampling of the anti-gay letters  that we have received in which the Hopkins material..."

Sounds like they accept gay practitioners, even made them a manual, that is great! Of course, I would have to read that manual, if the first line was they had to give up any sexual relations then I would know they are same as the others. There will always be those who oppose any happy relations for gay people, I guess. 


Quote
That's all they provided free, but the very idea that American Buddhists would rouse themselves from their meditation cushions and be motivated enough to write a letter--I don't know the state of email in 1996, probably nonexistant, or they would've recieved those, too-- a HATE letter to a Buddhist journal is extraordinary to me. It truly reminds me of a pack of snarling Baptist Bible-thumpers, or of  "Reverend" Phelps' minions holding horrific signs outside of AIDS funerals. Even with the stroke I had in August 2001, I still remember reading those letters of hate, it was that ugly a memory.

I am sorry you read those.  I have many really ugly memories of having my life threatened, and of name calling, of nasty deeds done.  For some reason those vicious things really stick in one's mind.  They color the whole world afterwards, that wonderful innocence, trust, never returns again.

Quote
Of course, many things have changed since 1996, and Brokeback Mountain was a part of  the gradual return to sanity in this area (still very much a work in progress). But the religious extremists are frightened by gays' advances, and you know what they say about a  animal when it's cornered: it's more dangerous than ever.

The problem with those people is they are afraid all the time, they even fear their own god.  They fear that someone, somewhere, doing something, will anger their mentally unstable god, and they will get punished unjustly, otherwise they would not care what other people thought or did as long as their rights were respected.  They mouth a god of love, but practice a god of equal stance to a drunken, wife beater, where she proclaims her love loudly at every chance she gets, but keeps the kids quiet, herself suppressed, never doing anything different, always walking on egg shells for fear of triggering his irrational anger.  To me that is worshipping a monster.

Quote
Just goes to show that homophobia exists were you would least expect it...as well as the usual suspects.

Yes, you are absolutely right.  You can see it even within the gay community.

When I get some time one of these days, I will have to look into Buddha a little more.

Thanks,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 06, 2006, 09:22:39 AM
Hi Jer009,

Yes, like every other organised religion, buddhism developed many branches, each of which developed its own interpretation of the Buddha's teachings. "It's all in the interpretation" is a convenient excuse Christians, Muslims and Buddhists alike have used over the centuries and still use today, to take only what they want from the teachings, turn and twist it to their own advantage, and disregard everything else. It's a human thing to do. And faulty.

The Buddha never differentiated between hetero and homosexual love. It's not the act, it's the intention with which it is done, is what he says, therefore who you do it with (excepting children, betrothed, and prisoners) is not important, as long as it is a mutual consensual and emotional act borne out of affection for each other.

In this article covering (homo)sexuality Theravada Buddhism explains in more detail how the Buddha viewed (homo)sexuality:

http://www.buddhanet.net/homosexu.htm

A quote from the article:
"All the principles we would use to evaluate a heterosexual relationship we would also use to evaluate a homosexual one. In Buddhism we could say that it is not the object of one's sexual desire that determines whether a sexual act is unskillful or not, but rather the quality of the emotions and intentions involved."
(unskillful meaning negative)

Of course, all buddhist monks are people, and as such carry with them the attitudes of their upbringing and culture, including bigotry and ignorance. In this respect they are no different than believers of any other faith. But at least Buddhism in itself doesn't condemn homosexuality as do Christianity and Islam.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 06, 2006, 09:25:49 AM
****Guys/Gals- This is my thread, there does NOT need to be a connection to BBM to post.  The only connection needed is you have come to this thread, that is enough.  Just something I wanted to clear up.  Sorry to have interrupted the flow here. ****

Thanks for that, Doug.
Wouldn't want to be reprimanded or anything for being off topic.

Not that I mind some playful spanking, of course...
 ;D

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 06, 2006, 10:47:42 AM

Not that I mind some playful spanking, of course...
 ;D

Vic


Oh be still my heart... 

Just kidding, I have never spanked anyone in my life, but with the right person... <wink>

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 06, 2006, 11:02:47 AM
I just got to see Fahrenheit 911.  While I think I have seen every single bit of it in pieces, it was really powerful to see it all put together.  Scary, to say the least.  Thanks Vic.

I also received another one of Ang Lee's movies.... The Wedding Banquet.  It was a nice change, cute and a fairly positive ending for the gay characters. 

Well, lunch time.

See ya all later,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 06, 2006, 01:42:50 PM

(http://links999.net/images/brokeback_mountain/bscap0705.jpg)

No problem.
Slap me hard !

;)
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on July 06, 2006, 02:40:49 PM
Quick reply to Vic re Buddhism--thanks for the link you provided, I'll look into it.

 Cherry-picking holy books is old hat, of course. The problem comes when Christians and others become so powerfull they can spread their hate and bigotry through violence. Garden variety homophobia is enough to deal with,  but  Fundamentalists of every stripe are prone to shove down our throats their insane notions through bombs in the case of the Middle East, and through gay bashing or homicide in the US and elsewhere.

When the DVD-to-libraries project in this Forum was in the early stages, there was enthusiasm for comparing the dissemination of the BBM DVD to Christian missionaries. It lost traction early, however, as cooler heads prevailed. That's one of the great things about this Forum. There's such a diversity of religious belief here that many of its members shuddered--including me-- at the thought of an association with missionaries of any faith,  however sincere the original impulse.

We in this Forum may be unique, in that we have straights, gays and everything in between contributing viewpoints. It's remarkable that a movie that was conceived as an "art-house, little picture" could draw such a wide audience of admirers. Where else could both straight and gay air their views in a civil manner, and with so much love? There's true understanding and a meeting of minds here, and I hope we will continue to build bridges.

Thanks to Ang Lee, everyone involved in BBM, and of course, Dave Cullen and his crew for giving us this opportunity.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 07, 2006, 03:02:25 PM
Jason,

Up to my door today the little old mail lady drove up and honked.  Package for me.

Within the movie "Just a Question of Love"

I tore it out of it's package and popped it into the DVD player.  Had to read the subtitles, but man did I cry when he was suffering his folks.  I know that battle so well.  What my parents do not know to this day is if it was not for gay friends of mine telling me it was not fair, I would have moved and never saw them again.  I had my plans, knew exactly how I was going to do it.  Pack one night, not show up for work again, and not leave a forwarding address, move far, far away so they would never find me, drop off the face of the earth. My friends would not hear of it, it was just too cruel they said.  At that point I was much more ready to reject them than have them reject me, which I was sure they would.  A bad habit of mine, I tend to reject before I get rejected, that seems to be my protection, though not a very good one.  Fear, it seems, rules...

I finallly wrote them a 24 page letter.  As it was, Mother cried for over a year, never could talk to her much, and Dad, well he never will talk of it again, anything but that.  I get along with them ok now, but that subject is still a no go.  My tears over BBM was only shared here on this forum.  They made comments that I must have allergies, because my eyes where so swollen and red.  Why bring them into it, it would have made no difference, they would have told me "it is just a movie, get over it."   

I, too, wished I had a parent like C's Mom, it would have been so much easier, would be so much easier.  At times I still wonder what the hell I am doing here, but getting older?  But to where, and for what? I do not fit in the city, and the city does not work in me, so a country bumpkin I stay.  As Ennis says, "nothin and lost".

A very nice ending, at least they have each other, great hopes for a future together, and C's Mom to keep them on track.   I wonder how many more long term relationships there would be if we had parents that loved and went to the extent she did for her son? 

Thanks, Jason, this movie rates a "10 out of 10" in my book.

Doug

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: quijote on July 07, 2006, 04:39:23 PM
Mr. Infidel,

I have been away quite a long time.  You all have travelled far and wide in my absence.  I just wanted to, in the short time I have, answer a few of the questions you posed to me what seems so long ago now.

First, again you are assuming you are speaking to a fundamentalist Christian when you speak to me.  You are not, sir.  The Old and New Testaments are mythological in the main and are not to be literally interpreted by you, me or anyone else.  That should handle your questions about the Old Testament god.  Moreover, if I am a Christian, I am really looking only to the New Testament, not the Old, except as a useful tool to understand how New Testament writers used the Old to interpret Jesus' life and death.  I take very little literally from the Old Testament, unless it gives me insight into ancient Jewish people, culture and their beliefs.

Second, if you want to understand how non-fundamentalist Christians look at passages from the New Testament that you cite,  you must understand that we see those passages as fully of their time, place and culture and filled with nuance.  They cannot be taken out of their context without doing a great injustice to their meaning.  Regarding the anti-family passages you cite, I agree with John Dominic Crossan on his interpretations of sayings attributed to Jesus.  He says:

"If the supreme value for the 20th century American imagination is individualism, based on economics and property, that for the first-century Mediterranean imagination can be called to the contrary, groupism, based on kinship and gender.  And there were really only two groups -- the familial and the political, kinship and politics -- to be considered.  But we have, precisely against both those groups, biting aphorisms and dialogues from the historical Jesus.  There is, first of all, an almost savage attack on family values and it happens very, very often.

The family is a group to which one is irrevocably assigned, but [as to the whoever does not hate father, mother, etc., saying], that given grouping is negated in favor of another one open to all who wish to join it.....Imagine the standard Mediterranean family with five members:  mother and father, married son with his wife, and unmarried daughter, a nuclear extended family all under one roof.  Jesus says he will tear it apart.  The usual explanation is that families will become divided as some accept and others refuse faith in Jesus.  But notice where and how emphatically the axis of separation is located.  It is precisely between the generations....The attack has nothing to do with faith but with power.  The attack is on the Mediterranean family's axis of power, which sets father and mother over son, daughter, and daughter-in-law....The family is society in miniature, the place where we first and most deeply learn how to love and be loved, hate and be hated, help and be helped, abuse and be abused.  It is not just a center of domestic serenity; since it involves power, it invites the abuse of power, and it is at that precise point that Jesus attacks it.  His ideal group is, contrary to Mediterranean and indeed most human familial reality, an open one equally accessible to all under God.  It is the Kingdom of God, and it negates that terrible abuse of power that is power's dark specter and lethal shadow."


Crossan also explains what Jesus means, given what he is trying to do and teach, this way:

"...the family was a group to which one was assigned....Jesus downplays the family in favor of another kind of group that is open to all who wish to join it.  For Jesus, the given family unit, the kinship unit, is no longer primary.  What is primary is a new community of persons who become "family" to one another in their common effort to do the will of God in the world....[Jesus'] ideal group is contrary to customary human social arrangements, a group that is open and equally accessible to all under God.  In the Kingdom of God there is no abuse of power.  All are welcome, all are equal, and all are alike under the will and purpose of God."

Now, I am one of those non-fundamentalists who think that the "family values" Republicans have a lot of explaining to do given what Jesus was REALLY trying to say.  (For me, what Crossan says convinces me there was a reason Jesus never said a word against homosexuality.)  I also think critics are missing the boat entirely if they don't first get a big picture notion of what Jesus was about and then, second, interpret what he said within that big picture.  Jesus lived in a different time in a different place.  His metaphors speak to those people in a very specific way.  If we keep that in mind, it is easy to understand what he is trying to say to us all.

There is simply no such thing as "plain" meaning.  Reading is a process of interpretation always.  The fundamentalists don't get it.  Neither do non-believers who read passages without any understanding of context.  Of course, an added complication is translation.  The Bible wasn't written in the King's English.  Literalists will constantly sink into the complexities that constitute the written word.  If any human being's philosophy or theology or world view consists of slinging biblical passages at one another, it is a mighty poor intellectual and moral foundation indeed.  Focus on the myth and the arc of the stories.  That's where the gold lies.  Jesus was a peasant living in a time of crushing imperial Roman power and inequitable social and religious rules.  He advocated religious and economic egalitarianism.  When reading what he is alleged to have said, this big picture needs to always be kept in mind.

Jesus' response to oppression and his teaching of the way to an unmediated relationship with something called the Divine had everything to do with our day-to-day treatment of each other.  His message was that the only way to fight oppression or encounter the Divine is to build a life of love, of equal treatment, of justice in our relationsihips with each other.    He, in fact, taught that this was God's will.  This was the nature of the Kingdom of God.

I'll end with Crossan:

"The deliberate conjunction of magic and meal, miracle and table, free compassion and open commensality, was a challenge launched not just on the level of Judaism's strictest purity regulations, or even on that of the Mediterranean's patriarchal combination of honor and shame, patronage and clientage, but at the most basic level of civilization's eternal inclination to draw lines, invoke boundaries, establish hierarchies, and maintain discriminations.  [Jesus' program] did not invite a political revolution but envisaged a social one at the imagination's most dangerous depths.  No importance was given to distinctions of Gentile and Jew, female and male, slave and free, poor and rich.  Those distinctions were hardly ever attacked in theory [by Jesus]; in practice, they were simply ignored."

I don't know when I'll have time to return.  I think this pretty much says all I have to say about interpreting Christianity or biblical passages.  You don't have to believe that Jesus was the son of god to understand he was a thoroughly dangerous man.  Just my type.

Much love to you, Doug, darlin'.
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 07, 2006, 05:28:12 PM
                   
Quote
  Thanks, Jason, this movie rates a "10 out of 10" in my book.

I'm glad you liked it Doug! I've watched it about 5 times now.  It's a great uplifter after watching BBM!  :)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 08, 2006, 09:55:30 AM
Mr. Infidel,

Hi Again,

Quote
I have been away quite a long time.  You all have travelled far and wide in my absence.  I just wanted to, in the short time I have, answer a few of the questions you posed to me what seems so long ago now.

Thank You.

Quote
First, again you are assuming you are speaking to a fundamentalist Christian when you speak to me.  You are not, sir. 

 No, I am just trying to get people to see that when they take the label "Christian" it comes with a butt load of baggage.

Quote
The Old and New Testaments are mythological in the main and are not to be literally interpreted by you, me or anyone else. 

Thank You, that was at least part of the point I was so unsuccessfully trying to get across. My point is if something HAS to be interpreted for you then it is a weapon to be used against you by those who do that kind of thing.  I totally agree the whole bible is mythological and not to be taken literally.

Quote
That should handle your questions about the Old Testament god.  Moreover, if I am a Christian, I am really looking only to the New Testament, not the Old, except as a useful tool to understand how New Testament writers used the Old to interpret Jesus' life and death.  I take very little literally from the Old Testament, unless it gives me insight into ancient Jewish people, culture and their beliefs.

Sounds good to me.

Quote
Second, if you want to understand how non-fundamentalist Christians look at passages from the New Testament that you cite,  you must understand that we see those passages as fully of their time, place and culture and filled with nuance.  They cannot be taken out of their context without doing a great injustice to their meaning.  Regarding the anti-family passages you cite, I agree with John Dominic Crossan on his interpretations of sayings attributed to Jesus. 

What I want to understand about non-fundamentalist christians is why they stand by and let fundamentalist define them, let them speak for them, and let them manipulate them. Taking out of context is everyday practice by most, so when I do it, it is just as valid as when they do it.  Of course, I know that wrong, that is also a point I am trying to make. 

Quote
He says:

"If the supreme value for the 20th century American imagination is individualism, based on economics and property, that for the first-century Mediterranean imagination can be called to the contrary, groupism, based on kinship and gender.  And there were really only two groups -- the familial and the political, kinship and politics -- to be considered.  But we have, precisely against both those groups, biting aphorisms and dialogues from the historical Jesus.  There is, first of all, an almost savage attack on family values and it happens very, very often.

Certainly agree there, however, the point was that one never hears that acknowledged.  Thanks for that.

Quote
The family is a group to which one is irrevocably assigned, but [as to the whoever does not hate father, mother, etc., saying], that given grouping is negated in favor of another one open to all who wish to join it.....Imagine the standard Mediterranean family with five members:  mother and father, married son with his wife, and unmarried daughter, a nuclear extended family all under one roof.  Jesus says he will tear it apart.  The usual explanation is that families will become divided as some accept and others refuse faith in Jesus.  But notice where and how emphatically the axis of separation is located.  It is precisely between the generations....The attack has nothing to do with faith but with power.  The attack is on the Mediterranean family's axis of power, which sets father and mother over son, daughter, and daughter-in-law....The family is society in miniature, the place where we first and most deeply learn how to love and be loved, hate and be hated, help and be helped, abuse and be abused.  It is not just a center of domestic serenity; since it involves power, it invites the abuse of power, and it is at that precise point that Jesus attacks it.  His ideal group is, contrary to Mediterranean and indeed most human familial reality, an open one equally accessible to all under God.  It is the Kingdom of God, and it negates that terrible abuse of power that is power's dark specter and lethal shadow."

That explanation is the best one I have heard to date.  How many of the "ordinary christians" do you think know this?  Very, very few is my guess. 


Quote
Crossan also explains what Jesus means, given what he is trying to do and teach, this way:

"...the family was a group to which one was assigned....Jesus downplays the family in favor of another kind of group that is open to all who wish to join it.  For Jesus, the given family unit, the kinship unit, is no longer primary.  What is primary is a new community of persons who become "family" to one another in their common effort to do the will of God in the world....[Jesus'] ideal group is contrary to customary human social arrangements, a group that is open and equally accessible to all under God.  In the Kingdom of God there is no abuse of power.  All are welcome, all are equal, and all are alike under the will and purpose of God."

Damn, it is too bad that the majority of christians do not believe this or practice it.  All are not welcome, all are not equal, this group is not open, with equal accessibility.  If this is the way it is supposted to be, how come I do not hear an out cry from the christians against their leaders who teach the opposite?

Quote
Now, I am one of those non-fundamentalists who think that the "family values" Republicans have a lot of explaining to do given what Jesus was REALLY trying to say.  (For me, what Crossan says convinces me there was a reason Jesus never said a word against homosexuality.) 

Thank You!!  I really wished I could believe you are the majority, rather than a small minority.  This Jesus I could get behind, even if I believed he was a myth.  The Jesus I hear preached is a monster of manipulation and hate, of course, that is really the man doing the preaching. Also another point. 

Quote
I also think critics are missing the boat entirely if they don't first get a big picture notion of what Jesus was about and then, second, interpret what he said within that big picture.  Jesus lived in a different time in a different place.  His metaphors speak to those people in a very specific way.  If we keep that in mind, it is easy to understand what he is trying to say to us all.

This I will never understand, why did he not speak in plain language?  Why the stupid metaphors to create need for interpretation? Why not state plainly?  I can not trust anything that needs interpretation, there is just too much room for manipulation. 

Quote
There is simply no such thing as "plain" meaning.  Reading is a process of interpretation always. 

Of course, but there is a marked difference between "Ennis had sex with Jack" and "Ennis was stemming the rose with Jack".   One is straight forward, and the other requires interpretation.  All it takes in the second is for the interpreter to tell his followers that "stemming of the rose" means "killing infidels" and we are right back to where we are with religion now.

Quote
The fundamentalists don't get it. 

Absolutely true. What I do not get is why there is not a big up roar against them, but there is not a whisper, therefore one has to conclude there is nearly total agreement.

Quote
Neither do non-believers who read passages without any understanding of context. 

Why should the non-believers be any more knowledgeable than the people who profess to believe? If they use passages out of context, then to expect the non-believer to not do the same is irrational.  He is going to try and turn the weapon against him to his advantage.  To fight fire with fire.  They stop using out of context passages as weapons, they will not find them being used against them.

Quote
Of course, an added complication is translation.  The Bible wasn't written in the King's English.  Literalists will constantly sink into the complexities that constitute the written word.  If any human being's philosophy or theology or world view consists of slinging biblical passages at one another, it is a mighty poor intellectual and moral foundation indeed. 

Absolutely agree.  However, being the one having biblical passage slung at him, having biblical passages used to make laws that prevent freedom, having biblical passages used as proof of evil, how does one fight this?  The turning of the other cheek has been tried, they take that as a success and press on to limit even more. 

Quote
Focus on the myth and the arc of the stories.  That's where the gold lies.  Jesus was a peasant living in a time of crushing imperial Roman power and inequitable social and religious rules.  He advocated religious and economic egalitarianism.  When reading what he is alleged to have said, this big picture needs to always be kept in mind.

For me it is nearly impossible to separate what is being said and taught day to day, and this.  For me, it is much more simple to dismiss the whole myth, and use my own loving, conscious being to know right from wrong.  I always try to come from a place of love, though that is very difficult sometimes when I am dealing with hatred wrapped in a cloth of make believe love.  The very word "christian" brings up all sorts of barriers and assumptions. You was hit with some of them.  Are they unjust?  Perhaps, but necessary if one is to be left sane. 

Quote
Jesus' response to oppression and his teaching of the way to an unmediated relationship with something called the Divine had everything to do with our day-to-day treatment of each other.  His message was that the only way to fight oppression or encounter the Divine is to build a life of love, of equal treatment, of justice in our relationsihips with each other.    He, in fact, taught that this was God's will.  This was the nature of the Kingdom of God.

Then why is the congress trying to pass laws again gay unions?  Then why are open gays not welcome in many churches?  Then why is there such shame attached to being gay?  They all profess to worship this Jesus, but where is his teachings then?  Where the hell is this Divine to build a life of love, of equal treatment, of justice?  Do you see my point?  Your belief is wonderful, and I only wished that more believed as you do.  I believe as you, but not because of a Jesus or teaching, but because I love, and want love and acceptance.  More or less the golden rule.   However, when one is meet with hatred... it is very hard to not give that back.

Quote
I'll end with Crossan:

"The deliberate conjunction of magic and meal, miracle and table, free compassion and open commensality, was a challenge launched not just on the level of Judaism's strictest purity regulations, or even on that of the Mediterranean's patriarchal combination of honor and shame, patronage and clientage, but at the most basic level of civilization's eternal inclination to draw lines, invoke boundaries, establish hierarchies, and maintain discriminations.  [Jesus' program] did not invite a political revolution but envisaged a social one at the imagination's most dangerous depths.  No importance was given to distinctions of Gentile and Jew, female and male, slave and free, poor and rich.  Those distinctions were hardly ever attacked in theory [by Jesus]; in practice, they were simply ignored."

Those man made distinctions should be ignored, and the loving, conscious human being seen and accepted.  Agree.

Quote
I don't know when I'll have time to return.  I think this pretty much says all I have to say about interpreting Christianity or biblical passages.  You don't have to believe that Jesus was the son of god to understand he was a thoroughly dangerous man.  Just my type.

I do not believe "Jesus" ever existed as one being, but as a aggregate of many.  I know there is a lot of positive in the bible, but the same can be said for many, many books.  I am not sure that myth is the way to teach, especially myth that is so far from our time that it has to be interpreted.  That brings me to another point, why do we put stock into a book that is 2,000 years old, when in no other area of our lives we do the same? 

Quote
Much love to you, Doug, darlin'.

Same to you.  Thank You for taking the time to explain youself, you have done what no other person do date has bothered to do.  Usually, because they have no idea what they are talking about.

Take Care,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on July 09, 2006, 01:54:29 AM
Doug, here's a link to an article about the Pope's recent visit to Spain:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/world/europe/09pope.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

"...the Church's opposition to gay marriage and Europe's long slide into secularism." indeed! To me, what the Pope bemoans as a "...slide into secularism..." is a reason to rejoice! Spanish gays have had the right to marry for a year now and the sky hasn't come crashing down, no rioting in the streets, no public fornication.

This is a serious problem....for the Church! Having life go on with married gays being a non-issue only shows how flawed and perverse (and anti-family!--gays have kids, too) the Church's teachings were from the very start.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 09, 2006, 04:08:42 AM
Thanks for that, Jer009.

Quote
From the article:
The Vatican, which normally seeks to smooth over all embarrassment, reacted with unusual force, commenting that other leftist leaders had attended such Masses when Pope John Paul II visited their countries.

When the previous pope expressed his wish to visit the Netherlands some years ago, the answer was plain.

Amsterdam and the northern half of the Netherlands is mostly protestant and they told the Vatican plainly that they had no intention to pay for his visit. If he wanted to visit the Netherlands he can go to the Southern part, which is mostly roman catholic, and if they want to pay for it, that's fine.

So he visited the southern part only.

Quote
From the article:
"You know that I follow closely and with much interest the life of the church in your country, a country with deep Christian roots, one which has greatly contributed and must still contribute to the proclamation and spread of the faith," Benedict wrote in his message to the bishops {of Spain}.

By contribution he means the Inquisition, which was started in Spain, and which eventually caused the death of tens of millions of innocents across Europe and South America? Only to solidify the church's stranglehold on knowledge and the masses and keep them perpetually in a state of poverty and ignorance?

Of course the church is horrified that traditionalist countries like Spain embrace secularity, and it is not surprising that the previous hypocrite targeted South America and Africa for his visits - the poor have more need of religion and a god to explain their misery than others who are more concerned with the realities of daily life and who have long since found out that the church is no help at all but rather another hindrance to their happiness.

Besides, I find the whole idea of a pope a joke, a farce, and an affront to belief and religion. Neither Islam nor Buddhism has one, for that matter.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 09, 2006, 08:59:08 AM
Doug, here's a link to an article about the Pope's recent visit to Spain:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/world/europe/09pope.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

"...the Church's opposition to gay marriage and Europe's long slide into secularism." indeed! To me, what the Pope bemoans as a "...slide into secularism..." is a reason to rejoice! Spanish gays have had the right to marry for a year now and the sky hasn't come crashing down, no rioting in the streets, no public fornication.

Thanks Jer009 for linking to this story, I had not heard of it before.  I had heard that religion is decreasing in Europe, which is very hopeful.  Indeed it is a reason to rejoice!  Now if we can only get a few other countries to try it, they will most likely find the same, but one statistic I would like to see from Spain now is how much more stable are the gay relationships?  Has marriage allowed those folks a better foundation to hold onto their relationships?

Quote
This is a serious problem....for the Church! Having life go on with married gays being a non-issue only shows how flawed and perverse (and anti-family!--gays have kids, too) the Church's teachings were from the very start.

Absolutely right gays have kids too, my best friend for many years was a gay woman with three boys in tow.  Many things are a serious problem for the Church, they like to take a non-issue and turn it into a real mess, all in the name of love of course.  A really big problem for the Church, if it can be found out, is if gay marriage proves to help the one problem the church has always claimed proved something, their relationships do not last, therefore are not natural.  Of course, it is little wonder gays have more problems with relationships considering how much pressure from all quarters is put on them to break up.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 09, 2006, 09:37:56 AM
On the "issue" of gay marriage, I have never understood how it can have the anti hold it does.

If a man talks to HIS god, and his god thinks it is a good idea. Then a man talks to HIS church, and they think it is a good idea, and a man talks to HIS pastor/minister and he is also in agreement. Is it not then a matter of FREEDOM OF RELIGION, rather than morality issue?  Who the hell is Pat Roberson, Jerry Falwell, Lot, Frist, etc to make law to deny freedom of religion? These nuts and other churches want it to be only freedom of THEIR religion, congress is now in the process of making a whole class of people less than the rest, it is one thing to believe it, another to codify it in the law.  IF this matter of Freedom of Religion is mute, then does that not mean that ALL matters of Freedom are mute, if the majority does not like it?  For this to even be a discussion for changing the Constitution is beyond all understanding of that very Constitution. 

Why does not the gay community use this fact? Yet, to date, I have not heard ONE word of Freedom of Religion on this argument from the gay side. Plenty of Freedom of Religion from the other side, they scream it in a non-stopping thunder day and night.  When are we going to learn to do the same?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 10, 2006, 12:24:31 AM
Here's a thought I had over the weekend while watching some of my favourite SF.

When we discover alien civilisations that also have a single omnipotent god as their main religion, will these Christians (and other religious zealots) accept this god as their god as well? Or, which I think is much more likely, will they instantly go to war with them because their god is the only one? They already have serious problems thinking of god as possibly female let alone accept her/him as some slimy 10-tentacled creature? They can't even love their neighbour who is human and gay. Forget about "love thy neighbour" when that neighbour turns out to be non-human.

For that matter, will they accept any god when that god reveals him/herself as simply a superior alien race that's been fiddling with humanity?
I think with what we already know of the universe today the whole concept of an omnipotent god is totally outdated anyway. And that would include any sons or prophets of him/her as well.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on July 10, 2006, 03:29:29 AM
Folks, Doug mentioned Sci Fi in an earlier post, and Vic wondered how Earthlings would treat aliens at first contact. What did you both think of Deep Space Nine, with all its religious themes? Sisko as a Prophet and all. Sure is a long way from the original Trek, which only mentioned religion a couple of times during its run, and The Next Generation which seemed to be, at times, way agnostic.

Was DS9 an abberation or an advance? Posters on the Sci Fi thread seemed to like it's more dark nature, and the religious nature, too.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on July 10, 2006, 04:02:24 AM
You've got to see this picture....I tried to capture it, but I couldn't.  It's in the "Start Your Own Threads" section, at Jack's Cracker Barrel, page 39.

It's a picture of a mini Statue of Liberty, only with a cross in one outstretched arm, and carrying tablets with the 10 commandments in the other.

I thought it was perfect for this thread, sickening though it is.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on July 10, 2006, 04:45:58 AM
Opps... a couple of posts back I was mentioning Star Trek: The Next Generation and I mentioned that Next Generation was often agnostic. What I meant to say is that the crew of the Enterprise seemed to be secular humanists, which religious conservatives seem to despise about as much as atheists. Me, I think secular humanism is our only chance if we're to get to the stars without blowing ourselves up in a war....probably caused by some extreme religious zealot. I think of agnosticism and secular humanism as a continuum, at least at this point in history.

In any case, the question stands: DS9, the wrong road or....?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 10, 2006, 05:50:28 AM
y'all have to see this.  its real.

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/07/04/us/05liberty.large1.jpg)

this may explain the previous post above.

jack

You mean this one? Yes, I find it quite disturbing.
If you want it out of your thread, Doug, just let me know and..... Zzzzaaapp.

;D
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 10, 2006, 06:15:57 AM
Folks, Doug mentioned Sci Fi in an earlier post, and Vic wondered how Earthlings would treat aliens at first contact. What did you both think of Deep Space Nine, with all its religious themes? Sisko as a Prophet and all. Sure is a long way from the original Trek, which only mentioned religion a couple of times during its run, and The Next Generation which seemed to be, at times, way agnostic.

Was DS9 an abberation or an advance? Posters on the Sci Fi thread seemed to like it's more dark nature, and the religious nature, too.

DS9 is very spiritual, yes. I sort of liked it as it didn't detract from the main storyline. But if it had involved humans directly they would have lost me real quick, which is probably why they let an alien race, the Bajorans, handle it. And, of course, the human ego, in this case that of Captain Sisko, isn't above being considered a prophet for an alien race...

Which reminds me of another question that came to mind:

How is the large Latin population of the United States, who are mostly catholic, buying into this religious cr*p?

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 10, 2006, 09:49:26 AM
Here's a thought I had over the weekend while watching some of my favourite SF.

When we discover alien civilisations that also have a single omnipotent god as their main religion, will these Christians (and other religious zealots) accept this god as their god as well? Or, which I think is much more likely, will they instantly go to war with them because their god is the only one?


They will attack with everything they have, telling us that they envy our freedom, hate our god, and are evil.  Their usual mindless junk.

Quote
They already have serious problems thinking of god as possibly female let alone accept her/him as some slimy 10-tentacled creature? They can't even love their neighbour who is human and gay. Forget about "love thy neighbour" when that neighbour turns out to be non-human.

Yep, not a chance.  Oh, there will be a few, but the majority will not tolerate them at all.

Quote
For that matter, will they accept any god when that god reveals him/herself as simply a superior alien race that's been fiddling with humanity?

All the aliens have to do is look, and act the part, then with a wave of the hand they could take over the entire planet.  If they can not look and act the part, they will have a major fight on their hands.

Quote
I think with what we already know of the universe today the whole concept of an omnipotent god is totally outdated anyway. And that would include any sons or prophets of him/her as well.

Yep, agree. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 10, 2006, 10:04:17 AM
Folks, Doug mentioned Sci Fi in an earlier post, and Vic wondered how Earthlings would treat aliens at first contact. What did you both think of Deep Space Nine, with all its religious themes? Sisko as a Prophet and all. Sure is a long way from the original Trek, which only mentioned religion a couple of times during its run, and The Next Generation which seemed to be, at times, way agnostic.

Was DS9 an abberation or an advance? Posters on the Sci Fi thread seemed to like it's more dark nature, and the religious nature, too.

I am all for it.  The more we are exposed to different religions, even imagined religions, the more easy it is to see that all of them are mind made.    I would like to see some them coming to the understanding that they are being lied to a little more often , but be that as it may...  I really like Star Wars for "the force" religion, it was easy to understand, that the force did not care who or how it was used, it just was.

This is why I really think there should be religion in schools, but not in the place of science, but in a mandatory religion study class that goes through the myths of say the top ten religions, compares them, contrasts them, and exposes them as the myths they are.  Educates people about how these different people believe, and perhaps gives them more chance to see them as human beings rather than a religion.  It is good for people to see that the Aboriginal origin story of god hatching from a cosmic egg, what laid the egg we will never know, that man came from a boil on his leg is just as valid as one they hold so dear. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 10, 2006, 10:25:49 AM
Opps... a couple of posts back I was mentioning Star Trek: The Next Generation and I mentioned that Next Generation was often agnostic. What I meant to say is that the crew of the Enterprise seemed to be secular humanists, which religious conservatives seem to despise about as much as atheists. Me, I think secular humanism is our only chance if we're to get to the stars without blowing ourselves up in a war....probably caused by some extreme religious zealot. I think of agnosticism and secular humanism as a continuum, at least at this point in history.

In any case, the question stands: DS9, the wrong road or....?

I guess this is where someone is going to have to enlighten me. Secular Humanists, what are they?  I was on a secular humanist forum once, it was in the process of being invaded by religious nuts, but I was having a really hard time telling them apart.  It seemed like they both where given to illusions of mysticism?  Or was I just on a mixed up forum? 

After looking up "secular humanist", it seems I could be one???   Hmmm....  No doubt the religious nuts will hate them with a passion, if what I just read is correct.

DS9, not the right road or the wrong road, just a road, it is sci-fi after all. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 10, 2006, 11:11:14 AM
y'all have to see this.  its real.

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/07/04/us/05liberty.large1.jpg)

this may explain the previous post above.

jack

You mean this one? Yes, I find it quite disturbing.
If you want it out of your thread, Doug, just let me know and..... Zzzzaaapp.

;D
Vic

No, I do not want anything keep out of this thread, except that which is against the general rules of this forum. 

This, like so much, is the rewriting of history.  They will convince others that this is how the statue of liberty was meant to be, and those damn god haters got them to change it to the torch.  Just you wait and see. 

They have already rewrote much of our history.  People actually believe that this nation was founded a democratic christian nation, it was founded a non-religious republic. Already people believe that "In God we Trust" is what the founding fathers wanted on our currency, it was E Pluribus Unum, "from many one".  Already people believe that the founding fathers were all highly religious, and that is what they created this nation from, religious tenents, but in fact many were deists, evangelical did not exist at all, deist is more of a naturalist religion, god in their view had long since left the arena.    The tenents they used was freedom of the individual, freedom from state and church, freedom and protection from authority was the main thrust.

If they want a statue like this I have no problem as long as it is not on public land, in the public square, this belongs in a church courtyard, or such.  Of course, their whole point is to have it in the public's face.  Since that is the case, I have a proposal, let them have their statue, but then they can not complain when the Buddhas, the American Indians, the Hindu, the Jewish, the atheist, etc. also want to put their versions of the statue of liberty in the same park.  I think there should be a group whose purpose it is to do just such things. 

When Judge Moore put up his religious stand in the main hall of the court house, I think someone should have walked in, measured it, then had at least ten more made with different religions on them, and backed a truck up, and filled that court house with them. When they sue to have the others removed, they will be hard pressed to justify their one.  Just a thought. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 10, 2006, 12:01:59 PM
Doug, I can't help but admire your single-minded consistency. Even when you talk about something else, you bring your point across most clearly. Thanks for that.

:)

And you're right, of course. No matter how or what you present the zealous with, no matter how logical, how creative, how sensible, how obvious, they will always come up with the same answer, namely, that their version is the only true one. And everyone else's is blasphemy and thus wrong.

That reminds me of someone I fired once. I had a creative assistant with whom I got along fine, we worked well together, even had fun, except that she had the bad habit to bring everything into religious context, which, quite frankly, bugged the hell out of me. But okay, let's be professionals here, I thought, as long as you do the work, you can believe what you like, just don't preach too much. And she didn't.

However, one day I had had enough, the proverbial drop that made the bucket overflow, so to speak. As an avid dinosaur enthusiast I came into work one day and quite happily told her how they had discovered the remains of a giant dinosaur, T-Rex type, etc. and so forth. Half way through my telling, she interrupted me and said: "But that's not possible." So I asked why not. "God created the earth and everything 6000 years ago," she answered, "so he only made it look like these bones were millions of years old. They weren't really that old."

...

After a memo to my superiors I fired her the same day. Not because I didn't agree with her, not because I couldn't let her have her belief. I fired her because of her mental rigidity, her inability to even consider thinking beyond the little box she had put herself into. And I knew then that somewhere down the line, in a creative field especially, she would become a liability rather than an asset to me. So I took action.

Problem is, you can't convert these people. I think you and me and other people here are willing to consider other possibilities, willing to realize that we may be wrong if provided with enough proof. People like her cannot be changed because change would force her to have to re-examine her motives, her self worth and all that.

If I learned anything about religion it is that is often used as a shield against "the big bad world" rather than a mirror to the self. And no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to change them. They can't cope with change on any level. And for that inability the rest of us have to pay.

Like you mentioned before, one can be an activist and not know it. Count me in.

;)
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 10, 2006, 01:36:02 PM
Doug, I can't help but admire your single-minded consistency. Even when you talk about something else, you bring your point across most clearly. Thanks for that.

:)

LOL!  Yeah, call it a character flaw...  I guess it is that way for me, because I see the interconnections everywhere, and it bugs me that others do not.  I will try to do better...  I absolutely know there is more to life than worrying about all this.


Quote
And you're right, of course. No matter how or what you present the zealous with, no matter how logical, how creative, how sensible, how obvious, they will always come up with the same answer, namely, that their version is the only true one. And everyone else's is blasphemy and thus wrong.

Sure looks that way to me.  My experiences confirm that conclusion as well. 

Quote
That reminds me of someone I fired once. I had a creative assistant with whom I got along fine, we worked well together, even had fun, except that she had the bad habit to bring everything into religious context, which, quite frankly, bugged the hell out of me. But okay, let's be professionals here, I thought, as long as you do the work, you can believe what you like, just don't preach too much. And she didn't.

However, one day I had had enough, the proverbial drop that made the bucket overflow, so to speak. As an avid dinosaur enthusiast I came into work one day and quite happily told her how they had discovered the remains of a giant dinosaur, T-Rex type, etc. and so forth. Half way through my telling, she interrupted me and said: "But that's not possible." So I asked why not. "God created the earth and everything 6000 years ago," she answered, "so he only made it look like these bones were millions of years old. They weren't really that old."

Aaaaaaggghhhhh!!  <Doug pulling what little hair he has left on his head.>   One has to wonder why God would bother with such a deception? I mean he went all out to get the radioactive dating to work out, the sedimentary layering perfect, the progression of the bone structures perfect, the logic is also perfect, yet he can not get the most important story of all, his resurrection right, nor even how many times and where each apostle died, and the logic... well...   He must have REALLY wanted to fool many poor souls into the lake of fire with his false evidence, sounds like such a nice loving welcoming god... 

Just think how different this would all be if this "false evidence" was not here.  Since it is, and if one accepts the premise of this god, then the great effort put into manufacturing this "false evidence" has to be a test, a test to see if one can think or not, those that think, use validated evidence, they are evil and are to be thrown into the lake of fire.  Remember it was from eating from the tree of knowledge in the first place that placed original sin on us all.  Such a nice loving god...

Quote
...

After a memo to my superiors I fired her the same day. Not because I didn't agree with her, not because I couldn't let her have her belief. I fired her because of her mental rigidity, her inability to even consider thinking beyond the little box she had put herself into. And I knew then that somewhere down the line, in a creative field especially, she would become a liability rather than an asset to me. So I took action.

I am glad you was able to, I am not so sure one could in the current environment here. 

Quote
Problem is, you can't convert these people. I think you and me and other people here are willing to consider other possibilities, willing to realize that we may be wrong if provided with enough proof. People like her cannot be changed because change would force her to have to re-examine her motives, her self worth and all that.

Quite so, I would convert in a single set down conversation with Jesus/god/allah, just after he proves he is who he says he is, and convinces me that he is worthy of my worship, fear is not going to do it.  I loath fear being used as a weapon.  He would have to satisfactorily explain why the evil I see all around, exists, especially from those who represent him.

Quote
If I learned anything about religion it is that is often used as a shield against "the big bad world" rather than a mirror to the self. And no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to change them. They can't cope with change on any level. And for that inability the rest of us have to pay.

Actually they pay as well, with the loss of their loved ones in war, with loss of greater life, and a life free of oppression.  But the brunt is the poor SOB that gets scapegoated as the "cause".  The really sad thing is "the big bad world" is an illusion, created to manipulate them, and fleece them as the sheeple they are.  "The big bad world" does not exist, it is only a few bad people able to get the support of the majority of good people by manipulation.  Where would that little monster in North Korea be if the people did not support him, even as he murders them and starves them? 

Quote
Like you mentioned before, one can be an activist and not know it. Count me in.

Lets see Vic, is one, counted.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 11, 2006, 04:08:19 AM
LOL!  Yeah, call it a character flaw...  I guess it is that way for me, because I see the interconnections everywhere, and it bugs me that others do not.  I will try to do better...  I absolutely know there is more to life than worrying about all this.

I don't believe in character flaws, just characters. :)

I'm also quite sure you know how to enjoy life and that you do more than worry about religious zealots, even when it's clearly important to you.

Quote
One has to wonder why God would bother with such a deception? I mean he went all out to get the radioactive dating to work out, the sedimentary layering perfect, the progression of the bone structures perfect, the logic is also perfect, yet he can not get the most important story of all, his resurrection right, nor even how many times and where each apostle died, and the logic... well...   

Just think how different this would all be if this "false evidence" was not here.  Since it is, and if one accepts the premise of this god, then the great effort put into manufacturing this "false evidence" has to be a test, a test to see if one can think or not, those that think, use validated evidence, they are evil and are to be thrown into the lake of fire.  Remember it was from eating from the tree of knowledge in the first place that placed original sin on us all.  Such a nice loving god...

That more or less sums up the ... I had with her! You don't really think I'd let her go without saying a word or 2(000)?
;D

Quote
But the brunt is the poor SOB that gets scapegoated as the "cause".  The really sad thing is "the big bad world" is an illusion, created to manipulate them, and fleece them as the sheeple they are.  "The big bad world" does not exist, it is only a few bad people able to get the support of the majority of good people by manipulation.  Where would that little monster in North Korea be if the people did not support him, even as he murders them and starves them?

Which is why "I only followed orders" was not accepted as viable excuse during the Nazi trials. We ALL have to account for our actions sooner or later. And I mean in this life, not the next!

As far as I am concerned heaven is very sparsely populated as zealots would be the first to be cast into hell, IMHO, followed by their hypocritical sheep.

Quote
Like you mentioned before, one can be an activist and not know it. Count me in.

Quote
Lets see Vic, is one, counted.
Doug

I've certainly been known to be on 'missions'. <trying to remember where I buried my hatchet>

 ;D >:(
Vic

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: All4one on July 14, 2006, 01:25:42 PM
" We all have to account for our actions sooner or later. And I mean in this life, not the next!" ( Vic)

Well, here's the thing: not all do pay for their actions in this life.
Maybe that's why some cling so fervently to the hope for an afterlife - that little voice inside us that
calls out "not fair!!"

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Gonzo on July 15, 2006, 04:36:55 PM
http://davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=11435.0

Hey Nonbelievers, I have a proposal that might be just up your alleys.  ;)  Follow the link up to a thread I started today.  It's called "Eye on the Religious Right" and it is a review of daily emails of Focus on the Family, Moral Majority (yeah, right), Christian Coalition and Traditional Values Coalition.  Check it out and see if you're interested.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 15, 2006, 08:32:00 PM
http://davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=11435.0

Hey Nonbelievers, I have a proposal that might be just up your alleys.  ;)  Follow the link up to a thread I started today.  It's called "Eye on the Religious Right" and it is a review of daily emails of Focus on the Family, Moral Majority (yeah, right), Christian Coalition and Traditional Values Coalition.  Check it out and see if you're interested.  Thanks.

I am interested, however, NOT talking about religion on a thread named "Eye on the Religious Right" is a very tall order. IMHO.  I will do my best, if that turns out to not be good enough then say so and I will leave that thread.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Gonzo on July 15, 2006, 09:20:20 PM
My take is that it's about the political behavior of the Religious Right.  Their political actions, not their beliefs.  Invariably, we'll probably stray because actions stem directly from belief, but if we could keep it down some that would be good.  We'll give it a try, see if it's doable.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Gonzo on July 15, 2006, 09:24:51 PM
P.S. When you read my post you will see that we can include any none religious groups that are perceived hostile by forum members.  NRA might be an example of a non-religious group.  So maybe if there is enough interest it could expand to be a general call-for-action thread.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 16, 2006, 05:34:03 AM
" We all have to account for our actions sooner or later. And I mean in this life, not the next!" ( Vic)

Well, here's the thing: not all do pay for their actions in this life.
Maybe that's why some cling so fervently to the hope for an afterlife - that little voice inside us that
calls out "not fair!!"

Since I don't believe in an after life, I do believe that we reap what we sow in this one, and that goes for all the people that made life difficult or a hell [for me]. I don't want to go too much into clichés but 'what goes around comes around'.  That zealots live a life of condemning and hurting others only to repent on their deathbeds in the hope that this will get them into heaven anyway, is a non-starter for me. And if there were a god, I doubt very much he would accept it as well. Like I said, heaven must be very sparsely populated.

For this same reason I find the idea of incarnation more interesting (though I don't believe in that either). At least here you automatically pay for your past life actions by coming back in a lower life (form) rather than moving up.

I do understand why people want an afterlife, the thought of not existing anymore in any form is simply too much for most to handle because it also means that we are nothing, really, but motes of cosmic dust, which is exactly what I do believe in. :)

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on July 16, 2006, 05:39:49 AM
http://davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=11435.0

Hey Nonbelievers, I have a proposal that might be just up your alleys.  ;)  Follow the link up to a thread I started today.  It's called "Eye on the Religious Right" and it is a review of daily emails of Focus on the Family, Moral Majority (yeah, right), Christian Coalition and Traditional Values Coalition.  Check it out and see if you're interested.  Thanks.

Interesting idea. I will look in and see how it goes, and help out when possible. No promises. But I won't subscribe to any of their newsletters, sorry. Got enough junk in my mailbox(es) already without adding to it with religious cr*p.

 ;)
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: cherry on July 16, 2006, 10:00:55 AM
I'm checking my email real quick and I haven't had time to read the entire post.  I just want to say thanks for having the bravery to start this thread.  I will read it later and rest assured I will visit this thread often.  Thanks.

Hahaha! Me brave?  Not really, just I really wanted to talk to people who actually make sense to me.  And my thought was that if we can create a nice thread that believers can read, maybe, just maybe we can all understand each other a little bit better.

I look forward to hearing from you.


You have to be brave in the US to say you're a non-believer?  I said it on another thread and I'll say it here - my heart bleeds. It honestly scares the poop out of me.   
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 16, 2006, 10:38:33 AM

You have to be brave in the US to say you're a non-believer?  I said it on another thread and I'll say it here - my heart bleeds. It honestly scares the poop out of me.   

Hi Cherry, Welcome!

I do not think you need to be brave, just honest with yourself. I think too many of us have taken to being quiet when we should say something, that is why things are the way they are now.  Also, many of us have given up, feel so overwhelmed that we just shut down.  I wonder if the current administration would be in if the large non-believer population would have gone out and voted this last two elections.  That is where we are beaten, we get down on all that even smacks of religion, both parties do at this time, which I fully understand, but we have to endure it and get out there make our positions known.  Just a thought. 

Again, welcome.

Take Care,
Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: cherry on July 16, 2006, 11:07:05 AM
Thanks for the welcome. :)

 I was just talking to my husband about this and he says I have a pessimistic view that nearly everybody there is of the same opinion and that's just not true. You said this, "I wonder if the current administration would be in if the large non-believer population would have gone out and voted this last two elections" and I'm just relieved to hear you say that there is a large non-believer population.  I hear of the religious right growing in the US and it scares me as  we tend to follow you.
I know  I'm not qualified or clever enough to get into this properly but I can't imagine people here in UK being scared to say they are non-believers. Anyhow, let's hope more people decide to speak up.  You're making a good start:)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on July 17, 2006, 05:40:57 PM
Thanks for the welcome. :)

 I was just talking to my husband about this and he says I have a pessimistic view that nearly everybody there is of the same opinion and that's just not true.

I think you will find this country is nearly divided into two.  The root difference is one believes that both parents should have equal power and guidance, the other believes in the master male, who gives the law from on high.  All the other differences seem to stem from those base beliefs.

Quote
You said this, "I wonder if the current administration would be in if the large non-believer population would have gone out and voted this last two elections" and I'm just relieved to hear you say that there is a large non-believer population. 

One thing to keep in mind that 54% of the population does not vote, the majority.  The majority do not see enough difference between the two parties, or do not believe that they can get a fair shake, and just stay home.  Are they non-believers?  Yes, at least in the area of belief in government.  The 50/50 divide that is always talked about is among those that do vote, the 54% majority is completely ignored.  I can not help but think that if that 54% was to vote they would vote more on the liberal side of the equation.

Quote
I hear of the religious right growing in the US and it scares me as  we tend to follow you.

I personally do not believe that, I believe that a few have taken centers of power, congress, presidency and judicial now the main ones, and are using it to make the illusion that the nation is turning wildly religious, but church attendance has been dropping for years.  I think what we are seeing is a very desperate religious right fighting dirty to keep their perceived power.   When you ask the regular person what they actually believe, only a few are as radical as the current climate suggests.  The vast majority bare no resemblance of the radicals that spew on the tv and radio all the time.

Quote
I know  I'm not qualified or clever enough to get into this properly but I can't imagine people here in UK being scared to say they are non-believers. Anyhow, let's hope more people decide to speak up.  You're making a good start:)

Qualified? You have to be qualified?  LOL!  Clever? You have to be clever? Naw, just be yourself is all that is required.  If questioned, answer the best you can, with honesty and integrity.

As far as being qualified, take a look at our current administration...   you just need to be connected, self-righteous, perhaps a little crazy, but surely not qualified or clever.   You are much more qualified than many of such clowns.  At least from what few words you have spoken you seem to be alble to think in terms of reality. Post anytime you like.

I am hoping that the majority will take the time to vote this fall and set this mess straight by overwhelming numbers.  However, they may be so beat down that they will continue to believe they are out numbered and out classed, if that turns out to be true, I really fear for the future of this world.  Three more years of this administration may very well find us in a full fledged world war, if any of the current news has meaning.  Hope I am wrong...

I am hoping that the UK will not travel down this road, it leads to disaster for mankind.  At this point it seems they are more free to voice their non-belief in the current set of illusions, though that Blair leaves a little to be desired in my opinion.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on July 30, 2006, 06:54:45 AM
Here is an interesting article:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/disowning-conservative-politics-is/20060729195809990004?ncid=NWS00010000000001
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: cherry on July 30, 2006, 07:31:04 AM
Doug, thanks for the reply again and I'm glad to hear that the radicals aren't as many as I feared.  I share your hopes that more people will vote this Autumn and change the way you've been going.  I wonder myself why people aren't in the streets of the UK right now, demonstrating.  Well, some are but I think the day will come soon when it becomes more of us.  I hope so.  Our freedoms are gradually being stripped away and you can feel them trying to keep us scared.

Blair? *spit*   I can't BELIEVE he got in for another term.  Maybe now at LAST people are seeing him for what he is. I do think a lot of the country have got increasingly sickened with what he's doing in our name.  He's suffering mightily in the press right now for being 'Bush's poodle' - especially after the 'open mic' incidents when Bush spoke to him like a little dog, lol. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 01, 2006, 09:23:09 AM
Doug, thanks for the reply again and I'm glad to hear that the radicals aren't as many as I feared.  I share your hopes that more people will vote this Autumn and change the way you've been going.  I wonder myself why people aren't in the streets of the UK right now, demonstrating.  Well, some are but I think the day will come soon when it becomes more of us.  I hope so.  Our freedoms are gradually being stripped away and you can feel them trying to keep us scared.

Our freedoms are being stripped, but not gradually, but boldly and roughly.  The only way they can do this is to keep the majority scared to death, so scared they do not risk being seen as opposing the current movement.

Quote
Blair? *spit*   

LOL!  But you have to agree he makes a cute little puppy...

Quote
I can't BELIEVE he got in for another term.  Maybe now at LAST people are seeing him for what he is. I do think a lot of the country have got increasingly sickened with what he's doing in our name.  He's suffering mightily in the press right now for being 'Bush's poodle' - especially after the 'open mic' incidents when Bush spoke to him like a little dog, lol. 

I can not believe he got in for another term, but ABSOLUTELY can not believe this country voted the head monkey we have in again.  We actually deserve much of what we are getting because the so many are under the influence of illusions of this man.  Just amazing.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Gonzo on August 02, 2006, 12:57:29 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101334.html?nav=rss_politics

This is an interesting article in the Washington Post

White House Proposal Would Expand Authority of Military Courts

By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 2, 2006; Page A04

A draft Bush administration plan for special military courts seeks to expand the reach and authority of such "commissions" to include trials, for the first time, of people who are not members of al-Qaeda or the Taliban and are not directly involved in acts of international terrorism, according to officials familiar with the proposal.

The plan, which would replace a military trial system ruled illegal by the Supreme Court in June, would also allow the secretary of defense to add crimes at will to those under the military court's jurisdiction. The two provisions would be likely to put more individuals than previously expected before military juries, officials and independent experts said.

The draft proposed legislation, set to be discussed at two Senate hearings today, is controversial inside and outside the administration because defendants would be denied many protections guaranteed by the civilian and traditional military criminal justice systems.


This is extremely scary, because the article indicates, among other things, that death penalties could be given with only 5 members of the jury agreeing, defendents could be tried in absentia, they would not be allowed to confront their accusers, hearsay evidence would be allowed, the scope of people being tried in these courts would enlarge and include people not officially associated with terrorist activities or organizations, etc. 

The implications are enormous.  If you have an altercation with somebody (say the mayor of your little town) and that person has sufficient enough power and connections and motivation, they could fabricate allegations that would almost be impossible to defend against.  It would be hearsay that you could not confront and, possibly, not be allowed at your own trial to defend yourself and you could be killed for it.  If you don't think this can happen, you're either very young, very naive or very stupid.

The Senate is discussing these White House proposals today.  Read the article, please.

If you feel so inclined after reading the article, contact your Senators.  Click below for contact info:

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jasonwv on August 08, 2006, 07:51:18 PM
This thread has been quiet for a few days. Everyone on vacation?  I found an interesting quote from Harvey Milk. It is "The fact is that more people have been slaughtered in the name of religion than for any other single reason. That, THAT my friends, is true perversion".  It's now my signature line.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 09, 2006, 11:10:19 AM
This thread has been quiet for a few days. Everyone on vacation?  I found an interesting quote from Harvey Milk. It is "The fact is that more people have been slaughtered in the name of religion than for any other single reason. That, THAT my friends, is true perversion".  It's now my signature line.

No, not on vacation, just getting back to work. The holiday season is quickly coming. 

Yep, that is true perversion.  Working towards a true end of times war because an old book wrote by people in deep need of mental illness intervention is also very perverted.

Just about every war at it's heart has religion fighting something/someone. One group fighting another group over whose imaginary head monkey is the true head monkey, whose rules appease the head monkey the best/the right way.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 09, 2006, 11:14:48 AM
Did anyone see the Ann Coulter interview the other night?  It was so nice of her to determine that Bill Clinton is a latent homosexual because he is promiscuous.  Promisucuous is obviously a powerful homosexual trait.

One has to wonder then, if using her logic, then if a gay person is NOT promiscuous, then he is a latent heterosexual?  LOL!  This person is a mangle of irrationality, just like the majority of people in this group of idiots.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on August 10, 2006, 10:55:37 AM
And how about Coulter calling Al Gore "...an obvious fag."  I want to discourage people from using that slur, and we were making progress in discouraging its use and shunning people who used it.

But maybe it will have a positive, unintended affect: If a crazy bitch like Ann Coulter uses a gay slur, it's a red flag to straights that this word is the equivalent to the "n" word for blacks.

It doesn't help matters that we gays use it among ourselves...I guess if you're gay you can use "fag" and if you're black you can use the "n" word. But in our case, potential gay-bashers don't take it  the same way. Look at Mathew Shepard.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 10, 2006, 11:39:19 AM
I don't know this Ann Coulter person. Worth looking up or better not bother?

Sounds like some right wing female dog with no brain. What happened, some guy she fell for turned out to be gay?

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 10, 2006, 11:57:31 AM
And how about Coulter calling Al Gore "...an obvious fag."  I want to discourage people from using that slur, and we were making progress in discouraging its use and shunning people who used it.

But maybe it will have a positive, unintended affect: If a crazy bitch like Ann Coulter uses a gay slur, it's a red flag to straights that this word is the equivalent to the "n" word for blacks.

It doesn't help matters that we gays use it among ourselves...I guess if you're gay you can use "fag" and if you're black you can use the "n" word. But in our case, potential gay-bashers don't take it  the same way. Look at Mathew Shepard.

And the word bitch sounds worse coming from a man than it does a woman!  :o  I like to discourage men from using that word.

Actually I don't like her, I think she might very well be insane.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 10, 2006, 01:02:12 PM
And how about Coulter calling Al Gore "...an obvious fag."  I want to discourage people from using that slur, and we were making progress in discouraging its use and shunning people who used it.

I sure agree with that.  I never use that word, it is nasty to my way of thinking.

Quote
But maybe it will have a positive, unintended affect: If a crazy bitch like Ann Coulter uses a gay slur, it's a red flag to straights that this word is the equivalent to the "n" word for blacks.

One can hope, but I doubt if most people care one way or the other. 

Quote
It doesn't help matters that we gays use it among ourselves...I guess if you're gay you can use "fag" and if you're black you can use the "n" word. But in our case, potential gay-bashers don't take it  the same way. Look at Mathew Shepard.

Poor Mathew...  Any time a group is put down by a slur, it dehumanizes them and it makes it so much easier to mistreat them.  The very attitude that people of a "group" are less than human makes them easy to distrust, to make up lies about that others will believe to bring them down even more, and to justify the removal of their freedoms, even killing them. 

Sadly, for gay people, the main source of these slurs and hate attitude is from the people who insist they "love", and worship a god of "love".  These same people of "love" are also the main source that works to take a person's freedom away, and make them a second class citizen.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on August 11, 2006, 05:02:20 AM
Doug, I think you're absolutely right, especially when you say they worship "...a God of love." Then why are you so keen to deprive me of my rights, pass laws that make it easier to bash and even kill us? My sister has been getting more and more narrow-mindid an bigoted since she joined a new church recently...God save me from her "love".

Lola--and whoever else I've offended-- I apologize for using the word "bitch". When presented with an insane person like Coulter, it's easy to use extreme language. Coulter has been accused of pl agerism and playing fast and loose with the footnotes to her new book: Keith Oberman on "Countdown"  on MSNBC has cataloged these mistakes in some detail. She is a piece of nasty business, homophobic and bigoted as the day is long.

Vic, if you want to know more about Coulter, maybe she has a Wikipedia entry. If you read it, you may want to take a scalding shower afterwards, to try and wash off the ickness.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 11, 2006, 09:33:16 AM
No problem Jer (and thanks for at least acknowledging me, lol)  and I agree she is pretty icky.  More than icky, I think she is evil.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0111.coulterwisdom.html
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 11, 2006, 10:38:36 AM
Thanks, Jer. I did do a quick search on the net for her. I don't really want to waste a minute of my time on people like that. The last thing I want to do is give them even more attention.

I did find some of her "famous" quotes. Misguided rantings would be more my conclusion.
Crazy? Definitely. But no doubt the voice of others just as ignorant and biased.

I also came across this article about the rape and bashing of a gay man by Darren Gay and Donald Bockman last year:
http://liberalserving.typepad.com/liberalserving/2005/10/darren_gay_dona.html

Here's why they did it:

"A police affidavit says that during the assault, one of the assailants told the victim that the book of Leviticus in the Bible says "to put to death any man that lays with another man", and tonight we are passing judgment on you for being a faggot and a queer."


The religious right are a growing problem in America, and it is not the gay that need to stand up, they already do, it is the mainstream hetero American. Their lives will be affected soon enough just as ours are if they don't.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 11, 2006, 10:59:03 AM
Doug, I think you're absolutely right, especially when you say they worship "...a God of love." Then why are you so keen to deprive me of my rights, pass laws that make it easier to bash and even kill us? My sister has been getting more and more narrow-mindid an bigoted since she joined a new church recently...God save me from her "love".

Is it not funny how this "love" looks and feels just like hate? 

One of my big problems is when I see or hear the word "christian" I think of Pat Roberts, Fred Philps, Jerry Farwell, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, etc.  And since they have big followings, it is obvious there is a fairly large crowd who call themselves "christians" who believe just as they do.  And worse, there is very little action from the rest of the Christians who condone their behavior by default.

Quote
Lola--and whoever else I've offended-- I apologize for using the word "bitch". When presented with an insane person like Coulter, it's easy to use extreme language. Coulter has been accused of plagerism and playing fast and loose with the footnotes to her new book: Keith Oberman on "Countdown"  on MSNBC has cataloged these mistakes in some detail. She is a piece of nasty business, homophobic and bigoted as the day is long.

While I very much dislike the use of the word "bitch" there are a very few women who qualify for it, and Ann Coulter is one.  She is obviously irrational, if not insane.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 11, 2006, 11:03:49 AM
[One of my big problems is when I see or hear the word "christian" I think of Pat Roberts, Fred Philps, Jerry Farwell, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, etc.  And since they have big followings, it is obvious there is a fairly large crowd who call themselves "christians" who believe just as they do.  And worse, there is very little action from the rest of the Christians who condone their behavior by default.


Well that is a problem, because when I hear the word Christian I don't think of any of them, not even close.  As for Fred Phillips, I don't know who that is, do you mean Fred Phelps?  If so his only following is his family and I pretty sure they are all inbred.  :-\
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 11, 2006, 11:59:44 AM
Quote

"A police affidavit says that during the assault, one of the assailants told the victim that the book of Leviticus in the Bible says "to put to death any man that lays with another man", and tonight we are passing judgment on you for being a faggot and a queer."

Of course they forgot the passage of not passing judgement...

Where they raped the "faggot", I think castration is in order, there is no sense in having these two breed and produce more insane monsters.  Just a thought.

Quote
The religious right are a growing problem in America, and it is not the gay that need to stand up, they already do, it is the mainstream hetero American. Their lives will be affected soon enough just as ours are if they don't.

The only problem with that is they do not see that it could ever come to that.  They do not see that as the fundamentalist take more and more hold, especially of our young people, as the two above, there can only be more and more violence.  That violence will be directed at the gays first, then at those who they then choose to demonize.  That being Jews, women in general, any ethnic group, and then those that choose to have more than one love partner.  To these people facts are meaningless, they just have to believe you are gay, Jew, and a dirty woman to set out to destroy you.    The hetero had better wake up soon, or all that will be left is laws enforcing mainly religious views.

Just take a look at Texas law on sexuality, and you will see the direction we are going.  I watched the TX legislature argue over a law proposed that would make it a felony for a penis to touch an ass hole, even in accident. It does not matter if it is a man and man or man and woman, nor does it matter that both are consenting adults.  I could not believe that was even being discussed, who was going to be standing in the bedroom of everyone watching to make sure that the law was not broken?  This law passed, with the exception it was compromised to misdemeanor.  They will keep working on getting it to a felony. Of course, to enforce this law it will require video recording of every sexual encounter, it is just a matter of time, unless we wake up.   Also on the books there are laws that prevent the sale of dildos, so in TX there is a large sale of cucumbers and zucchini for non-food uses.

There was a Democrate lady that was really arguing and making fun of the guy who proposed this law, who was quoting scripture to justify his law.   I later learned they "redistricted" her district and she is no longer in the legislature.   They are not above using dirty, underhand tricks to rid themselves of rational foes.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 11, 2006, 12:22:57 PM
I can only wonder why these people are always so hung up on sex. Not that I haven't noticed most are sexually frustrated to the extreme. Is it because they get too little? Mormons can hardly complain about a lack, what with a wife for every day of the week.

I'm not even sure what the bible has to say about sex in general. It's not a sexual book, for sure, which is probably why they're having so much trouble with the subject. Except for statements like the one I quoted previously it doesn't sound like there's a lot in it that is useful for a healthy sex life.

Btw, I thought Texas were liberal folk?

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 11, 2006, 12:51:25 PM
Quote
Well that is a problem, because when I hear the word Christian I don't think of any of them, not even close.  As for Fred Phillips, I don't know who that is, do you mean Fred Phelps?  If so his only following is his family and I pretty sure they are all inbred.  :-\

Yes, I mean Fred Phelps.  I knew a Pat Phillips and the hands did the rest. 

I was listening to Lars Larson the other night, he, from time to time, has some points I agree with.  Anyway, he was talking to a "lady", I use the term very loosely here, from the Phelps "church".  She was very nasty, told Lars he was not a real christian, did not believe in Jesus, and he would burn in the lake of fire with all the other fags.  He told her not to tell him what he believed or did not believe, he was not homosexual, she continued anyway.  He could not get a word in, nor could he defend himself, she just screemed over him, even though he is really quite religious, pretty homophobic, and very conservative.  I laughed, now, maybe, just perhaps, he knows how it feels like to be on the receiving end of a religious nut.  Maybe he will pause to think about what he does to others in the name of religion. Probably not.

Lars wanted to talk about them picketing dead solders funerals.  She just quoted scripture, and it was her churches duty, because god is killing those young men because our country condones homosexuality.  Of course, invading a country and exposing our young ones to people angry, and in their mind morally right to kill, would have nothing to do with it. This gal also qualifies for the "b" word, along with Ann.

As far as "normal" christians, I have family members to judge from.  A group of the aunts, and a few cousins got together not long ago, luckily I was not there.  But I heard about it from my Mother.  One of the female cousins wanted to see BBM, so her and her Mother went to a viewing in CA.  According to them it was "just sex for the first 15 mins" and they got up and left because it was just so very disgusting.  They went on and on about how sick it was.  How terribly degrading it was to cowboys.  Good thing I was not there, I would have let them have it with both barrals.

First of all, I have my real doubts they went at all.  I think they heard their favorite head monkey spewing this shit, and picked it up as their own. 

You see, I have very good reason to believe that the majority of christians, while not as evil as the Phelps clan, are none the less evil.  They do not think for themselves, they just parrot their favorite head monkey, and believe what they hear and see without question. To them, belief is more important than knowing reality.

And as you have read before, my other experiences with christians have not been good.

You, obviously, are not one of these.  Good on you we need more like you.  Sadly, to date I have seen very little that tells me you and your type are the majority, but instead everything points to you being a very small minority of the christian population.  Of course, that is just me and I would love to be proved wrong, so correct me if I am mistaken. 

Good to hear from you, you are very welcome here.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 11, 2006, 02:04:21 PM
 :'( :'( :'(

That makes me so sad to read all that.  Doug I swear to you I don't know any people like that. I can't even imagine!!

I can imagine how you feel, because reading what you just said makes my blood boil.  I knew nothing about Fred Phelps until someone told me about him.  I looked him up, big mistake..........I read and I cried, I really cried.

When I read about them picketing Matthew's funeral and counting down the days he burns in hell.........I just wanted to die.  These people aren't Christians, they are the total opposite of that.

I can tell you one thing, if I was Matthew's Mom (and I have boys his age) and they showed up at my son's funeral.   I would have got a gone and shot every last one of them.  How is that for being a Christian! lol

Jesus preached love, not hate, Jesus never even spoke of homosexuality.  My guess is I doubt he cares, he is more concerned with evil and some of these so called Christians are evil, they are the ones heading to hell.  They are just too sick and brain washed to see it.

I am Canadian by the way Doug, so I really am not that informed on all this religious right stuff.  I just pray none of them ever cross the boarder.  :(






Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 11, 2006, 02:59:48 PM
:'( :'( :'(

That makes me so sad to read all that.  Doug I swear to you I don't know any people like that. I can't even imagine!!

You are so very lucky...

Quote
I can imagine how you feel, because reading what you just said makes my blood boil.  I knew nothing about Fred Phelps until someone told me about him.  I looked him up, big mistake..........I read and I cried, I really cried.

When I read about them picketing Matthew's funeral and counting down the days he burns in hell.........I just wanted to die.  These people aren't Christians, they are the total opposite of that.

Their new thing is to picket the funerals of our solders.  They hold signs that say they deserved to die, they are condemned to hell and their crime?  Fighting for a country that accepts homosexuals.  I just wished there was a group that would do the very same for them when one of their loved ones dies, or gets sick. 

If this makes you cry, then let me tell a few stories I have experienced first hand.  My first love called me one evening and begged me to drive the hour to his place, he would not say why.  When I got there, there was another man there.  He was his minister, I got over 4 hours of fire and brimstone.  I was told I was evil, called names, and to leave my love alone.  I left broken, both hearted and  spiritually.  We had been together for quite awhile, I had even thought of living together forever.   He came back to me like nothing ever happened, then afterwards tell me I was evil, repeating his minister's words.  I had to finally break clean away from him. I moved to a different part of the country.

I found a wonderful loving person, his parents truly fundamentalist.  They kicked him out when they found out, he had to quit high school to work to support himself. He had juvenile diabetes as well.  What little contact he had with his family was always disastrous.  His diabetes went very bad, and he was in a coma for 13 days before dying.  His mother showed to pray over him, chant really.  She was cold, but descent to me.   His father showed on the last day to unplug him, he did not acknowledge I lived.  His grandparents never bothered to show, nor did they come to the funeral, they did not go to funerals of faggots.  A quote from his mother.  They set up the funeral so none of his gay friends could come, I was only called an hour before by his very wonderful aunt.  They put him in a small box someplace for 6 months, then had a burial for him on their ranch.  He was buried in a pasture, behind a grove of trees on private land, in a small fenced in area, forever alone.  His father told me after the burial was over that this was private land and I was not welcome to ever come back.  These are the type of christians I talk of when I use the word.

Quote
I can tell you one thing, if I was Matthew's Mom (and I have boys his age) and they showed up at my son's funeral.   I would have got a gone and shot every last one of them.  How is that for being a Christian! lol

In my book she would get a metal... purple heart for service to the country over and above the call of duty.  Just me...

Quote
Jesus preached love, not hate, Jesus never even spoke of homosexuality.  My guess is I doubt he cares, he is more concerned with evil and some of these so called Christians are evil, they are the ones heading to hell.  They are just too sick and brain washed to see it.

Yep.

Quote
I am Canadian by the way Doug, so I really am not that informed on all this religious right stuff.  I just pray none of them ever cross the boarder.  :(

It is coming if it does not get stopped here.  It works very much like a mind virus, it takes over and reproduces itself over and over, taking loving people and turning them into mindless monsters.  Once it has taken ahold, nothing will break through it.  Reason, facts, etc are meaningless to these people.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 11, 2006, 03:33:04 PM
I just can't understand it, it is ingnorance, but it is beyond that, what you describe is just evil.  I hate to just keep repeating the word evil, but it is all that I can think to say.

I watched an A&E show last night, "First 48 hours"  It follows detectives as they try and solve real crimes.  Last night was:

Miami detectives find a man murdered outside his own apartment. While hunting for the killer, they uncover the victim's inner life, revealing a man torn between who he is and what he believes.

Well turned out this was a sweet man, Catholic and gay and very torn between his religion and his homosexuality.  Seems he met someone one night and they killed him.  I don't know if they pretended to like him or what, but they murdered him.

Then of course everything came out about his "secret life"  The amazing thing (well not really amazing really) was the way his whole family rallied (and his Parent's were quite elderly and deeply religious, they were Hispanic)  The Father cried and said he was a model son.  They ended up, the family -  the police and the gay community, coming together to try and find the killer.

My heart just broke for this poor soul, he never knew love, he felt bad about himself and that is just not right.  And sadly they never caught who murdered him.

Anyway sorry for the ramble, it is just fresh on my mind from last night.

Picketing the funeral of soldiers...........sigh........what can you even say to that. 

I am glad you got away from your first love, he sounded very confused, too easily brain washed.  Obviously not ready for a loving committed mature relationship.


As for your second love, the one who died, I am so very sorry.  His Dad & Mom and Grandparents didn't deserve to even have him for a son.

I am so very sorry you had to go through all this.

I pray you have someone in your life, someone with a "normal" family.  I mean good grief!!  I have sons and I tell you they could come to me tomorrow and tell me they were in love with a man (either one could) and my husband and I would welcome that person into our home.

When you love someone, you love who they love.   As long as they treat them decent. 


So what can be done to stop these people?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 12, 2006, 11:40:26 AM
I just can't understand it, it is ingnorance, but it is beyond that, what you describe is just evil.  I hate to just keep repeating the word evil, but it is all that I can think to say.

If I am not mistaken, that is what got me in trouble with you in the first place.  I said "Christians are evil".  Glad to see that if my perspective is seen the same conclusion can be gotten to.

Quote
I watched an A&E show last night, "First 48 hours"  It follows detectives as they try and solve real crimes.  Last night was:

Miami detectives find a man murdered outside his own apartment. While hunting for the killer, they uncover the victim's inner life, revealing a man torn between who he is and what he believes.

Well turned out this was a sweet man, Catholic and gay and very torn between his religion and his homosexuality.  Seems he met someone one night and they killed him.  I don't know if they pretended to like him or what, but they murdered him.

Then of course everything came out about his "secret life"  The amazing thing (well not really amazing really) was the way his whole family rallied (and his Parent's were quite elderly and deeply religious, they were Hispanic)  The Father cried and said he was a model son.  They ended up, the family -  the police and the gay community, coming together to try and find the killer.


Yes, I can believe that.  But my bet is if you was a fly on the wall, the reason he was so torn between his religion and his "secret life" is because he was being shown by his own family that being gay was unacceptable.  Of course, in trying to not loose his family, he is going to hide it, try to change it, and failing that, as always happens, he stands it, like Ennis and Jack.  Then like Jack when he gets tire ironed, the family will of course be upset and look for the killer, even accept him at that point.  Death makes the differences less important, sadly it is too late for the one who died.  I even think that Michael's mom might have come around after his death, she seemed quite different at the burial.  Almost scary in her warmness towards me. I wanted nothing to do with her or her clan ever again after what I had been through.

Quote
My heart just broke for this poor soul, he never knew love, he felt bad about himself and that is just not right.  And sadly they never caught who murdered him.

Yes, that seems to be the pattern.  Very few of the gay bashers/killers get caught, whether that is the way it is for all such crimes or if it is lack of motivation on the police officers part.  Perhaps a little of both.

Quote
Anyway sorry for the ramble, it is just fresh on my mind from last night.

Nothing to be sorry about.  There needs to be this discussion. 

Quote
Picketing the funeral of soldiers...........sigh........what can you even say to that. 

It is just plain sick and evil. They label themselves proud, Bush supporter christians.  And there is very little opposition from "good" christians, thus a perceived condoning. 

Quote
I am glad you got away from your first love, he sounded very confused, too easily brain washed.  Obviously not ready for a loving committed mature relationship.

Yes, it might have been a disaster, but I can say on every other front he was very loving and kind.  Very grounded, and just.  It was just religion that messed him up, and even that did not happen until his "secret life" came to light, then his family and church moved to "save him" and destroy me.   I have kept a little track of him, he had another male relationship, but this time he got one that abused him, after that person died, he has been an alcoholic and drug addict from then on.  Such a waste...  but I will not put myself in such a position. 

I know how he feels, there has been times when I wanted to escape so bad, drugs seemed like an easy answer, but I could never go that route, guess I need to keep control too much, besides I know that it is just an illusion, it is not really easier, it just seems that way to the one being destroyed.  My only vice is I over eat thus using the comfort of food as a medication. 


Quote
As for your second love, the one who died, I am so very sorry.  His Dad & Mom and Grandparents didn't deserve to even have him for a son.

They did not.  And in many ways they did not.  He loved them, but could not stand them.  About once every 6 months his mother would show up at the house, they would not be together more than about 10 minutes until it was a screaming, knock down drag out.  She would go storming out the door, he would be a mess for a few days, and this was the parent he could get along with.  His Dad had beat him, verbally abused him, even though about once a year Michael would make a point to see him.  About a year before they found out about him, his Dad came home and having found out his Mother had had an affair on him, yes these radical fundies still make the same mistakes every one else does.  His Dad had a gun and was going to kill his Mother, it was only Michael who got in between him and her.  They wrestled over the gun, and it went off into the ceiling.  His Dad was like it woke him up, and he left.  Later they found out about Michael and kicked him out with just the clothes on his back, he was 16 at the time.  His Mother divorced his Dad, and married the man she was having an affair with, all the while both them still maintaining the fundie attitude of being perfect and god's chosen.   

Once Michael was out, he went out and created himself another family.  He was amazing in his ability to remember anniversaries, birthdays, etc.  Every one of these people could count on a card arriving the day before or the day of their event, and managed to visit them as well.  He had a contact book of over 300 people and he was very much a family member to all of them.  I only wished I had his talent.  I tried after he died, but I could not maintain it.

Christmas was his favorite time of the year.  It was not a biggie to me, until he came into my life.  He would call me to help him put up a tree and decorate his apartment, that was how we became really good friends. I was on a crew at that time that decorated the Holiday Inn and Sheradon Hotels and a few big restaurants.  After he moved into my house, we went all out.  Big Christmas tree, garland and lights everywhere in the house, and even the trees outside all lit up, it was always beautiful.  On the Sunday before Christmas, for eight years, we had "open house" people could begin showing up at noon.  We had card games people played, we had movies the choice was comedy, adventure, sci-fi, etc, no prono was offered.  There was no sex, just to blow the usuall illusion of what gays do when they get together.  In the 12 to 18 hours that people came through, there usually was around 400 who showed up, to gave hugs, have some food and drink, and to laugh in the holiday "spirit". 

Christmas morning was a time when up to 12 friends would come for breakfast and spend the day, this was especially for those who did not have family to be with.  Michael wore a tux, the very best glass ware was used, and Michael served everyone as the special people they were. He would eat after everyone else was done. Then after breakfast, it was tradition to watch the latest movie releases and just visit and enjoy being together.  Of course, Michael had a gift for every single one of them, very expensive shirts, sweaters, etc. 

God, I miss Michael.   I have not had Christmas since Michael died of his diabetes. You see this is why BBM hit me so hard, I am Ennis standing there crying.  The fight Jack and Ennis had before Jacks death also hits very hard.  As Michael's diabetes got worse, his doctor kept telling me he was doing this to himself on purpose.  He promised me was not, but stupid me believed his Doctor over him.  His insulin reactions was so out of control, that I never knew if I was going to come home to a dead person or not.  I learned to take blood samples, to give injections and to revive a kid that was nearly dead.  The last Christmas I would not let him put up a tree or have a house party, nor Christmas morning until he got control over his diabetes.  He did not, and we did not have any of that.  On Jan 6th, 1993 he was taking a nap on the couch, I was in the computer room working on a project for work. I heard a strange sound, he had another grand maul seizure.  The ambulance came once again has it had at least once a week for months.  Michael was coming around after the shot I gave him when they brought the gurney in and strapped him in.  He, not quite conscious, was screaming "Doug, help me, help me!"  I sat on the step on the front of the house crying as they drove him away.  I got myself together to go to the hospital, but when I got there he was not to be found.  It turns out he was taken to a different hospital.  When I found him, this time it was different, he had tubes everywhere and was completely out.  He never woke from his coma again. During the 13 days he was in the coma I lost my job because my boss could not understand why I needed to be with a "friend" who was dying.  I will give great admiration to the hospital who gave me complete access to Michael and even some of the nurses came in to give me hug.  After his death the doctor told me that he had to have been trying so very hard to keep his diabetes under control, because even in a coma it took them four days to get it under control. 
I am so very, very sorry that I kept him from his last Christmas, that I did not believe him over some idiot doctor.  Ennis I know exactly how it feels to not have resolved that last fight.   

Christmas is so very hollow now, it is meaningless. I never bother with a tree, but I do throw up one set of lights. All his and my friends have faded away, I sold the house, moved back to my original family home, time moves on, and I still cry for him 13 years later.  Of course, the fundies say this is not love, and I hate them for it.

Before I sold the house I rented it to a young man, his girlfriend and their three children.  I worked for him for a time. One day he heard a large fight going on in the ally behind.  He went out there and did not come back, his girlfriend went to see what was going on.  She found him beat nearly to death, his ribs broken, legs broken and his head caved in.  He "survived", but it would have been better if he had not.  He is a permanent resident of the nursing home now, just a eating/pooping machine.   She told me they had been calling him faggot for the few months before that, was it a hate crime?  Was it because they assumed that since Michael and I lived there he was "one" as well?  Of course, she moved out and I just sold the place.  And these where never found and prosecuted either. 

Quote
I am so very sorry you had to go through all this.

You have no reason to be sorry, things just happen.  I can not, will not, accept that I deserved this, or he did as in some kind of fate, or some kind of trial, or some kind of punishment, or some kind of twisted brainless entity deciding all this.  To me it just makes sense that it was simply the laws of physics and chemistry, and the luck of draw. 

Quote
I pray you have someone in your life, someone with a "normal" family.  I mean good grief!!  I have sons and I tell you they could come to me tomorrow and tell me they were in love with a man (either one could) and my husband and I would welcome that person into our home.

Thanks.  I doubt if I will find someone again.  I am getting old now, have become fat, bald, was diagnosed with diabetes last year, and I now make Aguirre look really cute.  My avatar picture is me at Michael's time.  When my doctor started heading me down the same road Michael's doctor did, I stopped it all.  I threw away the meds on the 5th day, found out they destroy the very insulin producing cells that is the cause of the problem in the first place.   I did a lot of research, and learned what my, and his doctor, do not know or understand.  I have absolute control of my diabetes, no meds, even though my doc insists it is impossible.  It is also impossible that my diabetes is undetectable, but if I did not tell anyone they would never know. Lab tests show me as better than normal.  If I had known then, what I know now, Michael would still be here and in good shape.  Every time I go in my doc is amazed with me, but he does not seem to want to learn, or tell anyone else.  I have offered to teach.  Anyway, be that as it may.

Your boys are very lucky.  I hope for them the very best lives they can live. 

My folks try so hard, but they are not able to talk about gay anything, just do not want to know about it.  When BBM came out, Mom said she wanted to see it.  I bought the DVD, but she can not bring herself to watch it.  The rest make no bones about not watching "that stuff".  They know I am gay, but rather pretend I am asexual. 

Quote
When you love someone, you love who they love.   As long as they treat them decent. 

With Michael, my folks met him once or twice but did not know anything more.  They have never heard the stories you have heard today. They do not want to know, so I do not burden them with it.  They do not know how hard I cried after watching BBM, they noted the red eyes, but convinced themselves I have "allergies". 

Quote
So what can be done to stop these people?

You can not stop these people, you can only marginalize them.  When the "regular" Christians start standing up against them, instead of accepting them, they can be put back to the fringe margins they actually are.  When the "regular" Christians vote in support of these, because they partially agree with them, or they are caught up in the illusions they create to justify their deeds, that is how they grow and destroy.  Regular Christians need to educate themselves, learn to break through the illusions, and stop these monsters who imagine themselves as "gods warriors".  Why does an all powerful, all knowing, god need "god warriors"?  I have never understood this, why is god so lazy as to use faulty, manipulation prone humans to carry out "gods will", when with a flick of a finger he could do it himself, and without violating "free will"?  Oh well...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 12, 2006, 12:35:28 PM

If I am not mistaken, that is what got me in trouble with you in the first place.  I said "Christians are evil".  Glad to see that if my perspective is seen the same conclusion can be gotten to.

Well I could say with this particular brand of Christians, yes.  But then I don't believe they are Christian, so again I have to disagree!  ;)  I can see why you would feel that way though, based on your experiences.


Quote
Yes, I can believe that.  But my bet is if you was a fly on the wall, the reason he was so torn between his religion and his "secret life" is because he was being shown by his own family that being gay was unacceptable.  Of course, in trying to not loose his family, he is going to hide it, try to change it, and failing that, as always happens, he stands it, like Ennis and Jack.  Then like Jack when he gets tire ironed, the family will of course be upset and look for the killer, even accept him at that point.  Death makes the differences less important, sadly it is too late for the one who died.  I even think that Michael's mom might have come around after his death, she seemed quite different at the burial.  Almost scary in her warmness towards me. I wanted nothing to do with her or her clan ever again after what I had been through.

I got the feeling his family knew nothing of his secret life.  I don't think anyone did, not until after his death.  And I felt the police really did care.  In fact when they were digging into (and finding out all about this stuff) they seemed very moved.  They mentioned the fact that they work very closely with the gay community, because there is a nasty segment of society that targets gays.

I am so glad to hear that you know drugs and alcohol are not the answer.  They don't help anything, they just make matters worse.


Michael sounds like a gift from God, you are so blessed to have had him in your life.  Your memories of Christmas just touch my heart.  Diabetis is often very hard to control and sometimes despite our best efforts uncontrolable. 

Don't let ANYONE tell you what you and Michael had was not love, it was love baby.   Boy BB must really have hit you like a ton of bricks.  :'( 

You know it is easy to sit back and say, but don't live like Ennis (in that trailer at the end, with nothing but shirts for memories) get a tree this year, even if it is just a "Charlie Brown one" decorate it with love and think of Michael.
   
My Parents passed away within 2 years of each other, my Mom loved the holidays, I swore off Christmas for a year after she died.  But the next year I had to celebrate, I couldn't hold back.  I decorated my tree, plugged in the lights, looked heaven bound and said "enjoy Mom"

I don't even know what to say about the young man you rented the house to, so much hate in the world, so much hate..

You make Aquirre look cute!! lol  That just made me laugh out loud, I am sure you look perfectly nice.  We can't all look like Jake ya know!  ;)  People get older, the belly grows, the hair gets a bit thin, so what?   You could meet someone, someone who would love you for you.  You seem like a very nice person to me.  :)

I am very glad you have the diabetis under control, it is a bitch of a disease, my Dad had it.


I wish you and your Mom could sit down and watch the movie, I really do, then she could see where you are coming from.  That movie could have been an eye opener for so many, but of course they have to actually watch the film.

These so called Christians, do belong in the fringes, there will always be nuts in the world, we can never rid the place of all of them, but they have no business in the forefront.

God doesn't need God warriers, or anything like that.  We don't need people like these in power, I truly believe they will destroy the world in the end, but I guess that is another topic, or maybe not.

Anyway (((HUGS))) Doug,  I wish I could take you out for a nice steak dinner, we could split a nice bottle of wine, chat.   I love talking to you, which is odd, because I don't think we have spoke much in the 8 months or so I have been here.  But I feel a connection with you.

Maybe it is because I am a Christian and I feel so sad that all you have ever known is bad ones.  And I do feel bad you have had such unhappiness in your life.

But you know none of us get out of this life untouched by grief (I certainly have not) but some just seem to get more of their share than others.

Look at Dana and Christoper Reeve, her death just blew me away, but until the end her faith in life and goodness remained strong.

I think I will watch Brokeback Mountain tonight and think of you and Michael. . . .
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 12, 2006, 04:23:19 PM
Quote
I got the feeling his family knew nothing of his secret life.  I don't think anyone did, not until after his death. 

Of this I have no doubt.  When I was just a college lad, I had the same secret life.  A high school teacher of my youngest brother and him became great hunting friends, however, this same asshole was very homophobic.  My whole family became the same while I was gone.  When I was home it was one faggot joke after another, even my Mother had a few to give.  The stress on me was so great that I broke out in hives every time I came home, which was every weekend.  I thought about packing up and moving, not giving a forewarding address and never seeing them again.  The close friends I had at the time would not hear of it, they insisted they had to know why I would think of such a thing.  So, in a many page letter I told them.  The next night very early in the morning I got a call, to tell me my baby sister had been killed in a car accident.  I thought it was a dream, and went to work as normal, but this nagging thought kept bothering me.  So, I called just to be sure to find out she had died and I had been called early in the morning.  Of course, guess what showed up a day later.  My Mother cried over me and her for the next two years, the pain got intertwined to the point that either subject was just too much.  The rest of the family choose to make believe it was not true.  They absolutely had no idea until I told them.

Quote
And I felt the police really did care.  In fact when they were digging into (and finding out all about this stuff) they seemed very moved.  They mentioned the fact that they work very closely with the gay community, because there is a nasty segment of society that targets gays.

Yep, it is that segment that bothers me, and it seems that segment is growing. 

Quote
I am so glad to hear that you know drugs and alcohol are not the answer.  They don't help anything, they just make matters worse.

From what I have observed of others, that is always the case.  It is better to deal with your problems without compounding them with drugs that cloud the mind.


Quote
Michael sounds like a gift from God, you are so blessed to have had him in your life.  Your memories of Christmas just touch my heart.  Diabetis is often very hard to control and sometimes despite our best efforts uncontrolable. 

He was a treasure, but from god I doubt, just me.  Diabetes is not hard to control it just takes knowledge, and understanding of how things work.  My brother is an EMT, and he was giving me this line of stuff the other day that was unbelievable.  He will not believe me because "he studied it" and knows.  He knows what the doctors know which is mainly wrong, so very wrong.   

Quote
Don't let ANYONE tell you what you and Michael had was not love, it was love baby.   Boy BB must really have hit you like a ton of bricks.  :'( 

Yeah, you could say that.  It totally destroyed me for a time, I lost my mind for a few days.  I just had to remember what I had used before to go on.  I just had to remember that if given the exact same circumstances, knowing only what I knew then, I would have made the same decisions again.  What I know now, would have changed everything.  But is not the way it always is? 

Quote
You know it is easy to sit back and say, but don't live like Ennis (in that trailer at the end, with nothing but shirts for memories) get a tree this year, even if it is just a "Charlie Brown one" decorate it with love and think of Michael.

At this point I am exactly like Ennis living in a small trailer, I had everything Michael owned, except his Mother took every single picture of his.  The only picture I have of him is his drivers licence.  Over the years his stuff is getting used up, wore out, and it slowly is disappearing from my life.
   
Quote
My Parents passed away within 2 years of each other, my Mom loved the holidays, I swore off Christmas for a year after she died.  But the next year I had to celebrate, I couldn't hold back.  I decorated my tree, plugged in the lights, looked heaven bound and said "enjoy Mom"
  Sorrry to hear about your loss, I am not sure how I am going to take the loss of my parents, I really dread the thought. 

Quote
I don't even know what to say about the young man you rented the house to, so much hate in the world, so much hate..
  Yes.

Quote
You make Aquirre look cute!! lol  That just made me laugh out loud, I am sure you look perfectly nice.  We can't all look like Jake ya know!  ;)  People get older, the belly grows, the hair gets a bit thin, so what?   You could meet someone, someone who would love you for you.  You seem like a very nice person to me.  :)
 

Thanks for that.  Aquirre is rather cute to me, granted he is not a Jake or Heath, but only a very, very limited number of people in the world rate that kind of beauty.  Ever see "revenge of the nerds", there are many more of us of the plain to slightly ugly than there are of the beautiful. 

Quote
I am very glad you have the diabetis under control, it is a bitch of a disease, my Dad had it.

It is a bitch of a disease if one is fighting the "wisdom" of the docs and it at the same time.  Let me give a run down how it normally goes...  One day you are not feeling particularly well, and maybe your eyesight is a little funny.  A trip to the doc and a blood test later you are told you are a diabetic, maybe even severe diabetic.  There are two tests the blood sugar of the moment and the average blood sugar of the last three months (A1C).  You doc hands you a bottle of pills and says take one every morning and come back in a month, he also sets you with a glucose meter, and tells you write down the numbers.  Never a word about what is normal, what to shoot for.  He does say if you can keep it under 200 he will be happy, if under 140 that is good contol.  Not a word about cause, about diet, or side effects.  You get your blood sugar to under 140 and you are happy, it is not too bad.  Your original A1C test, the three month blood sugar average is over 9.  He tells you that if you can get to 7 it is great, but 7 1/2 is good.  You start your pills, your sugar is under control, you feel better.  You are now in what they call the "honeymoon" period.  A time after first diagnose when it seems your insulin producing cells are returning, but they warn you it only lasts about a month or two at most. Then even stronger pills, then on to insulin.  Sugar control becomes impossible, as to cover the meals you eat you have to take massive doses of insulin, 80 to even 130 units. 

Here is what you are not told.
1.) The pills they give you are most likely to force the insulin cells to produce insulin, but it is burn out of these very cells that is the problem in the first place.  This is like running 10k, and your foot swells, pounds and your doctor telling you now run 26k a day and be sure to put full weight on that foot.  In short order, it will turn black and die, the same happens with the insulin producing cells, and then the "honeymoon" is over.  I am out over a year and half and my "honeymoon" is only getting better and better.

2.) They either do not know, or assume you will not work at, but there are three sets of body cells that do not need insulin to take in blood sugar, they are the insulin producing cells themselves, the cells of the lens of the eye, and the cells surrounding the nerves.  These cells when bathed in high blood sugars swell, and if not relieved of the high sugar will die, will the rest of the body cells can not get the sugar in, and slowly starve to death.  This is the reason that one of the first symptoms of diabetes is funny eye sight, as the lens swell and no longer focus correctly.  Nerve damage because of the swelling of the nerve lining cells dying is what causes the numbness in the feet and hands leading to amputation.  And the real biggie, the insulin producing cells die off even more, raisin the blood sugar even more.  Oh, when does this damage start?  Any time the blood sugar is over 126, far below the "under control" 140.  Oh, and normal?  83 for a young healthy person.  It is proven that if one can keep there bs under 90 the insulin producing cells fully recover, and given time will begin to replace the lost cells.  This also traslates to an A1C of under 5.  Mine now runs 4.7.

3.) Carbohydrates... the doctor will tell you need at least 100 a day to function, the truth is you need none.  You body is able to produce all the blood glucose it needs from protein.  However, it does need the plant compounds in good vegies, so one gets a fair dose of carbs there.  The closer to none one can get the better until they have control of their bs.  Then once the insulin producing cells have recovered as much as they can, one can move up to around 30, even as high as 50 carbs a day.  Absolutely no fast acting carbs again, that is all flour and sugar products, no exceptions, ever.  I hear people say they would rather die than not have their cake, their wish will be granted, but before they will loose their eyesight, then their feet, and every year they will wack off another hunk of your flesh because of a want for piece of bread.

4.) The illusion of insulin.  The docs have this illusion that you can give yourself insulin to cover your meals.  You can, and must, if you need it, but the vast majority do not need it if they only understood. That being said, the doc tells you to eat at least 100 carbs a day, and counter it with a big dose of insulin.  What they do not tell you is that same amount of insulin varies in it's effectiveness by 30%.  One day your calculation will not do it, and your sugars will be very high, the next the same food, same shot, and you will be in insulin shock.  It is the roller coaster of hell.  Oh, and again, high sugars makes more high sugars by killing more insulin producing cells.  However, if you cut your carbs to low, then it takes only a very small amount of insulin to control and the 30% is not enough to make you either too high or too low. 

5.) Research is showing that there is a good chance of a cure in next 5 to 10 years, but one thing that is apparent, you will have to use some of your own insulin producing cells to do this. If you have none left, you are out of luck.

6.) Morning Phenomenon .  As your body readies itself to awaken, the liver starts clearing out insulin. In a normal person this is not a problem, they just produce more insulin to replace it. But in a severe diabetic they can not do this, so they have to have a extra little amount of long acting insulin to prevent that.

7.) Long before there is enough nerve damage to loose a foot, the nerves that regulate the stomach stop working right.  This is what got Michael.  The docs did not ever get this, nor was we ever told about it.  When the nerves are damaged that empty the stomach it does not empty in a timely matter.  It can take up to another 8 hours for it to empty, but if you have taken an insulin shot to cover that meal, and it does not enter the gut to be digested, you have a severe insulin reaction.  You then treat that reaction with fast acting sugar, and guess what happens when the stomach does empty sometime later?  Blood sugars in the 600 to 800 range, doing even more damage.  This was the roller coaster Michael was on, it is only know that I understand what was going on.  His doctors never did figure it out. 

Quote
I wish you and your Mom could sit down and watch the movie, I really do, then she could see where you are coming from.  That movie could have been an eye opener for so many, but of course they have to actually watch the film.

I have not given up just yet, I think it will happen at some point.

Quote
These so called Christians, do belong in the fringes, there will always be nuts in the world, we can never rid the place of all of them, but they have no business in the forefront.

Exactly! 

Quote
God doesn't need God warriers, or anything like that.  We don't need people like these in power, I truly believe they will destroy the world in the end, but I guess that is another topic, or maybe not.

I saw a documentary the other night on fundies, they are in a big hurry to bring the end times war on.  They can not wait for it to hit so they can be taken away to the promise land.  I just wish they would do as the Jim Jones group and take themselves out and leave the rest of us alone.  I do think this "war on terrorism" is actually them heading towards the end times war, it has to be in the middle east by the bible. 

Quote
Anyway (((HUGS))) Doug,  I wish I could take you out for a nice steak dinner, we could split a nice bottle of wine, chat.   I love talking to you, which is odd, because I don't think we have spoke much in the 8 months or so I have been here.  But I feel a connection with you.

A nice steak dinner would be great!  ((( Hugs))) back.  I do not think I spoke to you since the first enounter. 

Quote
Maybe it is because I am a Christian and I feel so sad that all you have ever known is bad ones.  And I do feel bad you have had such unhappiness in your life.
 

Some would say I have created it for myself, but I do not believe that.  Though I know I hold onto it more than I should.

Quote
But you know none of us get out of this life untouched by grief (I certainly have not) but some just seem to get more of their share than others.

Look at Dana and Christoper Reeve, her death just blew me away, but until the end her faith in life and goodness remained strong.

Yes, Dana was not a big loss to me, because I never followed her, but Christopher was a very big loss.  Imagine breaking your nick and having to live on without even being able to breath for yourself.

Take Care.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 12, 2006, 05:27:34 PM
My Mother cried over me and her for the next two years, the pain got intertwined to the point that either subject was just too much. 

That is so interesting, other people on this site have said something similar to me, that their parents thought of their being gay almost as a death. That is so bizzare to me.  To lose a child must be unbearable, to have a child who is gay....what is that......that is nothing.  I pray for my kid's happiness, that is all I ever want from life.

I have no doubt diabetis can be controlled in some people, just like hypertension, high cholesterol and alot of other things, but sometimes I just don't think it can.  Of course I don't know for sure.  It sounds like you are doing an excellent job of controlling yours.

And yes hind sight is 20/20, I could have used it many times in my life.

Michael can never fade from your memory.  I have everything of my Parent's, but I don't take them out and look at them, I carry them both in my heart every day.

Aguirre (Randy Quaid) isn't too bad, he will always be Clark Griswald's brother in law to me! lol  I find men who can make you laugh, very sexy!  ;)


Quote
3.) Carbohydrates... the doctor will tell you need at least 100 a day to function, the truth is you need none.  You body is able to produce all the blood glucose it needs from protein.  However, it does need the plant compounds in good vegies, so one gets a fair dose of carbs there.  The closer to none one can get the better until they have control of their bs.  Then once the insulin producing cells have recovered as much as they can, one can move up to around 30, even as high as 50 carbs a day.  Absolutely no fast acting carbs again, that is all flour and sugar products, no exceptions, ever.  I hear people say they would rather die than not have their cake, their wish will be granted, but before they will loose their eyesight, then their feet, and every year they will wack off another hunk of your flesh because of a want for piece of bread.

VERY Interesting, I hope people with diabetis are taking note.  My Dad lost a leg, it wasn't nice.  :'(

 
I have a feeling your Mom and you WILL sit down and watch that movie and I have a strong feeling it is going to be life changing for both of you.  Be close, while you two still have each other.


Yea end of times, break out the killer kool aid, the rest of us are in no hurry to get there.   

You have done NOTHING to create the sad things that have happend to you, sounds to me like you have handled them all with dignity and courage.

Poor Christopher Reeve, he was a gorgeous man, he was freaking Superman, he had life on a string.   Beautiful wife, career, little son and in a blink of an eye it changed.

For 10 years, imagine what his life was.  And still he persevered.  And she stood by him, in sickness and in health.  And for what, to die herself of lung cancer, she never even smoked.

To leave their child on his own, what a tragedy.  In an 18 month period, she lost her husband, her mother and her life. 

I think the Reeve's are my insperation.

When days get tough, I think we can look to their legacy for strength.

Now be a good boy and put up that Charlie Brown Christmas tree this year.    :-*

(http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d145/cccccarol/EnnisJack_icon.jpg)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 12, 2006, 09:20:06 PM
I had to shut down quickly due to a thunderstorm, then it was time to milk.

Here are a couple of more things Doctors do not tell you on diabetes.

8.) Artificial sweeteners are nearly 100% glucose, the very last thing you should eat.  They hide this by calling glucose "malto dextrose".  By law they do not have to count this because it is less than 1 gram of carb, so at .999 gram it is written out as zero, and it is the fastest acting sugar there is, it does not even need to be digested, just putting in your mouth it goes straight to the blood stream.  Insulin shock or insulin reaction tabs are made of the same thing.

9.) How to read labels, diabetics should know the difference between sugar carbs and fiber carbs. The sugar carbs count the fiber carbs do not.  Avoid pure sugar if possible, natural ones are ok for the most part, with the exception of honey.  Avoid all "diabetic" products, the vast majority of them are loaded with sugar, and sugar under different names, malto-dextrose, corn syrup, sucrose, dextrose, maltrose, fructose, honey, and there is a host of other alcohol sugars, many of them not counted as sugars.  It can say no carbs, no sugars, and be loaded with them and will make your blood sugars skyrocket. 

10.) There are two types of diabetes.  Type 1 a nearly total loss of insulin producing cells is usually caused by either auto-immune problems, where one's own body attacks and kills the insulin producing cells or they are destroyed by a virus.  Most Type 1 happen at a fairly young age, but can be late too.  Michael was a Type 1, he had no insulin production at 4 days old.   Type 2, the most common of all is caused by a positive feedback loop.  Abdominal fat produces a substance that blocks insulin in the rest of cells, the result is called insulin resistance, thus slowing the uptake of glucose, causing blood glucose to raise. Insulin is the fat producing hormone, circulating insulin causes the cells to uptake glucose, if those cells are blocked, then the fat cells uptake the glucose and turn it into fat. BTW, eating fat does not cause fat directly, it first has to be converted into glucose, then with insulin stored as fat, a much less efficient way than eating carbs.  As there is more fat cells being made, there is more insulin resistance, more glucose in the blood, so the pancreas pumps out more insulin to compensate. More insulin, more fat stored, more insulin resistance, more blood glucose.  This keeps spiraling upward until the insulin producing cells exhaust themselves, and the high blood sugar starts to cause them to swell and die.  Then type 2 diabetes has arrived.  What most people do not know, even those requiring insulin injections, is they more than likely have 10 to 100 times the insulin circulating than the normal person and it still is not enough. They are more than capable of producing plenty of insulin, if they can step off the roller coaster.  To step off, they need to stop in taking all carbs, or just the very minimal, let the pancreas rest for a month or two. Keep blood sugar readings below 90, it will take some time for the cells to recover so it may take awhile for the blood sugars to stabilize that low.   Then slowly add back slow acting carbs, while monitoring working towards an average of 83 and an A1C of 5.3 or less.

11.) About monitoring, do not follow the advice of your doc.  Check it at least 7 times a day for the first few months, until you understand how your body works.  Everyone is different, what may cause one person high sugars may not bother another at all.  Find out when your peaks are, when your lows are and work with them.  Test different foods. My doc told me to check once a week, then when I came back with absolutely great numbers he told me once a month was enough. Bull!  7 times a day until you understand your peaks, what reacts badly with you, then just on the peaks until you have them under control, then just upon rising every day. Once upon rising, to see what you dawn phenomenon is doing, once before lunch to see how your breakfast has done, once an hour after lunch to see how high your meal caused you to go, once before dinner, once an hour later, once before bed, and once in the middle of the night if you wake up.  Then, if you go 6 months without a single reading high, then once a week, perhaps, though I still test nearly every day.  Of course test anytime you feel strange.

12.) Another thing, there are the insulin producing cells, the beta cells, and there is another set of cells right next to them, the alpha cells. The alpha cells produce a product that is the opposite of insulin, they produce a product that releases stored sugars from the liver.  When our blood sugar gets low, they release sugars to bring it back up, too low is just as bad as too high. Sadly, these cells suffer the same fate as the beta cells, they die from high blood sugars as well.  Add in, either medications or insulin, and they can not stop a low blood sugar event, called an "insulin reaction" or "insulin shock".  The brain only uses glucose for fuel, when it becomes dangerously low the first to shut down is the higher functions, the result is actions that look very much like drunkenness at first, slurred speach, impaired judgement. Then knowledge starts to shut down, the meaning of like "Tuesday" is gone or how to open a can.  The next stage is very much like dealing with an animal.  You have to be very careful not to frighten, or threaten in any way, because the consequence is being hit, bit, and the house being tore to shreds, along with them hurting themselves.  The strength of such a person is beyond imagination. And finally diabetic coma.  The funny thing is, or not so funny, once the sugars are normal again, they will not remember a single detail.  Ideal is to stop the dying of both kinds of cells, get them slowing repairing themselves, and have the ability to not have to have drugs or insulin.  However, even if it is only insulin, a partly working insulin system takes the rough spots out, and is much better than none.

13.) About eyesight.  High blood sugars do two things, they swell the eye lens, causing focusing to be off, double images, even with one closed one thing to happen, or ghosting is another.  Prolonged high sugars, even fairly marginally, cause the blood vessels in the retina to became thin, to leak and then to break.  Then a strange thing happens, from the leaks and breaks, new vessels grow massively, but they are very fragile and bleed easily, to the point of pulling the retina off.  So the first symptom is "floaters", small blood leaks that cause small clots to float through the eye fluid.  Then major blood leaks that can fill the eye giving the person only red for sight, laser blasts to cauterize the bleeds is usually done now.  And if the retina detaches, it sometimes can be saved by laser reattachment, if not then blindness.

14.) Illness.  Being sick can raise hell with blood sugars. Keep them monitored when sick, and cut out carbs if they raise.  If on insulin, take a small dose to bring it back down under control.  Though personally I have not had any problems with blood sugars even when sick, again each person is different.

Well, for those who endured, you now know more than 99.9% of the doctors.  If you have a loved one who suffers this, please get them to think about saving themselves the terrible consequences of high sugars.   Oh, another fact that you will never see anywhere, there are no symptoms to diabetes if the blood sugars are kept normal. 

Of course, this is all just my opinion, what I have learned, you do what you think is right for you.  If a donut is worth your eyesight then munch away...  I was setting our table last month with 9 family members, 7 of us with diabetes.  Cake and ice cream was served, 6 of us with diabetes ate it, a couple of them had more than one helping.  I got up and had me a couple of sticks of celery with cream cheese sweetened with stevia.  Since they all believe that belief is more real than knowledge, I hope in a few years their belief will keep them well, but I will not hold my breath.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 12, 2006, 09:32:40 PM
Doug you are so knowledgeable on the subject.  I know for a fact there are many people on the board with this disease, maybe you should start a seperate post.  I think you could help people, I really do.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 12, 2006, 10:24:29 PM
Quote
That is so interesting, other people on this site have said something similar to me, that their parents thought of their being gay almost as a death. That is so bizzare to me.  To lose a child must be unbearable, to have a child who is gay....what is that......that is nothing.  I pray for my kid's happiness, that is all I ever want from life.

In my case, I think it was that she had planned it all out that I would have children, I would have a lovely wife she could also spoil.  My sister had a small daughter at the time and a husband loved by all.  It all went so bad for her, so much of a loss. 

Quote
I have no doubt diabetis can be controlled in some people, just like hypertension, high cholesterol and alot of other things, but sometimes I just don't think it can.  Of course I don't know for sure.  It sounds like you are doing an excellent job of controlling yours.
 

Thanks, I do believe it can be controlled in everyone.  It is much more direct than hypertension.  High cholesterol is another one that is loaded with illusion.  But that is another post on another day...

Quote
And yes hind sight is 20/20, I could have used it many times in my life.

Michael can never fade from your memory.  I have everything of my Parent's, but I don't take them out and look at them, I carry them both in my heart every day.

Yeah, Michael is always there, some times I can go a week or two without thinking about him.  Of course, anytime BBM is around I fall back to thinking about him.

Quote
Aguirre (Randy Quaid) isn't too bad, he will always be Clark Griswald's brother in law to me! lol  I find men who can make you laugh, very sexy!  ;)
 

I will always love his brother Dennis.  I fell for him in "Caveman" many years back, he is still is so handsome to me.  Though Randy is quite fine as well.

Quote
VERY Interesting, I hope people with diabetis are taking note.  My Dad lost a leg, it wasn't nice.  :'(

That is why I decided to write all that out, maybe someone, someplace can find the hope that they did not know existed.

Quote
I have a feeling your Mom and you WILL sit down and watch that movie and I have a strong feeling it is going to be life changing for both of you.  Be close, while you two still have each other.

We are quite close most of the time, I just have this section of my life closed off from her and the others.  It is just easier that way, but leaves me rather isolated when things like BBM come up and rattle my cage. 

Quote
Yea end of times, break out the killer kool aid, the rest of us are in no hurry to get there.   

Yep, no hurry at all. 

Quote
You have done NOTHING to create the sad things that have happend to you, sounds to me like you have handled them all with dignity and courage.

Well, I try.   Yet, it is me and me alone that allows myself to be sad about these things.  I could either forget them, or change the way I remember to exclude the bad things.  Yet, I feel I would not be honoring Michael if I forget even a second, but do I honor him when I remember the pain?  Most times I remember the good things, but sometimes I slip back into the turmoil and suffering.  BBM sure slapped me square into the pain and suffering.

Quote
Poor Christopher Reeve, he was a gorgeous man, he was freaking Superman, he had life on a string.   Beautiful wife, career, little son and in a blink of an eye it changed.

For 10 years, imagine what his life was.  And still he persevered.  And she stood by him, in sickness and in health.  And for what, to die herself of lung cancer, she never even smoked.

To leave their child on his own, what a tragedy.  In an 18 month period, she lost her husband, her mother and her life. 

I think the Reeve's are my insperation.

I am not sure I ever thought of them as inspiration, I just admired them for taking the suffering with so much honor and wisdom.  I really wished we could now find the cure promised by stem cells that Chris hoped that one day would allow him to walk again.  I hope that such will allow all diabetics to be free of their suffering as well. Of course, we once again have fundies objecting on the grounds of belief over knowledge. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 12, 2006, 11:21:20 PM
Doug you are so knowledgeable on the subject.  I know for a fact there are many people on the board with this disease, maybe you should start a seperate post.  I think you could help people, I really do.

Perhaps, but I have found out that for there to be any reason for them to consider what I have to say, they have to be already searching.  They have to already come to understand that belief in the authority called "doctor and hospital" can be damaging to your health, otherwise I am just another wind bag like so many others they have been warned against.  In that case they will find what they are looking for, just like I did. 

For example, I was visiting the neighbors, they had me making a book for them.  Him and her both have diabetes really bad.  She just had eye surgery to stop bleeding, she is also on oxygen 100% of the time.  He is doing a little better.  I asked about what their doctor told them, it was just like I wrote before.  I told them all this, it was like talking to a wall, they trusted their doctor to the end. They have faith that it will all be just fine.  They do not want to know any of this, it is just too hard, they would rather swallow a pill in his case, and inject insulin in her case, and believe that all is well while eating a toast snack.   I have talked to family members to hit the same wall.

I guess I really am different, my doc tells me so, as does a lot of others.  I just do not see this as that difficult knowing what the consequences are.  Anyway...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 13, 2006, 01:46:16 AM
Quote
I have no doubt diabetis can be controlled in some people, just like hypertension, high cholesterol and alot of other things, but sometimes I just don't think it can.  Of course I don't know for sure.  It sounds like you are doing an excellent job of controlling yours.
 
Thanks, I do believe it can be controlled in everyone.  It is much more direct than hypertension.  High cholesterol is another one that is loaded with illusion.  But that is another post on another day...

Fascinating. And I share your belief that doctors are only people too. Maybe doing what they think is best but that doesn't make them infallible in any way nor omnipotent. I am blessed with exceptional health mainly due to my lifestyle, of years of searching and finding out how everything works and why. That's not to say I don't get ill once in a while, as a child I was ill a lot, but on average it has been less than a week a year for the past twenty, since I took control myself, and I think that's a pretty good record.

Still, due to a luxury lifestyle and eating all of my favourite foods far too often, I got seriously high cholesterol some years back. I knew something was wrong so I started mapping out symptoms and times, etc. Age, smoking and other factors over a couple of years where I worked more and exercised less made that really the most likely diagnosis. I went to my doctor, who had never seen me before, and I said I think I have high cholesterol, what can I do about it.

He looked at me with that look I'm sure you know, like who is the doctor around here, and had my blood tested. It was confirmed. I was to take pills the rest of my life and I wouldn't have to worry. But I don't like to take pills unless it is absolutely necessary.

I asked, is there no other way? Well you can try diet, he said, but most people can't do that. I can. I said, I'll take your $5 a pill three times a day for a month or two to bring the level down quickly while I configure my new diet and lifestyle. He didn't believe me. But he never saw me back again.

It's been over five years now since I last took an anti-cholesterol pill. My levels are perfectly normal, even low at times. I stopped eating everything with high cholesterol content as a first action, and combinations of food that produce more of it, as well as other foods, like pineapple, that reduce it, and I do miss my duck and paté, Belgian chocolates, baked liver with onions, etc. but instead of eating that every week like before, I just eat them once or twice a year.

I test my levels every couple of months, and there is no problem. The pills also had a couple of nasty side effects that I didn't like, such as flatulence, and I wasn't about to go through the rest of my life farting all the way! LOL

Doctors don't know everything, and even if they do know that you can change a lot yourself, they are not programmed to think that way. Modern medicine is a great and wonderful thing, but it isn't the beginning and end of all things health by any means. I don't trust doctors and the industry they back up.

We are what we eat and being aware of what you put into your body and what it does there is crucial. The body doesn't care about food for pleasure. It only wants those substances it needs for energy and proper functioning and it knows what it needs. All you have to do is listen. You put too much crap in, it starts to malfunction. You do that for years you develop serious problems.

There are so many wonderful things to eat and I like to cook anyway, so for me there really is no reason to see any diet as a long road of suffering. For everything I shouldn't eat there are a hundred other delicious things I can, so what's the big deal? It's all in the mind. And no, the bible is definitely not a good source for dietary advice.

Good for you, Doug!

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 13, 2006, 07:50:48 AM
Hello Doug.
Sorry that I don't have anything to contribute to your thread, but I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate it greatly.  I learn just sooooo much from your postings; and am very impressed with the way that you reply in great depth and detail to every component of each question which is asked of you. In a field of enquiry where motherhood statements seem to be the norm, it is so educational to read your considered opinion on all of the issues raised.

It has also been great to see the rapport and agreement between you and Vic. Are you sure that you haven't just manufactured him as another manifestation of yourself, just to have someone agree with you? LOL!

Similarly, I have enjoyed the respectful interactions between you and Lola -- where she is sadly a believer. Lola, if all so-called "christians" were more like you, and as Doug says, if they all spoke out loudly against their fundamentalists' anti-humanity tirades, then perhaps more people might think of embracing their belief.

The huge lesson for me in the recent postings is that about the fundamentalists' fomenting world conflicts so that the day of reckoning might come sooner -- during their lifetime!  Wow!  Thanks for posting that Doug -- it gives me a completely new perspective on why such conflicts occur, and continue.

As one of my dearest friends suffers from diabetes, I was very interested in your postings on that topic Doug, and have copied them and sent them on to him, feeling sure that he will read quite a bit in there that will help him to better manage his own health.  I must say though, that when you write with such knowledge about foods and nutrition; it makes me ask how it is that you also write that you carry a lot of weight? I guess that it is probably a case of still eating to excess some of the things which are not bad for your diabetes.  But then again, if I had had your experiences, I wonder if I would still be here in any form, with weight or without it.

Doug, I have read your own story earlier, probably on the "how BBM affected me" thread; and was even more saddened by reading your recent postings here.  What sad commentaries they make on a supposedly advanced and "civilised" society.  And I was especially affected by your addendum about the virtual murder of your male tenant after you moved out. Yes, it would seem that either they thought he was just another part of your harem, or perhaps he manifested some "gay" traits. How awful for him and his family.  You know, one of the worst things for me as a one-time believer who saw the light and is now a strident non-believer, is that along with my non-belief I had to discard the comforting notion that bastards like those who attacked your tenant would get their come-uppance in a future "life".  It is so sad that they are so blatantly anti-social, and seem to get off "scot-free" in just so many cases.

Finally Doug, here is a co-incidence. Originally when I was reading your personal postings, especially about the family saying not to let the neighbours know as they would kill you; I thought to myself: "why doesn't he just have someone live there with them as an employee?". I was surprised then quite a bit later to see at least twice in your commentaries, that you made that similar viewpoint when talking about Jack and Ennis -- but yet it almost seems as if you did not see that as a possible solution for yourself.  Please forgive me if any of this sounds rude or unfeeling, as it is certainly not intended to be that way.  Back-pedalling quickly, I can think of one answer to me, which might be that you may consider it, but have to find the fella first.

At this rate, I had better stop writing now. You probably won't hear back from me again, as I have nothing of substance to add to your thread, but I shall continue lurking as a strong supporter and admirer of you and of your fellow non-believers -- and of posters like Lola.
JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 13, 2006, 08:43:19 AM
Doug your Mom just wanted what every Mom wants.  But you know I have two very good friends (gay, males) they are together (married) they just adopted a child.  They have great careers, lovely home.  So their Parents are quite proud, and their Mom's are happy they got their weddings and their grandchild.   It is possible to have both, a gay child and grandkids! 

Diet and exercise, lifestyle change,  can help alot.  My husband has had problems with things over the years and the minute he loses a few pounds, he responds, it is often as simple as that.  People sometimes find taking a pill easier, than making any real changes in their lives.

Doug I also wondered (as Johnny X mentioned) if you do all these things, how is it you still struggle with weight?


Hey don't even mention Dennis Quaid, The Big Easy is my favourite, saw it when it first came out and I still haven't recovered...........sigh 

When you are close to someone, you want to share.  And I know it must have killed you not to be able to share this movie with those you were close to  (like your Mom).

My husband is away on business and I saw a movie called WATER this weekend, I can hardly wait for him to get home tonight, so I can watch it with him and we can talk about it.   

Did BB give you hope, I mean as sad as it was, did you look at the end and hope good things for Ennis?  I did, I was sad of course, but I thought maybe now he would have the courage to go on with living and be true to himself.   I always felt like he would have Alma Jr. in his corner, no matter what.

Stem cell research is another topic, I don't know where the conflict lies with that I really don't.

Johnny X I really hope you keep posting!

Vic very good advice and you are so right, healthy eating doesn't have to make people feel deprived.  As the old saying goes "we are what we eat"

You guys should join us in the BB mountain diet thread, Bobby has a good one going.  ;D



Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 13, 2006, 09:42:39 AM


Perhaps, but I have found out that for there to be any reason for them to consider what I have to say, they have to be already searching.  They have to already come to understand that belief in the authority called "doctor and hospital" can be damaging to your health, otherwise I am just another wind bag like so many others they have been warned against.  In that case they will find what they are looking for, just like I did. 


Well people do trust their Doctors, that is true.  I have a kid going through to be a Doctor right now, so I don't want to run them down to much! lol   He is also very "anti drug" let's see if he stays that way.

Perscription drugs are also quite expensive, so you think that in itself would be insentive for people to look for a viable alternative.  I bet their are alot of people in the U.S. (especially seniors) who can't afford their meds.



OMG speaking of "whacko's" check this out:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/12/polygamy.fbi.ap/index.html
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 13, 2006, 10:36:30 AM
Quote
Fascinating. And I share your belief that doctors are only people too. Maybe doing what they think is best but that doesn't make them infallible in any way nor omnipotent.

This is true, but I think the bigger factor is they are believers in the schooling they got, most will not think outside of the box, nor will they take notice to resolve the contradictions.  Take the food pyramid taught to our children, it is supposed to create health, we as a country are eating "right" exercising more, and still loosing the battle. Something is not adding up, but they do not work to find out what it is.

Quote
I am blessed with exceptional health mainly due to my lifestyle, of years of searching and finding out how everything works and why. That's not to say I don't get ill once in a while, as a child I was ill a lot, but on average it has been less than a week a year for the past twenty, since I took control myself, and I think that's a pretty good record.

I have not been ill much in my life.  Even this disease, I did not feel ill at all.  Though I knew it was coming, it is on both sides of my family very strong.  Every six months for years I have had myself tested for diabetes.  When I was in college, oh so many years ago, a medical student friend of mine had me tested with a glucose tolerance test.  At that time even I was told I had "an exaggerated sugar curve".  My insulin response was too strong, and then my sugar crashed when I came down.  Of course, then my response was to eat again. Anyway, I have had myself tested for years, I was even tested just one month before being diagnosed this time and was told I was normal.  BUT I learned after the fact, that they only used the cheap sugar of the moment test, rather the more expensive 3 month average test.  IF the SOB would have told me of such, THAT would have been what I wanted.  Turns out I have a low period every day in the mid-afternoon, and that is when I always have my appointments due to the distance to travel.

Quote
Still, due to a luxury lifestyle and eating all of my favourite foods far too often, I got seriously high cholesterol some years back. I knew something was wrong so I started mapping out symptoms and times, etc. Age, smoking and other factors over a couple of years where I worked more and exercised less made that really the most likely diagnosis. I went to my doctor, who had never seen me before, and I said I think I have high cholesterol, what can I do about it.

Please do your due diligence on cholesterol.  I have genetically very low cholesterol, when I was thinner mine ran less than 100, now it runs about 110.  A funny story... a female friend of mine got us a job of doing cholesterol checks at grocery stores many years back.  She insisted I take mine because I was heavier, therefore bound to have high cholesterol, she thin as a pencil.  Ok, if you do the same I said.  Mine came back as too low for the machine to read, less than 100.  Hers was 486, thus began her voyage into the world of cholesterol control. 

Quote
He looked at me with that look I'm sure you know, like who is the doctor around here, and had my blood tested. It was confirmed. I was to take pills the rest of my life and I wouldn't have to worry. But I don't like to take pills unless it is absolutely necessary.

Good on you.  You have read that the side effects from cholesterol lowering drugs are worse than the effects of the cholesterol itself?

Quote
I asked, is there no other way? Well you can try diet, he said, but most people can't do that. I can. I said, I'll take your $5 a pill three times a day for a month or two to bring the level down quickly while I configure my new diet and lifestyle. He didn't believe me. But he never saw me back again.

See, he gave away his belief that there is no sense in telling anybody about the non-drug methods because none will follow them.  I think, even if it does fall on deaf ears, doctors should tell you all your options, and the reasons why and how the drugs they are to give you work.  And of course, any side effects. 

Quote
It's been over five years now since I last took an anti-cholesterol pill. My levels are perfectly normal, even low at times. I stopped eating everything with high cholesterol content as a first action, and combinations of food that produce more of it, as well as other foods, like pineapple, that reduce it, and I do miss my duck and paté, Belgian chocolates, baked liver with onions, etc. but instead of eating that every week like before, I just eat them once or twice a year.

Sounds good.  A couple of studies I read fairly recently is finding that high cholesterol is two fold.  One, not nearly as bad for you as once thought, and two, that dietary intake does not have as a big effect as once thought.  Cholesterol being a large molecule does not pass the gut/blood stream barrier, it has to be broken down first, therefore it is no longer cholesterol when absorbed.  It is your body that reassembles it into human cholesterol.  A quick story, only interesting in value, my Grandmother and her sister had sky high choleserol, the doctors was always trying to put them on meds.  They said they was too old worry about it, but really they just could not afford them.  Anyway, Grandmother died at the young age of 103 and her sister at 106, obviously the high cholesterol killed them. LOL!  Anyway, more studies are now showing the real problem is inflammation of the veins and arteries.  That inflammation causes the body to protect those areas with a cholesterol patch, that patch is what can break away and cause a clot.  The problem is not the cholesterol it is the inflammation, which can be caused by a few other problems, low grade infections of the mouth being pointed to for both this inflammation and heart muscle problems, but low grade infections anywhere can contribute, even those yellow, turned up fungus ate toe nails.  A circulating compound called "homosistine", sorry did not take the time to look up the spelling, directly inflames the lining of vein walls and may have more to do with blood clots than cholesterol.  To me, it seems it is far from settled as to the role that cholesterol plays.   

Quote
I test my levels every couple of months, and there is no problem. The pills also had a couple of nasty side effects that I didn't like, such as flatulence, and I wasn't about to go through the rest of my life farting all the way! LOL

Oh, but the sweet music that can be played...  LOL!  Keep it up, do what is right for you.  Do not believe, know, be an equal opportunity non-believer, but you already know that.

Quote
Doctors don't know everything, and even if they do know that you can change a lot yourself, they are not programmed to think that way. Modern medicine is a great and wonderful thing, but it isn't the beginning and end of all things health by any means. I don't trust doctors and the industry they back up.

Yep.  They are programmed to think in the method of drugs, and that people are too simple to ever understand the workings, or worse, do not want to know, of their bodies.  Also doctors are trained to think in terms of bullets, a bullet for that pain, a bullet for that ailment, another bullet for this.  Of course, interactions between bullets are common, and being bullets they also tend to destroy all rather than just the problem.  They do not think in terms of the whole body as one working unit, that bringing up the bar for the whole body does things great for the specifics, they also do not allow for the body abilities to heal itself.  They fight symptoms, not causes.  Take diabetes, the first pill they put you on targets the insulin producing cells and forces them to make insulin, the very same cells that are dying from exhaustion, that are struggling to survive, then they add this pressure.  The very best thing they could do would be to rest them with two approaches, one use the one drug that lowers insulin resistance allowing less insulin to do the job, and the injectable insulin for a couple of months giving the cells a rest.  Sadly, someone like me who wanted to add the insulin resistance lowing drug in a small dose, can not be accommodated, that is reserved for those in their last throws, too little too late. 

Quote
We are what we eat and being aware of what you put into your body and what it does there is crucial. The body doesn't care about food for pleasure. It only wants those substances it needs for energy and proper functioning and it knows what it needs. All you have to do is listen. You put too much crap in, it starts to malfunction. You do that for years you develop serious problems.

Sadly, it is so very hard to know.  The TV screams that this is healthy, that is not, and for many of us it is the opposite. 

Quote
There are so many wonderful things to eat and I like to cook anyway, so for me there really is no reason to see any diet as a long road of suffering. For everything I shouldn't eat there are a hundred other delicious things I can, so what's the big deal? It's all in the mind. And no, the bible is definitely not a good source for dietary advice.

The bible is not a good source for any advice, yes it has many, many good things in it, but it also has so many that contaminate the good, and it is very hard to sort the good from the bad, one is better off just chucking the whole thing, and looking for better validated sources. 

Living in the boonies has its problems with the foods. Our local grocery carries nothing that is a bit different, and even the produce is low quality.  I raise a lot of our veggies, eat them fresh in the summer and can or freeze the rest.  That does not allow for much of a variety.  Oh well, does with what one has.

Keep up the good work, and teach us.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 13, 2006, 01:20:44 PM
Hello Doug.

Hey Johnny! Welcome!!

Quote
Sorry that I don't have anything to contribute to your thread,

LOL!  And you think I do?  I just like to visit.

Quote
but I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate it greatly.  I learn just sooooo much from your postings; and am very impressed with the way that you reply in great depth and detail to every component of each question which is asked of you. In a field of enquiry where motherhood statements seem to be the norm, it is so educational to read your considered opinion on all of the issues raised.

<Chest puffed out big>  Why thank you!  I really appreciate you saying so.

Quote
It has also been great to see the rapport and agreement between you and Vic. Are you sure that you haven't just manufactured him as another manifestation of yourself, just to have someone agree with you? LOL!

LOL!  Shhhh, quiet Vic, do not tell them at thing...  Just kidding...  Is not Vic the greatest?  I think so anyway.  It is so good to talk to intelligent people, something I have sorely missed over the last years.  I used to be connected to a lot of very intelligent people, but alas, time and circumstances have moved most of them on. 

Quote
Similarly, I have enjoyed the respectful interactions between you and Lola -- where she is sadly a believer. Lola, if all so-called "christians" were more like you, and as Doug says, if they all spoke out loudly against their fundamentalists' anti-humanity tirades, then perhaps more people might think of embracing their belief.

Well, one thing is for sure, my first impression of Lola was completely wrong, I sure had her pegged as a total fundie.  Reality and her has set me straight on that. Is it not great that reality exists just the way it is whether you believe it or not?   I agree, if all Christians were like her, we could get along great, and I do not think we would be working towards the end time wars.

Quote
The huge lesson for me in the recent postings is that about the fundamentalists' fomenting world conflicts so that the day of reckoning might come sooner -- during their lifetime!  Wow!  Thanks for posting that Doug -- it gives me a completely new perspective on why such conflicts occur, and continue.


I had thought of it before when Bush pulled the inspectors out of Iraq, dismissed their insistence that there was no evidence of mass destruction weapons, dismissed all intelligence that contradicted his wanted results, that actually the sanctions had worked well, when Bush warned Saddam over and over again, "we are coming", and choose to attack with "shock and awe".  For what possible reason would he go this route?  First he wanted to be a war hero, rather than what he was.  Second, when by letting the inspectors finish, we could have confirmed with some reasonable assurance that Iraq had no such weapons, we could have then entered, not as occupiers, but could have entered with humanitarian aid, built roads, schools, strengthened the infrostructure, honored their religion.  Saddam would at that point had two choices, attack us, which we would protect ourselves, or let us do this.  Whose side do you think the people would be on if he attacked? Or if he didn't?  I doubt we would have lost more people, nor do I doubt that it would have cost more, and for sure there would not be grieving families hell bent on justifying the wrongs.  To me this is America, help with compassion and love, not bomb the hell out of people. Preemptive strike is a very bad norm to set.  If Saddam was such a threat, then pop him, you can not tell me we do not the ability to do that, and not take credit, come in saying "You poor people, we will help with anything you need". If they then get another dictator then pop him as well, maybe even release "confirmed evidence" it was Ben Laden. Third, Bush is wanting the end times war, so the thousand year rein of Jesus can be on his watch, talk about a legacy!  That would sure show up that damn Clinton!

Quote
As one of my dearest friends suffers from diabetes, I was very interested in your postings on that topic Doug, and have copied them and sent them on to him, feeling sure that he will read quite a bit in there that will help him to better manage his own health. 

Want to really help him? Get him to buy and read this book...  The Diabetes Solution by Dr. Richard K. Bernstein, MD.  This man is a type 1 diabetic who all on his own figured this all out.  He in his 60's went to medical school to become a specialist diabetes doctor, he is also black balled by the medical establishment, big surprise...  You have never read, nor heard, a more down to earth, reality based man.

Quote
I must say though, that when you write with such knowledge about foods and nutrition; it makes me ask how it is that you also write that you carry a lot of weight?


Good pick up on a contradiction!  A gold star for you.  A couple of factual points, circulating insulin is the fat producing hormone. It takes blood sugar and with the help of fat cells converts it to stored fat.  You can not loose weight with a high circulating insulin level, it just does not work that way.  I have a very high circulating level of insulin, because of my insulin resistance, making it very hard to loose weight, but gaining weight is a snap.  I had ate the same foods and amounts as Michael he weighed 115 lbs, and had a hard time keeping it up.  Type 1's do not ever have insulin resistance. I gained.  A little research you will find people on 1000 calorie a day diets gaining weight, which the medical society will tell you it is impossible.  A little background, I was a very heavy kid, 180 in sixth grade, I remember it so well, that is when the "hunger" took a hold of me.  I have had a life time of cravings so strong that nothing would stop them, I felt nearly crazy many times.  Circumstances did not help either, being shy, and fat in high school I became the target of many.  I took beatings many days, they would kidnap me drive me out 10 or so miles and make we walk back to school. At night they would run me off the road, just about once a week.  I lived in fear, hate, and anger most of the time.  In a year I was thin as a rail, and hated school, and hated them.  Only one teacher, who I had a crush on, kept me sane.  Though him and the other teachers never stopped them.  My best friend at the time, Dwight, and I used to play horse on the basketball court, out of the blue I would get hit with a basketball in the face, that happened a number of times without them ever facing consequences, they were the football heroes after all.   I understand Columbine, one day I got my 22 rifle and was headed to school, I was going to stop it, it just had to stop. I had no thoughts of consequences, of killing myself, or what was going to happen, it just had to stop.  Lucky for me Mom saw me, and took my rifle away.  She called the school and the state patrol and it did finally stop, at least the worst of it.  The worse three of those monsters are ministers now... guess they have sin to account for.  LOL!  After high school the weight, and hunger came back, but I did manage to keep it within reason, averaged 180.  Then I moved away, and I went on a 33 day fast.  I lost a lot of weight, and was down to 155 size 30 jeans. I kept it off for over a year and half, but was so very hungry all the time, and so very tired and stressed.  Then I lost my gallbladder due to the stones I created with this diet, of eating just enough to keep my weight steady.  I decided I would never do that to myself again.  My weight slowly inched it's way back to 180, then Michael died.  I found myself medicating myself with food, and my weight ballooned.  The hunger, the nearly crazy feeling that came over me, came more often.  I could not get enough carbs, and I am sure a little depression was in there, maybe even a little wishing I could cease to exist.  Time passed I stopped feeling so bad about Michael, accepted that I must move on, must decide that find a happy place.  I knew from before that happiness is just a decision.  I made that decision again.  I had been on the Atkins diet a couple of times and had lost weight, and more importantly felt better, but family members would always convince me to get off of it, both by dragging out reports on how the Atkins diet is a heart killer, and by deed.  How can you say no to your own birthday cake?  At my top weight it was 283 lb, yes at that point I was eating everything in sight, mainly carbs, for it is the carbs that do things to me.  I had lost about 20 lb when the diagnoses came.  I have lost another 25 or so since then.  You would think since I have not had one flake of flour or grain of sugar on propuse since then, I would be loosing at a great rate, not so, it is very slow.   But the one great thing is the hunger is gone, not a trace of it left, and life is so much easier without it.

Quote
I guess that it is probably a case of still eating to excess some of the things which are not bad for your diabetes.  But then again, if I had had your experiences, I wonder if I would still be here in any form, with weight or without it.

Here, perhaps, is part of an illusion showing.  It is not nearly as simple as eating too much, or the "wrong" thing.  It is more of a whole mind/body thing, where some of us have things going on that feed each other, positive loop, to get us to a place we would never have chose for ourselves.  This is very similar to being gay, no one chooses to be gay, only an idiot would choose the route with the strife at every turn, despite what the "common knowledge" is.  No one chooses to be fat, only an idiot would choose the route fraught with loneliness, the looks and stares, the shame, and the obvious health obstacles.  It is not a matter of will power either I have very strong will power, I can stop eating altogether for long  periods of time, that is not a problem, that cost me a gallbladder last time.  I can keep it within a set zone for long periods of time as well, it is just so damn discouraging to find you are still gaining weight.   I have ate only 1000 calorie diets for a month only to step on the scale to find I gained two pounds.  Slowing the carbs has been the only thing to work for me.

Quote
Doug, I have read your own story earlier, probably on the "how BBM affected me" thread; and was even more saddened by reading your recent postings here.  What sad commentaries they make on a supposedly advanced and "civilised" society.  And I was especially affected by your addendum about the virtual murder of your male tenant after you moved out. Yes, it would seem that either they thought he was just another part of your harem, or perhaps he manifested some "gay" traits.
 

His sin, I think, was he hung around gay people and was confortable with them, his lesbian cousin was his mentor and a good friend of mine at the time.  He was quite handsome.  He looked very much like Heath, brown hair, brown eyes, tall and slender, always with a smile on his face, and wore cowboy cut/fashion clothes, with boots.  Intelligent and well spoken.

Quote
How awful for him and his family.  You know, one of the worst things for me as a one-time believer who saw the light and is now a strident non-believer, is that along with my non-belief I had to discard the comforting notion that bastards like those who attacked your tenant would get their come-uppance in a future "life".  It is so sad that they are so blatantly anti-social, and seem to get off "scot-free" in just so many cases.

Yes, that is one big draw back, but I accept that is just a part of reality. Look at nature, and one soon learns that words like "innocent", "fair", "just", do not exist in nature.   That they are man-made constructs.  Since we are a part of nature, we can not control it all, and sometimes things like this happen. 

Quote
Finally Doug, here is a co-incidence. Originally when I was reading your personal postings, especially about the family saying not to let the neighbours know as they would kill you; I thought to myself: "why doesn't he just have someone live there with them as an employee?". I was surprised then quite a bit later to see at least twice in your commentaries, that you made that similar viewpoint when talking about Jack and Ennis -- but yet it almost seems as if you did not see that as a possible solution for yourself. 

Oh, quite the contrary, I would move in or move out in a heart beat if I found such a person as either Jack or Ennis, the problem is finding such.  Of the many years I have been here I only found one other person, he was a very nice, and very promising.  He did have a fair amount relgion holding him down, and for that reason I was a little afraid of him.  Then one day he packed up and moved to Seattle.  He now has a lover, a good life, shifted his religion and is very happy.  I am happy for them both.  One side note, he was hung like a horse, I could do very little with that thing but throw it over my shoulder and burp it.  LOL! 

Quote
Please forgive me if any of this sounds rude or unfeeling, as it is certainly not intended to be that way.  Back-pedalling quickly, I can think of one answer to me, which might be that you may consider it, but have to find the fella first.

Bingo!

Quote
At this rate, I had better stop writing now. You probably won't hear back from me again, as I have nothing of substance to add to your thread, but I shall continue lurking as a strong supporter and admirer of you and of your fellow non-believers -- and of posters like Lola.

What are you talking about you have nothing of substance?  Seems to me you have got right to the nitty gritty of the substance to be had.  I like no pussy footing around, and getting to the point.  While none of us like to be shown where we are irrational, that is just what we need the most.   Post and post often.  And besides where is it in the rules that a post has to be of substance? Huh?   Would this forum even exist if that was the case?  My poor beloved picture captions thread would be lost to the dust... 

Take Care, ask questions, hold me accountable, make me honest.  I am not like those fundies who evade every question with nonsequentors.

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 13, 2006, 01:45:03 PM
Quote
Did BB give you hope, I mean as sad as it was, did you look at the end and hope good things for Ennis? 

Just the opposite for me.  Him, standing there, crying, all alone seemed all so hopeless, so very final.  I could see him doing himself in just to end the pain.  Annie stated that one of the reasons she wrote this was because so many single older, perhaps gay, men commit suicide. 

I had to do something different, I had to rewrite the story so it would end more hopeful.  I had to get it so Jack was not murdered, and he and Ennis had a happy life together. 

But in the real world, there is no rewriting the story, there is just the suffering, one then must accept it and move on as best as he can. With time, one finds he can laugh again, can enjoy again, and the memories fade.  Over years the constant thoughts, slowly get replaced until the only time those thoughts of loved ones past are when they are triggered.  That is what religion does it lets people rewrite the story, to they are actually happy someplace better and you will get to see them again sometime, instead of not existing any more at all.   Just a thought...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 13, 2006, 01:54:02 PM

Well people do trust their Doctors, that is true.  I have a kid going through to be a Doctor right now, so I don't want to run them down to much! lol   He is also very "anti drug" let's see if he stays that way.

I do not want to run them down too much either, I do think they have the best of intentions. 

Quote
Perscription drugs are also quite expensive, so you think that in itself would be insentive for people to look for a viable alternative.  I bet their are alot of people in the U.S. (especially seniors) who can't afford their meds.

Most just go without, instead of finding a reasonable replacement. 

Just something for the son to think about. I read of a clinic that refused to take any kind of insurance, because they was not under the control of the insurance industry they could offer people much cheaper, and better health care, while the doctors themselves got paid better, had the time and ability to take as much time with a patient as was needed.  It sounded interesting to me.



Quote
OMG speaking of "whacko's" check this out:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/12/polygamy.fbi.ap/index.html
The elder LeBaron ordered the executions of rival polygamists in the 1970s, investigators have said. In 1972 he was convicted in Utah of ordering family members to kill his brother, who was said to have disobeyed church laws.

Ervil LeBaron died in the Utah state prison in 1981. Before his death, he reportedly wrote a "bible" which included a commandment to kill disobedient church members.

Nothing like that religious nut love is there? 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 13, 2006, 02:13:06 PM
Just the opposite for me.  Him, standing there, crying, all alone seemed all so hopeless, so very final.  I could see him doing himself in just to end the pain.  Annie stated that one of the reasons she wrote this was because so many single older, perhaps gay, men commit suicide. 

I had to do something different, I had to rewrite the story so it would end more hopeful.  I had to get it so Jack was not murdered, and he and Ennis had a happy life together. 

But in the real world, there is no rewriting the story, there is just the suffering, one then must accept it and move on as best as he can. With time, one finds he can laugh again, can enjoy again, and the memories fade.  Over years the constant thoughts, slowly get replaced until the only time those thoughts of loved ones past are when they are triggered.  That is what religion does it lets people rewrite the story, to they are actually happy someplace better and you will get to see them again sometime, instead of not existing any more at all.   Just a thought...

Although Ennis looked old at the end of the film, wasn't he only suppose to be 40 (correct me if I am wrong) He still had alot of living to do.  He had his kids, he surely could have lived to love again.

People (straight people) love and lose a love and they go on.  Gay people (Ennis) could do the same.  And I think because of what he learnt in that relationship with Jack, he could give alot to another relationship.

And yes in real life we move on, not a day goes by I don't miss my Parents, but I go on.   And I do hope to see them one day, do you think you will see Michael again?  I think you will.  And I am going to get my Parents to look him up, make sure he is okay!  ;)


My son will be a Doctor in Canada, so I am not sure, I think we do things alot different up here with insurance companies etc.


Yep a hit list, you gotta shake your head.   ???




Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 13, 2006, 03:14:26 PM
Although Ennis looked old at the end of the film, wasn't he only suppose to be 40 (correct me if I am wrong) He still had alot of living to do.  He had his kids, he surely could have lived to love again.

He could, but would he?  Would he take the risks?  Without Jack to pull him out of himself, I fear he would just stay numb and time moving on without him.  "Have nothing need nothing"...

Yes, he will be a part, maybe even a big part, maybe a very small part, of his kids lives.

Quote
People (straight people) love and lose a love and they go on.  Gay people (Ennis) could do the same.  And I think because of what he learnt in that relationship with Jack, he could give alot to another relationship.

This is true, if he could allow himself to believe that.  But if the majority of the forum community is correct, Ennis would think Jack was the only one, and with him gone would just live out his life alone, not searching for anyone else, not knowing anyone else.  Then, being closeted he would not have the support as straight people do.  I have a single straight bother as a reference, family and friends go out of their way to set him up with available women he might find interesting.  They get him out to dances, get togethers, etc  Straight men friends point him to other women, and give him encouragement. When they see him out with a gal, they tell him what a cute couple they would make, what is she like, etc.   To a closeted gay Ennis this would be repugnant, and soon even those efforts would stop.  As Elma Jr. stated, "He is not the marrying kind", soon it would be obvious he is not the "dating kind" either, as Cassy found out.

The only place he would get the kind of support he needs is in a gay community, or through gay friends, but that would require him moving to the city, and getting himself known, I do not see him doing that.

Quote
And yes in real life we move on, not a day goes by I don't miss my Parents, but I go on.   And I do hope to see them one day, do you think you will see Michael again?  I think you will.  And I am going to get my Parents to look him up, make sure he is okay!  ;)


I have no doubt he does not exist anymore, forever gone from reality, he consciousness gone with the brain that created it. His body existing only now as dismembered atoms that are now part of other living and non-living things.  His heat and electrical energies forever fading into the existence. 


Quote
My son will be a Doctor in Canada, so I am not sure, I think we do things alot different up here with insurance companies etc.


I have no idea, so leave that there.


Quote
Yep a hit list, you gotta shake your head.   ???


Or shake in fear as these monsters roam free, and followers hold them in high regards, keeping them free and able to do their evil? 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 13, 2006, 03:18:43 PM
Although Ennis looked old at the end of the film, wasn't he only suppose to be 40 (correct me if I am wrong) He still had alot of living to do.  He had his kids, he surely could have lived to love again.

On a side note, I always thought they made them look way too old for their years, more like 50 than 40.

And here I am, a firm believer in that fresh mountain and country air is good for your complexion.

:)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 13, 2006, 03:31:34 PM
I guess they lived a hard life Vic, because they didn't look like any 39 years olds I have ever seen!  :)

Doug I am not sure if the majority on this forum do feel that way, at least not the conversations I have participated in.

I think at one point it would have been unconceivable for Ennis to even fathom being with another man.  But I think after Jacks death, he learnt a lesson, a very valuable lesson.  Times are changing, yes I think he will love again.

And I see him coming out to Alma Jr.  I see her as his rock.  Maybe she will be the one to "hook her Daddy up with a nice gentleman caller"  ;)


I am sad you feel that about Michael, but of course you are more than entitled to feel that.  I just could never think that way.  :-*
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 14, 2006, 07:16:36 AM
Although Ennis looked old at the end of the film, wasn't he only suppose to be 40 (correct me if I am wrong) He still had alot of living to do.  He had his kids, he surely could have lived to love again.
On a side note, I always thought they made them look way too old for their years, more like 50 than 40.
I guess they lived a hard life Vic, because they didn't look like any 39 years olds I have ever seen!  :)

Exactly. I'll believe it of Ennis, but Jack certainly didn't lack any material things or a lack of food or healthcare.
But I thought they did a pretty bad job on the make-up all round, actually, when the guys started ageing a little. I believe there's a whole thread devoted to this somewhere, so I won't clutter up Doug's any more with it. Sorry Doug!

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 14, 2006, 07:56:30 AM
Quote
so I won't clutter up Doug's any more with it. Sorry Doug!

What's a little clutter among friends?  Clutter away... the point is to enjoy each others company.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 14, 2006, 08:01:34 AM
Re: doctors. This is true, but I think the bigger factor is they are believers in the schooling they got, most will not think outside of the box, nor will they take notice to resolve the contradictions.  Take the food pyramid taught to our children, it is supposed to create health, we as a country are eating "right" exercising more, and still loosing the battle. Something is not adding up, but they do not work to find out what it is.

Quite, and let's not forget the pharmaceutical and insurance companies, who are not at all stimulating doctors to think outside the box or consider alternative methods, such as dietary and nutritional control, or even well proven homeopathy. But this differs in Europe, where homeopathy is accepted, on the condition that it is prescribed by a doctor.

The food pyramid is outdated. The main problem is that it is different for each person. At best these standards are averages. And again, with multinationals exerting pressure on governments, you will never get the truth anyway. Ever wonder why oranges are officially the healthiest fruit if you live in the state of Florida, why apples are the same in New York, and why olives are the best for you if you live in Italy or Spain? It's not because they are or aren't, it's because they need to sell.

Quote
Please do your due diligence on cholesterol.  I have genetically very low cholesterol, when I was thinner mine ran less than 100, now it runs about 110.

I keep a good eye on it, thanks. My mom also had a serious cholesterol problem some years ago. She too lowered it by dieting (with a bit of help from me), although she didn't like it very much <lol>. Who wants to eat boiled chicken and fish for six months!! The whole family suffered with her, but it helped.

Quote
You have read that the side effects from cholesterol lowering drugs are worse than the effects of the cholesterol itself?

Yes. Which is why I avoid all drug taking (except the recreational kind once in a while, but that is 100% natural anyway). :)

Quote
I think, even if it does fall on deaf ears, doctors should tell you all your options, and the reasons why and how the drugs they are to give you work.  And of course, any side effects. 

They should, few do. If I really need to I tend to go to doctors that specialize in alternative methods, they are more open-minded. But most people don't want to know anyway, so I don't completely blame the doctors.

Quote
To me, it seems it is far from settled as to the role that cholesterol plays.

Cholesterol in itself is not dangerous, no. But too much of anything in your body will cause problems eventually. The Western diet is a disaster, stemming from Northwestern European winter climates. Too much fat and carbs altogether. And unfortunately, it's taking over the world.

Quote
Sadly, it is so very hard to know.  The TV screams that this is healthy, that is not, and for many of us it is the opposite. 

True, but again, listen to you body, it will tell you. You eat something "wrong" you will not feel comfortable, you may develop all kinds of little things, like blotchy or bad skin, heart burn or stomach pains, or the "end product" is just wrong, etc. Sadly, we are not taught to listen to our bodies, instead we have to digest what is generally accepted. And, of course, it is always easier to be a sheep than a wolf and blame someone else when things go wrong.

Quote
The bible is not a good source for any advice, ... one is better off just chucking the whole thing.
Did that a long time ago. :)

Quote
Living in the boonies has its problems with the foods. Our local grocery carries nothing that is a bit different, and even the produce is low quality.  I raise a lot of our veggies, eat them fresh in the summer and can or freeze the rest.  That does not allow for much of a variety.  Oh well, does with what one has.

Sounds good, grow it yourself and you can control the quality. I don't have a garden at all right now, but I always grow my own herbs at least, and generally I buy organically grown. I eat meat only two or three times a week because I prefer free range. I hate battery meat, whether it's chicken, fish, beef, cow, pig or whatever. It tastes like nothing, it's full of antibiotics, hormones and other chemicals. Disgusting.

Besides, any animal who gets fed his own ancestors (as much of what cows, pigs and chickens eat is ground up leftovers from their own kind - which is how we got BSE in the first place) can't be good meat in my book. I'm willing to pay up to three times for free range because it's worth it and when I can't afford it, I go without. And I avoid all processed meats and cold cuts. So I eat less but better quality meats and the rest of the week vegetarian. I like meat, and any animal that has had a good life, i.e. space to move around, variety of food, fresh air and sunshine, simply is better meat for you. And especially when they get a quick death because that is very important. Fear hormones are very bad for you. 

But yes, it's really dependent on the access you have to a variety of foods. I'm one of those pesky irritating people that can spend hours in a supermarket or greengrocer department, smelling, (gently) squeezing and even tasting (like grapes and other small fruit or veg) everything before I buy. And I love to harrass the staff "It doesn't say where it's coming from, where does it come from?" "Why isn't there a date on this." etc. LOL

I don't care what they think, it's my health we're talking about!

Quote
Keep up the good work, and teach us.

Flattery will get you everywhere... thanks. But you already said it, it's will power.

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 14, 2006, 08:38:16 AM
Quote
so I won't clutter up Doug's any more with it. Sorry Doug!

What's a little clutter among friends?  Clutter away... the point is to enjoy each others company.

Gee: what a lovely non-rule-bound thread this one is.

Lola and Doug: I thank you both for your lovely welcomes, along with the invitations to post some more.

Doug: thank you for your true-to-form answers to all segments of my posting. I am glad that my genuine compliments resulting in your having a "chest puffed out big": so it should be.

I have already passed your diabetes book reference on to my mate, via his wife's e-mail, and forewarned him about it in a phone call, and he is grateful to be exposed to new understandings of his conditon; so thank you for all of that too.

Thank you for not being offended with my rude question about putting on weight etc., and for the detailed explanation which you gave of so many of the issues involved. That all helps to gain a better understanding of how it is for some people. I must say though that many years ago when I fairly regularly went to Los Angeles on business, I was shocked by the number of over-weight people: adults of both sexes and children of both sexes; who I always saw eating at junk food outlets, always including massive amounts of what you people call "french fries" (which we just call "chips"), and almost always washing that down with Coke or Diet Coke.  YUK. I feel quite sure that in those cases there was little more than poor dietary choices underlying the whole situation.

Doug, like you I was bullied at school. The difference was that I was extremely short, and extremely skinny. Like you I was also quite shy. In my case however, the bullies were often the big, fat, boys; and there was no way that puny little me could ever hope to be able to best them. Accordingly, I spent quite a proportion of my life trying to discover new routes to school and home again, so that I could avoid wherever they might be hiding away ready to pounce on me.  Therefore it is surprising to read that with your larger size, others still picked on you.  Your situation as you describe it though, makes my experience minimal by comparison. How disgusting that it was so bad that you are moved to write that:  "I lived in fear, hate, and anger most of the time".  How glad you must be now that your mother took that gun away from you. Your story, and your consequent understanding of how it could motivate the sad Columbine situation, makes me see that story in a completely new light. Your empathy with others is just so clear.

Doug: you also wrote: 'words like "innocent", "fair", "just", do not exist in nature ... they are man-made constructs.' Once again, your clear insights are just spot on.  I don't think that I wrote about it on the other thread with the rest of my stories, but several years back a young friend said that he had a life-changing experience by reading "The Selfish Gene" by Professor Richard DAWKINS in Oxford, England; and recommended it to me. Some years later I chanced upon the book, and it changed me from an agnostic into an atheist in belief -- and I stress that in my opinion this is just my belief, equal in that regard to the beliefs which religious people hold. But at least I accept that it is a belief.  In case you are not familiar with the work, he is a devout Darwinist, and in his research he goes further and further back in time, proving that all living organisms are the results of evolution.  Unlike you, I do not have a scientific mind, and at times his reasoning overwhelms me, but mostly he explains everything in very clear, simple, terms; but without sacrificing clarity.  Some of his mathematical examples are just mind-boggling, and just overthrow what we would otherwise think of as common sense. Sorry that I am writing in a general manner, but I don't have access to the book, and my memory is so poor now, that I cannot give more concrete examples. If you google his name, you will find his other works. My wife recently brought home his latest book for me, and it was LITERALLY so heavy, that it was painful just to hold it in my hands -- and that was before I even got to any of the content. I have forgotten the title, but it was something about "Ancestors"; and was further proofs of his hypotheses way back in time. However, I would recommend "The Selfish Gene" as a great way to start understanding him.

Your reference to your "picture caption thread" made me smile. I have avoided anything like that here, whilst I read instead the threads of more substance. However in the past couple of days I have gone into your captions, and find them ... "captivating".  So far I have only read about the first 30 pages of them, so I have a long way to go. (I think that I saw contributions from Lola there too.)

Oh by the way: Vic: I went into your sex web-site. What a great service to compile all of that information, and to make it available to all. So far I haven't read too much of it, but I do hope to get back to it more often, and to work my way through the content.

Finally: DOUG: this little phrase from you, near the end of your response to my first posting, indicates what a high-calibre person you are: "Take Care, ask questions, hold me accountable, make me honest. ..."  Oh if only more people in the world would see those things as something to aim for!  Aaaaaghhhh.... the idealist in me makes its way out to the surface again.

Good night all: JohnnyX.



Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 14, 2006, 09:01:57 AM
Doug: you also wrote: 'words like "innocent", "fair", "just", do not exist in nature ... they are man-made constructs.' Once again, your clear insights are just spot on.  I don't think that I wrote about it on the other thread with the rest of my stories, but several years back a young friend said that he had a life-changing experience by reading "The Selfish Gene" by Professor Richard DAWKINS in Oxford, England; and recommended it to me.

Sounds really good.

Quote
Your reference to your "picture caption thread" made me smile. I have avoided anything like that here, whilst I read instead the threads of more substance. However in the past couple of days I have gone into your captions, and find them ... "captivating".  So far I have only read about the first 30 pages of them, so I have a long way to go. (I think that I saw contributions from Lola there too.)

PhotoCaps is the most creative of all the threads, I think. Besides covering the topics of all the other threads, you get a picture to go with it as well.
 ;D

Quote
Oh by the way: Vic: I went into your sex web-site. What a great service to compile all of that information, and to make it available to all. So far I haven't read too much of it, but I do hope to get back to it more often, and to work my way through the content.

Thanks, it's only two weeks old at this point, but I've reserved 4 Gigs of server space so far, so it has plenty of room to grow...
Did you join, because that is the only way to get to see all of the topics? And please do let us have your voice and insights there as well as here! 

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 14, 2006, 10:27:46 AM

Quote
Oh by the way: Vic: I went into your sex web-site. What a great service to compile all of that information, and to make it available to all. So far I haven't read too much of it, but I do hope to get back to it more often, and to work my way through the content.

Thanks, it's only two weeks old at this point, but I've reserved 4 Gigs of server space so far, so it has plenty of room to grow...
Did you join, because that is the only way to get to see all of the topics? And please do let us have your voice and insights there as well as here! 

Vic
 

Hello Vic and thank you for your reply. On your question and invitation above: NO I didn't join; as I just looked in quickly.  I wasn't aware that it is such a new venture -- so I wish you all the best for its future growth and utility to a lot of others.  Mmmm...: about my voice and insights ... ROFLMAO: who? me? You obviously haven't read my first few postings to the "How BBM affected me" thread, to see how "out of left field" I am.  But also Vic, my wife is already concerned because I spend just so much time on this BBM web-site. If I were to tell her that I am also spending time in a separate discussion list about sex; I am sure that she would be even more concerned. ROFL again.  She is really very tolerant and understanding of my weirdnesses.
Talking of sex, I did tell her today that I have been reading all of the postings on the BBM "Juicy" thread. Wow, I learned a lot about so much there; and appreciated the honest replies by the guys there, to good but personal questions put by the women.  I haven't yet found the time to hunt for their new Medical thread either.

Looking forward to reading more of the love-fests between you and Doug.  More ROFL!
JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 14, 2006, 11:21:43 AM
Your wife sounds like a wonderful person, Johnny. She seems to know you well enough, I'd say. :)

I just read through your posts and my end thought on that was that I think you have a lot to contribute, and that you waited way too long in doing so! Lurking for six months? Wow. I wouldn't be able to contain myself for that long. It took me all of 5 minutes after finding this place to sign up and post.

 ;)
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 14, 2006, 12:14:54 PM
Gee: what a lovely non-rule-bound thread this one is.
<Ennis mode on> Freedom is great, huh? <Ennis mode off>

Quote
Lola and Doug: I thank you both for your lovely welcomes, along with the invitations to post some more.

Doug: thank you for your true-to-form answers to all segments of my posting. I am glad that my genuine compliments resulting in your having a "chest puffed out big": so it should be.

I have already passed your diabetes book reference on to my mate, via his wife's e-mail, and forewarned him about it in a phone call, and he is grateful to be exposed to new understandings of his conditon; so thank you for all of that too.

Keep me posted on what he thinks, and do not hesitate to email me if I can be any help with understanding.

While I was milking last night, I thought I need to clear up a possible small illusion.  All this information has happened since my diagnosis on March 4th, 2005.  Before that I ate what I wanted, the amount I wanted, and even had a binge or two. I lived on high carbs. A normal meal here is Potatoes and gravy, buttered bread, some sort of meat, then a dessert.  Snack was some sort of chips and a soda.  At night, had to have the late night traditional ice cream before bed.  Those are all gone now, and I am slowly loosing.  I gained it slowly, it is only fitting to loose it slowly.  No magic here.  Anyway, thought I would clear that up, that I went with the flow, believed what was being said, and ignored most of it when I felt like it.  I definitely did this to myself. 

Quote
Thank you for not being offended with my rude question about putting on weight etc.,

There is a balance, and part of that is intention.  It is rude when your intention is to hurt, it not rude, but a touchy balance to maintain, when the intention is to understand.   Sadly, so many people are so touchy they can not handle truly honest questions to understand, I wonder how much different the world would be if sometimes brutal honesty was used instead of illusions of everything is fine? 

Quote
and for the detailed explanation which you gave of so many of the issues involved. That all helps to gain a better understanding of how it is for some people. I must say though that many years ago when I fairly regularly went to Los Angeles on business, I was shocked by the number of over-weight people: adults of both sexes and children of both sexes; who I always saw eating at junk food outlets, always including massive amounts of what you people call "french fries" (which we just call "chips"), and almost always washing that down with Coke or Diet Coke.  YUK. I feel quite sure that in those cases there was little more than poor dietary choices underlying the whole situation.

Yep, that was my choices before, believe me they taste wonderful...  But...  they are potatoes good veggies... cooked in the highest, purest, non-fattening oil, and the coke is the purest spring water, gently carbonated, and kissed with just the right amount of pure natural flavorings, all without any of that nasty sugar.  LOL!!!   

Yeah, I just wolfed them down, personally I never did do much fast food eating, too expensive.  It was just when time was very tight or when we were far from home. I bought most of my poison from my local grocery. Eating this way for all my life, it is green veggies that was YUK! Rabbit food... They are not so bad now, since I can eat them, and I can not eat the other any longer. 

Quote
Doug, like you I was bullied at school. The difference was that I was extremely short, and extremely skinny. Like you I was also quite shy. In my case however, the bullies were often the big, fat, boys; and there was no way that puny little me could ever hope to be able to best them. Accordingly, I spent quite a proportion of my life trying to discover new routes to school and home again, so that I could avoid wherever they might be hiding away ready to pounce on me.  Therefore it is surprising to read that with your larger size, others still picked on you.  Your situation as you describe it though, makes my experience minimal by comparison. How disgusting that it was so bad that you are moved to write that:  "I lived in fear, hate, and anger most of the time".  How glad you must be now that your mother took that gun away from you. Your story, and your consequent understanding of how it could motivate the sad Columbine situation, makes me see that story in a completely new light. Your empathy with others is just so clear.

Bullying sets people up for a harder time of it.  They must resolve this.  I wonder how much different Ennis  would be if his Dad had not scared the holy shit out of him? If he did not carry the image of being tire ironed for not being "normal" at every turn?  How much hate does he carry for them, and for himself because of it?  How much anger lies just below the surface, anger about just how unfair it is that their life is acceptable and he is not? They can hug and kiss in public and it is cute, and his is grounds to be murdered?   I have resolved most of my issues around the bullying, but the images still remain and can come up at the most strange times. 

Quote
Doug: you also wrote: 'words like "innocent", "fair", "just", do not exist in nature ... they are man-made constructs.' Once again, your clear insights are just spot on. 

Yep, a baby bird killed by a cat is only innocent to us, nature has no thought on it, the cat only sees the food it needs to survive.  Nature has no thought on a cat being mauled to death by a dog, nor a dog mauled by a mountain lion.  Fair and justice is meaningless in nature, it is all cause and effect.  It is not fair that a rock falls and kills a hiker, nor just, but that is meaningless to nature, it just is.  On the other hand for the higher conscious beings, where that consciousness is the highest value, the concepts of "innocent", "fair" and "just" are the backbone of a civilized people.  In such a civilization initiation of force, or threat of force, would be illegal.  The only justification of force or threat of force would be only in response to initiated force.

Quote
I don't think that I wrote about it on the other thread with the rest of my stories, but several years back a young friend said that he had a life-changing experience by reading "The Selfish Gene" by Professor Richard DAWKINS in Oxford, England; and recommended it to me. Some years later I chanced upon the book, and it changed me from an agnostic into an atheist in belief -- and I stress that in my opinion this is just my belief, equal in that regard to the beliefs which religious people hold. But at least I accept that it is a belief.  In case you are not familiar with the work, he is a devout Darwinist, and in his research he goes further and further back in time, proving that all living organisms are the results of evolution.  Unlike you, I do not have a scientific mind, and at times his reasoning overwhelms me, but mostly he explains everything in very clear, simple, terms; but without sacrificing clarity.  Some of his mathematical examples are just mind-boggling, and just overthrow what we would otherwise think of as common sense. Sorry that I am writing in a general manner, but I don't have access to the book, and my memory is so poor now, that I cannot give more concrete examples. If you google his name, you will find his other works. My wife recently brought home his latest book for me, and it was LITERALLY so heavy, that it was painful just to hold it in my hands -- and that was before I even got to any of the content. I have forgotten the title, but it was something about "Ancestors"; and was further proofs of his hypotheses way back in time. However, I would recommend "The Selfish Gene" as a great way to start understanding him.


I will look him up, sounds very interesting.  I do know from their human genome studies that a majority of the genes we carry are parasitic, meaning they are not of any benefit, they just are there for the ride, and reproduce.  It seems to me that if we was created, why would any good creator throw in the majority as junk that can mutate and cause real problems?  But if we evolved, then it makes sense that there would be a large pool of stuff, where some of it worked out. 

Quote
Your reference to your "picture caption thread" made me smile. I have avoided anything like that here, whilst I read instead the threads of more substance. However in the past couple of days I have gone into your captions, and find them ... "captivating".  So far I have only read about the first 30 pages of them, so I have a long way to go. (I think that I saw contributions from Lola there too.)

Well, I give it tribute for helping me deal with this movie, it took the painful scenes and gave me another thought.  Take Ennis holding the shirts and crying, that became "that febreze sure does make them smell nice".

Quote
Oh by the way: Vic: I went into your sex web-site. What a great service to compile all of that information, and to make it available to all. So far I haven't read too much of it, but I do hope to get back to it more often, and to work my way through the content.

I agree a nice web site, I will be there as time allows.  Having had only a limited amount of sex adventures I will probably lurk more.

Quote
Finally: DOUG: this little phrase from you, near the end of your response to my first posting, indicates what a high-calibre person you are: "Take Care, ask questions, hold me accountable, make me honest. ..."  Oh if only more people in the world would see those things as something to aim for!  Aaaaaghhhh.... the idealist in me makes its way out to the surface again.

Perhaps it is the idealist in me as well.  Lets talk about your idealism, anyone jump in, here are few thoughts in that line:

I really wonder if we as a nation, and our government especially, was to answer questions, not be afraid of hard questions,  be held accountable, not hide and alter the facts, and was held as honest the world over if most of the strife in the world would not end in a generation or two.  How can we as a people be the light of the world when we are considered a dark force in the world?  Of what value is it to be the police of the world if we are not respected, if in fact we are corrupt police?  What gave us the authority to be the police of the world in the first place, does power really make right? 

I do not think there should be domestic "national security secrets", such as the wire tapping, bank tapping, etc. 
I do not think there should be laws passed in the middle of the night, or any laws passed where congress has not even read it.  Any such laws should be repealed and those who did not do their jobs fired. 
I think that any laws that have to be interpreted for the average man to understand should be repealed.
I think that all raises for congress should have to be voted on by the people, what other job in the world exists where the employees decide when they get a raise?
I think that all benefit packages for congress should also have to be voted on by the people, perhaps the Social Security mess would not exist if congress had to rely on it too, instead of their private retirement where they get 80% wage income for life, plus health, and security benefits over and above that.
I think all laws that "protect" others at the expense of freedom should be revisited with an eye to reality. 
I think our foreign policy should be more geared to help rather than "forced" democracy, our foreign policy should never contain "blow them up and deal with whoever is left". Nor should we ever use weapons that use Deplete Uranium which poisons the innocent for the next 5 billion years, use of such should be grounds for war crimes against humanity.  Preemptive strike should never be an option, however taking out a problem leader, as Saddam, should be.
I think we should end all income tax.  As the forefathers intended we should gather our revenues to run the government from tariffs on incoming foreign goods.  This government should have to live within a budget like everyone else.
A president should never have the power of executive orders, expect for a few hours after a direct attack upon the nation.
A president should never have the power of signing statements.
No laws, no government should have say in private matters, when there is not initiation of force taking place.
Separation of Church and State should be absolute.
I question if separation of economy and state should not be absolute as well.
Well, that is a few off the top of my head...  what do you think?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 14, 2006, 12:32:56 PM
You got my vote!

Quote
I think that any laws that have to be interpreted for the average man to understand should be repealed.

Last year, when Holland had to vote for the new EU constitution, I (along with the majority) voted a resounding NO. When they asked me why, because I was on a select "deeper insight" panel, my answer was simple: The constitution should be 2 pages long, not 784.

I've been accused of being a idealist, another label I wear with pride!

;)
Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 14, 2006, 01:13:54 PM
Quite, and let's not forget the pharmaceutical and insurance companies, who are not at all stimulating doctors to think outside the box or consider alternative methods, such as dietary and nutritional control, or even well proven homeopathy. But this differs in Europe, where homeopathy is accepted, on the condition that it is prescribed by a doctor.
Pharmaceutical companies I can deal with, though I think they should be made to deal with foreign competition just as any other company, that alone would lower the prices.  Insurance companies, to me, should be put out of business as extortion, shell game businesses.  I see very little difference between the old mafia extorting "protection" money and the current insurance scam.  You pay for years and years and when something does happen they wiggle out of and drop you.  This is one place that a good government program is needed, and then only for catastrophic events.   Outlaw insurance and the prices for health would drop 95% in my humble opinion.

Quote
The food pyramid is outdated. The main problem is that it is different for each person. At best these standards are averages. And again, with multinationals exerting pressure on governments, you will never get the truth anyway. Ever wonder why oranges are officially the healthiest fruit if you live in the state of Florida, why apples are the same in New York, and why olives are the best for you if you live in Italy or Spain? It's not because they are or aren't, it's because they need to sell.

Yes true. Would you not think one of the main jobs of media would be to make sure you get the truth?  It used to be, but not anymore.  To me media is the fourth branch of government, it's job is to hold check on the other three, plus expose illusions.  Sadly, now it creates illusions.

Quote
Cholesterol in itself is not dangerous, no. But too much of anything in your body will cause problems eventually. The Western diet is a disaster, stemming from Northwestern European winter climates. Too much fat and carbs altogether. And unfortunately, it's taking over the world.

Being totally raised in it, I have a hard time dispelling the illusions.  I know that too much fat is bad, but how much is too much?  I know that transfat is very bad, and now know that fast acting carbs are bad, and the combination is disastrous.  However, I am not convinced that total vegetarian diet is good either.  I think good meat is good at this point, I am always open to being wrong however.  I usually raise 100 free range chickens, but did not this year.  Lazy I guess.

Quote
True, but again, listen to you body, it will tell you. You eat something "wrong" you will not feel comfortable, you may develop all kinds of little things, like blotchy or bad skin, heart burn or stomach pains, or the "end product" is just wrong, etc. Sadly, we are not taught to listen to our bodies, instead we have to digest what is generally accepted. And, of course, it is always easier to be a sheep than a wolf and blame someone else when things go wrong.

Or believe all you have to do is take a pill to make it all better. 

Quote
Sounds good, grow it yourself and you can control the quality. I don't have a garden at all right now, but I always grow my own herbs at least, and generally I buy organically grown. I eat meat only two or three times a week because I prefer free range. I hate battery meat, whether it's chicken, fish, beef, cow, pig or whatever. It tastes like nothing, it's full of antibiotics, hormones and other chemicals. Disgusting.

All our meat is raised by us, or is wild game, our milk is milked by me. 

What herbs do you raise?  That is one area we seem to be unknowledgeable in what different herbs are good and for what.  Other than salt and pepper we do not seem to know much.

Quote
Besides, any animal who gets fed his own ancestors (as much of what cows, pigs and chickens eat is ground up leftovers from their own kind - which is how we got BSE in the first place) can't be good meat in my book.

You are absolutely right there!

Quote
I'm willing to pay up to three times for free range because it's worth it and when I can't afford it, I go without. And I avoid all processed meats and cold cuts. So I eat less but better quality meats and the rest of the week vegetarian. I like meat, and any animal that has had a good life, i.e. space to move around, variety of food, fresh air and sunshine, simply is better meat for you. And especially when they get a quick death because that is very important. Fear hormones are very bad for you. 


Agree totally here as well.  What things do you eat vegetarian? We seem to be limited to my garden - tomatoes, carrots, beans, cucumbers, zucchini, beets, cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower and squash.  The squash will be available this fall.  We nearly live on cucumbers and tomatoes during the summer, and miss them badly during the winter. 

Quote
But yes, it's really dependent on the access you have to a variety of foods. I'm one of those pesky irritating people that can spend hours in a supermarket or greengrocer department, smelling, (gently) squeezing and even tasting (like grapes and other small fruit or veg) everything before I buy. And I love to harrass the staff "It doesn't say where it's coming from, where does it come from?" "Why isn't there a date on this." etc. LOL

Oh you would drive me batty!  LOL! 

Quote
I don't care what they think, it's my health we're talking about!

As it should be!

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 16, 2006, 06:34:46 AM

 But this differs in Europe, where homeopathy is accepted, on the condition that it is prescribed by a doctor.


Oh you would drive me batty!  LOL! 

Quote
I don't care what they think, it's my health we're talking about!

As it should be!

Doug

Oh dear: reading all of this message, and the foregoing ones, I feel impelled to join the Vic & Doug love-fest. Does three make a crowd?  I just agree so strongly with virtually everything which both of you guys write.

On Vic's quote extracted above about Europe (not the other quotes which I have just left there because I like them so much!), I am into natural treatments whenever possible; but it seems that because of their medical training and also with the brainwashing and freebies to doctors by the pharmaceutical companies, most of them are not interested in natural therapies etc.

So often I have read that herbal treatments etc. will never become the mainstream because the pharmaceutical companies cannot patent herbs etc.; so will not investigate the natural treatments. Well, several years ago when I was first diagnosed with depression --- yes it seems from reading the threads that so many of us BBMountaineers have this affliction --- to the disgust of my psychiatrist, I refused to take his synthetic chemical treatments. By sheer co-incidence, that same day I chanced upon a little book about the treatment of depression with St.John's Wort -- a herb, otherwise called hyperionforte. Sorry I have forgotten the title and author, and as I gave the book to someone else, no longer have it to refer to. Anyway, in its preamble, it said that St.John's wort is THE MOST PRESCRIBED medical treatment in Germany for depression. (I think that it might have said but not for major depression, which I had). The book said that the German government has an ongoing funded project to evaluate all herbal treatments -- one-by-one; and that as each evaluation is completed a full report is written up on it. It was through this process that St.John's wort was confirmed in its effectiveness.

I must add one word of caution here though -- when someone on one of the earlier threads recommended this herb to this board, someone else came back and said that there are problems IF it is taken whilst one is still on pharmaceutical medications -- so be warned! (I am accepting that statement at face value, with no knowledge pro or con.)

For me, St.John's wort worked marvellously -- but evidently muuuuuch slower than the chemical treatments which my psychiatrist was still trying to induce me to change to. I told him that I am used to natural treatments taking longer than synthetic ones. Additionally, to my knowledge I had NO side-effects; whereas I don't think that would have been the situation with the synthetics.

This has come a long way from Vic's quote -- apologies for being so long-winded about it.
Now I shall go back and respond to Vic's lovely note to me.

JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 16, 2006, 06:44:26 AM
Your wife sounds like a wonderful person, Johnny. She seems to know you well enough, I'd say. :)

I just read through your posts and my end thought on that was that I think you have a lot to contribute, and that you waited way too long in doing so! Lurking for six months? Wow. I wouldn't be able to contain myself for that long. It took me all of 5 minutes after finding this place to sign up and post.

 ;)
Vic

Hi Vic.
Yes, I am very lucky.  I realised long ago that I am so selfish that I should not be married to anyone; but given that I did fall in love and marry, I am married to the perfect person for me --- well, almost anyway! LOL.

Thanks for thinking that I have a lot to contribute, you are very kind. I guess that I have at least one of three things in mind when I write Vic. One is to reply to someone else's post which I find to be meaningful. Another is to share my honest thoughts, feelings, experiences; in the hope that others who think that they are weird because they are the only person in the world who thinks that way, may find that they are not alone. (Gee, for so many decades I was sure that I was the only person who could not stop wanking, when all the world said that it was wrong!) And my third reason for posting is to try to learn more about myself with the help of input from others -- like my questions to that other thread about my uncontrollable erections.

On this thread however, there is a bonus: all of the marvellous intellectual conversations on a diversity of topics by Doug and his co-contributors.

Vic, where you wrote about my long time lurking on the board, I wanted to read all of the posts before I did so, so that I was not asking questions which had been previously asked etc. As I said in my first post to that other thread, by the time that I finally posted, I felt that I no longer NEEDED the board, as reading everyone's messages had "cured" my BBM fever.  BUT shortly after writing that I bought the DVD, and yes you guessed it: the fever is still here!  LOL.

There were just so many times though Vic whilst I was reading, that I wanted to reply to someone's post, but decided not to.

Thanks again for your nice words.
JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 16, 2006, 06:53:04 AM
Sorryfor posting another message guys, I am trying to make up for lost time, as I was not able to log in yesterday.

This one is a question for Doug.
Doug I love your references to milking, as that was my great love and first job upon leaving school. In fact I only left the work on the farm so that I could go to the city to earn bigger money so that I could then go back and buy my own farm. Of course it never happened -- I didn't realise that bigger money in the city also meant bigger living expenses!

My knowledge of the US is very minimal -- I have visited a few places in California on many visits; spent only a few days (over 35 years ago) in New York; driven from California to Nevada; and flown from California up to Vancouver twice. With that limited experience, I have NO knowledge of which states in the US have dairying. Most of those shown in cowboy movies seem too dry etc. to have the rich pastures which dairy cattle need.

Given your story Doug, I don't want you to "out" yourself as to your location; but could you perhaps give me the names of several states within the US where dairying is carried on please.
(And, sorry to be so demanding, as I find the 2-lettered abbreviations for US states to be almost incomprehensible, would you mind writing them out in full, or something close to it please?)

Thank you in advance: JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 16, 2006, 07:44:13 AM
Hi Johnny, glad to have you join us.

Homeopathy works slower but is certainly healthier with none or little of the side effects. Many pharmaceutical drugs are based on plant extracts anyway, albeit in a much more concentrated form.

I stick to alternatives since I have been lucky enough healthwise not to need any major surgery or anything like that. Fresh foods, herbs, vitamins and minerals, are all a standard part of my own way to stay healthy, as is exercise, which I can do less or more of, depending on my situation. But I rarely get colds, infections or any of that, so I must be doing something right. Vegetables, herbs and minerals in particular are also necessary for proper brain functioning. It's the trace elements that the brain, and other specialised organs need, in order to do their work, and it is exactly these same substances that is often lacking in mass produced and processed foods.

About the lurking, I'm just too impatient to lurk for long.  :D
At one point I just got to throw in my 2 cents, or the whole wallet.

As far as masturbation is concerned, 95% do and the other 5% lie, IMHO. It's a perfectly normal way to blow off steam and if animals do it, it's obviously natural too, so it's got to be good! When I went to the company doctor one time because I suffered from RSI (25 years of computing) and could barely move my fingers, he gave me that look, and I said, if it was from that, I would have had RSI when I was 18.

Again, the bible or the church are not good reference sources for a healthy sex life.

 ;D
Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 16, 2006, 09:55:16 AM
Hi Johnny, glad to have you join us.

... At one point I just got to throw in my 2 cents, or the whole wallet.

... As far as masturbation is concerned, 95% do and the other 5% lie, IMHO. It's a perfectly normal way to blow off steam and if animals do it, it's obviously natural too, so it's got to be good! When I went to the company doctor one time because I suffered from RSI (25 years of computing) and could barely move my fingers, he gave me that look, and I said, if it was from that, I would have had RSI when I was 18.

 ;D
Vic
 

Dear Vic. If I were not sitting at the keyboard replying to you, I would definitely be ROFLMAO.

I love your 2 cents / throw in the whole wallet line. Never heard that one before. I just love being exposed to such inventive uses of the language. Thank you!

RSI at 18 -- hell, I would have had it at age 11 in that case: and I was late to mature!

Thanks again for the laughs. I just love this board.  JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 16, 2006, 10:21:20 AM

My knowledge of the US is very minimal -- I have visited a few places in California on many visits; spent only a few days (over 35 years ago) in New York; driven from California to Nevada; and flown from California up to Vancouver twice. With that limited experience, I have NO knowledge of which states in the US have dairying. Most of those shown in cowboy movies seem too dry etc. to have the rich pastures which dairy cattle need.

Given your story Doug, I don't want you to "out" yourself as to your location; but could you perhaps give me the names of several states within the US where dairying is carried on please.
(And, sorry to be so demanding, as I find the 2-lettered abbreviations for US states to be almost incomprehensible, would you mind writing them out in full, or something close to it please?)

Sure are a few, but not all of them.  I would not be surprised if there are not dairies in nearly every state in the union with the exception of Alaska.   Wisconsin is one of the big dairy states, however, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Colorado have fair amount of dairies as well. Just about any of the states in the "midwest" will have dairy.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 17, 2006, 10:15:34 AM

Sure are a few, but not all of them.  I would not be surprised if there are not dairies in nearly every state in the union with the exception of Alaska.   Wisconsin is one of the big dairy states, however, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Colorado have fair amount of dairies as well. Just about any of the states in the "midwest" will have dairy.


Thanks Doug, my ignorance is profound. This makes me feel very guilty (yes, my early religious upbringing -- just to keep moderator Doug from nudging me on topic. LOL.) because I often accuse Americans in general (not all of you lovely people on here) of being ignorant of the rest of the world; and here am I demonstrating such ignorance myself. Oh well, off the pedestal I fall! LOL.

BTW Doug: do you milk just one breed of dairy cattle? Or do you have a mixed herd?
How many head are milked?

In my dairying days, we milked what we then called Friesians, but which over here are now called Holsteins (I think that the text-books used to call them Holstein-Friesians). They looked lovely (I am extremely kinky for cows -- my wife used to be terribly offended when I gave her the highest possible compliment that I could, in telling her that her eyes reminded me of my lovely cows. Just can't understand these women!), and gave huge quantities of milk. Then we had a few Jerseys to increase the quality of the milk because of their higher cream/buterfat percentages.
Remember that I said the other night that I was soooo short, well the younger of my two bosses said that I "fooled around" (if you get my meaning) with these young Jersey cows, as they were the only ones which were my height. LOL. NO: he was wrong, much as I loved the cattle, bestiality never entered my head. However, when the bull was servicing the cows, a certain uncontrollable part of my anatomy became excited!  (I told them on another thread that this is an ongoing problem for me).

It must be time for me to leave, as I am becoming too risque.
Good night all / or good day for your time: JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 17, 2006, 03:31:33 PM
Thanks Doug, my ignorance is profound. This makes me feel very guilty (yes, my early religious upbringing -- just to keep moderator Doug from nudging me on topic. LOL.) because I often accuse Americans in general (not all of you lovely people on here) of being ignorant of the rest of the world; and here am I demonstrating such ignorance myself. Oh well, off the pedestal I fall! LOL.

Does this make one ignorant?  I think that no one has a complete understanding of how it is in other parts of the world, to be so would require living every where and knowing everything.  I just do not have the resources, nor time for such.

Quote
BTW Doug: do you milk just one breed of dairy cattle? Or do you have a mixed herd?
How many head are milked?

Mainly one breed, Holstein, and a minor second breed, Jersey.  We average about 100 cows most times, at the moment it is 89 head.  We constantly have cows coming into production and leaving for their couple of months off.

Quote
In my dairying days, we milked what we then called Friesians, but which over here are now called Holsteins (I think that the text-books used to call them Holstein-Friesians). They looked lovely (I am extremely kinky for cows -- my wife used to be terribly offended when I gave her the highest possible compliment that I could, in telling her that her eyes reminded me of my lovely cows. Just can't understand these women!), and gave huge quantities of milk. Then we had a few Jerseys to increase the quality of the milk because of their higher cream/buterfat percentages.

Yep, exactly.

Quote
Remember that I said the other night that I was soooo short, well the younger of my two bosses said that I "fooled around" (if you get my meaning) with these young Jersey cows, as they were the only ones which were my height. LOL. NO: he was wrong, much as I loved the cattle, bestiality never entered my head. However, when the bull was servicing the cows, a certain uncontrollable part of my anatomy became excited!  (I told them on another thread that this is an ongoing problem for me).

Using the herring bone system we use now, you really would have a problem.  Being in a pit all the time the cows bags are just at chest level.  Even for me when I get one standing away a bit, it is hard to reach the tits with the milker.  I am of average height.  I do not have that reaction when watching cattle "do it".  Just a bore I guess...

Doug
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jack on August 18, 2006, 07:01:24 AM
at the request of the management...

Pete just put up a poll at http://davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=12326.0 so we can find out approximately how many books we need to have printed in the first run. I don't know a single soul who gets around these threads better or more than you do. So I wondered if you would help us spread the word and get a bunch of folks to fill out the poll for us. Could you point them in that direction as you move from thread to thread (like a ministering angel)?

jack
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 19, 2006, 07:31:36 AM

Using the herring bone system we use now, you really would have a problem.  Being in a pit all the time the cows bags are just at chest level.  Even for me when I get one standing away a bit, it is hard to reach the tits with the milker.  I am of average height.  I do not have that reaction when watching cattle "do it".  Just a bore I guess...

Doug

Good evening (here) / morning (over there) Doug -- and all others.

Doug: the herring-bone system was just coming in here around the same time as I left the farm to head for the city (to make my fortune: LOL); so I have no experience of them; apart from what I have seen in films and books etc.  One thing that the pollution in the city seems to have done to me though, is to make me grow tall; so I guess that I could NOW reach those lovely warm tits (I had a fixation about them too! LOL)

Also, I doubt that I would have that old reaction when watching the animals at it these days; but in those days as a frustrated 15-year-old, it certainly affected me. And NO, it is apparent from all of your postings that you are certainly NOT a bore!  Well, perhaps you might be if you are around mindless people who don't have the intelligence to interact with you on a decent level.

Changing subjects: VIC! are you still here?
In a couple of your messages you wrote as if you are located in the Netherlands. Have I interpreted that correctly?  If so, is that as an ex-pat American, or as a genuine local?  That came as a surprise to me when I read it, because from your posts I just thought that you were in the US like most of the others here.    I had a 2-week CYCLING holiday in Holland away back in the early 1970s. After that I argued with anyone who told me that Holland is flat. It seemed that no matter in which direction I was riding; the bloody wind was always blowing against me, in my face; and there were always hills which I was trying to pedal UP. LOL.

Lola! Are you still here too?  I am still trying to work my way through the captions thread. I am still only up to about page 50 (with about 900 to go, I think); and see lots of contributions there from you.  It is great to read so many of the filthy captions there by the women; it seems that their minds are as filthy as mind is. LOL.

In half-an-hour it will be Saturday midnight here, so I shall try to catch an early night for once.
For the rest of you it will probably be day-time Saturday; so I wish each of you an enjoyable day!
JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 19, 2006, 09:05:15 AM

Doug: the herring-bone system was just coming in here around the same time as I left the farm to head for the city (to make my fortune: LOL); so I have no experience of them; apart from what I have seen in films and books etc.  One thing that the pollution in the city seems to have done to me though, is to make me grow tall; so I guess that I could NOW reach those lovely warm tits (I had a fixation about them too! LOL)

Eeeyyyyhhhh...  I find nothing enticing about squeezing tits... it is a dirty job that someone must do. 

Quote
Also, I doubt that I would have that old reaction when watching the animals at it these days; but in those days as a frustrated 15-year-old, it certainly affected me. And NO, it is apparent from all of your postings that you are certainly NOT a bore!  Well, perhaps you might be if you are around mindless people who don't have the intelligence to interact with you on a decent level.

Yes, an extreme bore to those type of people, I just do not talk to them, it is not worth the frustration, which means I do not talk to anyone in this local area, it being extreme bible belt.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 20, 2006, 01:48:27 AM

Eeeyyyyhhhh...  I find nothing enticing about squeezing tits...

Yes, an extreme bore to those type of people, I just do not talk to them, it is not worth the frustration, which means I do not talk to anyone in this local area, it being extreme bible belt.


Mmmm....!!!  I had better not go into more detail about those lovely warm tits/teats; it might be too risque even for this board. LOL. 
 I will say however, that when I read messages on this board, where people write about their "coworkers" (without the hyphen), I think how appropriate that is for BBM -- because I read it as cow workers! ROFL. Of course they mean co-workers -- but these days most people in business seem to be doing away with punctuation marks as much as they can; whereas I love them for the extra dimensions of meaning which they bring to the written word, bringing it closer to the spoken word.

Doug: I know just what you mean about not wanting to talk to those types of people. I am becoming much the same way as you now. In the past I often worked in service industries, so I had no choice but to make mindless small-talk with different people, many of whom were narrow-minded etc.  Now that I am no longer at work, and after my depression, I find that it exacerbates my depression to be around those types of people, and I no longer want to even try to expose them to alternative views. These days, my viewpoints are probably just as fixed as theirs are, and I have no interest in even being around such people.

To give you an example of how extreme I am becoming, I recently obtained an e-mail address for a fellow who I felt quite close to many years ago. So I sent him a brief message (it must be about 25 years since we were last in touch). In his reply he mentioned "the people in (his) church". Just this mention put me off completely, so I never even replied to his message again; as I no longer wish to interact with any believers. 

That is also why when I was lurking on the board, I was originally put off by all of the believers who posted their "christian" viewpoints etc.; and so I was glad when they started their own thread; which I have no intention of ever visiting.

By contrast it was great to discover your thread here; and to receive an education on the so many things which you have written here. Just magnificent!

And it was reading Lola's non-confrontational, respectful, and thought-filled responses which gave me respect for her too.

Onto a completely different topic now Doug. You write in such an informed way about scientific matters. Is that the field that you trained in, or perhaps studied in at college?   Here in Australia, tonight I shall see the final (3rd) segment of a tv show called "The Elegant Universe", about Einstein, Newton, relativity, gravity, electro-magnetism, strong force, weak force; and string theory.  Most of it is over my head, and in fact my wife reminded me that we had both seen the same series about a year ago; yet small pieces only are retained.   My area is more that of the humanities. Much easier to understand and remember. Laziness probably comes into the equation somewhere too.

Apologies for all of the questions.  Bye for now: JohnnyX.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Scott6373 on August 21, 2006, 07:18:11 AM
Onto a completely different topic now Doug. You write in such an informed way about scientific matters.



Imagine that...Doug, a handsome man with a brain...what more could anyone want :)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 21, 2006, 10:24:32 AM

Mmmm....!!!  I had better not go into more detail about those lovely warm tits/teats; it might be too risque even for this board. LOL. 

LOL!  Whatever floats your boat, but I doubt it is too risque but for me...  lets don't ok?

Quote
I will say however, that when I read messages on this board, where people write about their "coworkers" (without the hyphen), I think how appropriate that is for BBM -- because I read it as cow workers! ROFL. Of course they mean co-workers -- but these days most people in business seem to be doing away with punctuation marks as much as they can; whereas I love them for the extra dimensions of meaning which they bring to the written word, bringing it closer to the spoken word.

I do think we are loosing something important when people no longer use punctuation, or even relevant capitals.  I hate reading unformated text all in small letters or all in caps. 

Quote
Doug: I know just what you mean about not wanting to talk to those types of people. I am becoming much the same way as you now. In the past I often worked in service industries, so I had no choice but to make mindless small-talk with different people, many of whom were narrow-minded etc.  Now that I am no longer at work, and after my depression, I find that it exacerbates my depression to be around those types of people, and I no longer want to even try to expose them to alternative views. These days, my viewpoints are probably just as fixed as theirs are, and I have no interest in even being around such people.

I sometimes feel that way, however when you cut all religious people you cut out a lot of the population.  My cut is a little more open than that, I will deal with religious people who respect my religious freedom, who do not bring up religion every few minutes or who do not expound hate of anyone who is not in their camp.  The people I milk for are exceptionally religious people, they have church in their home every Wednesday, and Sunday.  Yet, if you was not around them for a time you would never know it. They do not put their religious views upon anyone else.  Their religion is quite tight, they do not believe in TV, radio, gambling, drinking, smoking or dancing.  I only know that from asking.  They only marry within their religion, and they are in contact with their entire "cult" across the world.  They are always having people visiting from all across the world, who look just like them.  Women mostly wear denim dresses, and they never cut their hair, it is usually kept up in a bun.  Women use no makeup, nor dye their hair.  However, they are the warmest people you could ever meet.  What do they think about homosexuality? I do not know, nor do I care as long as they keep it to themselves.

Quote
To give you an example of how extreme I am becoming, I recently obtained an e-mail address for a fellow who I felt quite close to many years ago. So I sent him a brief message (it must be about 25 years since we were last in touch). In his reply he mentioned "the people in (his) church". Just this mention put me off completely, so I never even replied to his message again; as I no longer wish to interact with any believers. 

Yep, sure sounds like he is not going to keep it to himself.  Sounds like his pride is tied to his standing in church, making him more likely to be a self righteous religious nut.

Quote
That is also why when I was lurking on the board, I was originally put off by all of the believers who posted their "christian" viewpoints etc.; and so I was glad when they started their own thread; which I have no intention of ever visiting.

I have visited the "christian" thread, they are totally irrational.  You can ask them pointed questions and only get the usual dodges. 

Quote
By contrast it was great to discover your thread here; and to receive an education on the so many things which you have written here. Just magnificent!

Thanks.

Quote
And it was reading Lola's non-confrontational, respectful, and thought-filled responses which gave me respect for her too.

I, too, have found respect for her.  At least she is not judgemental, does not seem to harbor any hate, and does answer questions with her own words, instead of the usual canned responses of the radical right. 

Quote
Onto a completely different topic now Doug. You write in such an informed way about scientific matters. Is that the field that you trained in, or perhaps studied in at college?

In college I majored in physics and organic chemistry, sadly in my last year I came down witn Mono and had to quit, no more funds available for me to continue. 

Quote
Here in Australia, tonight I shall see the final (3rd) segment of a tv show called "The Elegant Universe", about Einstein, Newton, relativity, gravity, electro-magnetism, strong force, weak force; and string theory.  Most of it is over my head, and in fact my wife reminded me that we had both seen the same series about a year ago; yet small pieces only are retained.   My area is more that of the humanities. Much easier to understand and remember. Laziness probably comes into the equation somewhere too.

I doubt that laziness had anything to do with it.  I am not sure that for humanities would be easier to understand and remember, we all have our strengths and weakness, mine is in understanding physics and chemistry, however I did struggle hard with calculus III.

I saw the "Elegant Universe" a couple of times, here is my thought, it is interesting, but it is not science at this point.  A math equation that works does not make reality, it could be reality, but it can not be taken as reality until it can be tested and testing this is not going to be possible from what we know now.  That being said, only string "theory" is in this condition, all the rest are quite well documented and quite settled. I really wish that we as a people did not have such sloppy use of our language, it is a root cause of a lot of misunderstanding.  There is no string theory, there is up to five string hypotheses.  The use of "theory" for hypothesis has given the religious right much power in getting their "intelligent design" hypothesis even considered, it barely qualifies for even a hypothesis. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 22, 2006, 12:30:12 AM

Imagine that...Doug, a handsome man with a brain...what more could anyone want :)

Scott: He says that the "handsome" no longer applies since he put on some weight; but we know from his posts that he is handsome where it counts: INSIDE in his heart! And yes, with a brain too -- which he uses, as we can see on these pages.   Oh dear, I have truly become a fan!
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 22, 2006, 08:11:46 AM

Imagine that...Doug, a handsome man with a brain...what more could anyone want :)

Scott: He says that the "handsome" no longer applies since he put on some weight; but we know from his posts that he is handsome where it counts: INSIDE in his heart! And yes, with a brain too -- which he uses, as we can see on these pages.   Oh dear, I have truly become a fan!

Ahh, gee...  Thanks guys, you sure know how to compliment a person and that will get you everywhere...  ;)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Scott6373 on August 22, 2006, 08:15:03 AM
Ahh, gee...  Thanks guys, you sure know how to compliment a person and that will get you everywhere...  ;)



Promises, promises...LOL
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 26, 2006, 07:05:04 AM
Ahh, gee...  Thanks guys, you sure know how to compliment a person and that will get you everywhere...  ;)

Promises, promises...LOL

Sorry guys, I am very slow at replying here: but is this a gang-bang that I can be part of?
I mean, I have to learn about these things somewhere, sometime soon; apart from just reading about it on the Juicy thread. LOL.

BTW Doug: thanks again for your complete replies to my last list of questions. I will try to get back on some of them soon; but I have been spending a lot of time on the Affected Me and Captions threads, as well as in PMs to a certain person.   Cheers: JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Nick_F on August 26, 2006, 01:53:30 PM
It is your friendly neighbourhood mod here - don't be scared! just wanted to congratulate you all on such an interesting thread.

Y'all are kinda off-topic but I won't tell anyone if you don't. But you all seem such an erudite. learned and articulate lot that I wondered if you had been to any of the other serious "chat" threads that about. It would be good to see new blood in some of them particularly The Diner's Back Room

http://davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=8982.0

Cheers

Nick

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 29, 2006, 08:13:10 AM
Hello again Doug. Apologies for the almost 2-week delay since you  posted this.



I sometimes feel that way, however when you cut all religious people you cut out a lot of the population.  My cut is a little more open than that, I will deal with religious people who respect my religious freedom, who do not bring up religion every few minutes or who do not expound hate of anyone who is not in their camp.  The people I milk for are exceptionally religious people, they have church in their home every Wednesday, and Sunday.  Yet, if you was not around them for a time you would never know it. They do not put their religious views upon anyone else.  Their religion is quite tight, they do not believe in TV, radio, gambling, drinking, smoking or dancing.  I only know that from asking.  They only marry within their religion, and they are in contact with their entire "cult" across the world.  They are always having people visiting from all across the world, who look just like them.  Women mostly wear denim dresses, and they never cut their hair, it is usually kept up in a bun.  Women use no makeup, nor dye their hair.  However, they are the warmest people you could ever meet.  What do they think about homosexuality? I do not know, nor do I care as long as they keep it to themselves.

I expect that they are like those "Dutch" in the film "Witness".
My dearly beloved grandmother was a member of what sounds like the same sect that you describe above. She was the source of my early religious instruction, but it was the more formal religions which damaged me. When I asked my grandmother what their sect was called, she said that it was to presumptious of them to give themselves a name, they were just followers of the Lord.  At her funeral which was officiated at by a man from her church, I asked what they called the religion, but he didn't enlighten me. One day I should buy her Death Certificate, and it MIGHT have something under "Religion of Minister Officiating".

I think however that others in society provide them with names. I have heard them called "Plain People" and I think something like "Christian Israelites" and "Brethren" ; and they seem close to what over here are called the "Plymouth Brethren". 

With my grandmother's group, they were all loving and supportive to each other people, but they would have nothing to do with you if you were a member of their family and broke their taboos. For example she stopped coming to stay at our home after my mother's boyfriend moved in. "I cannot stay under the same roof where such sin is committed".  Wow, if she knew me now she would be horrified. But back then I was her little golden-haired eldest grandchild, and the strength of her love for me fortified me through many long and difficult years when I doubted the love of others.  Hell, I am really digressing here. Over and out.



Quote
Onto a completely different topic now Doug. You write in such an informed way about scientific matters. Is that the field that you trained in, or perhaps studied in at college?

In college I majored in physics and organic chemistry, sadly in my last year I came down witn Mono and had to quit, no more funds available for me to continue. 

That is really sad Doug that finances and the illness eliminated your chance of finishing your education. Still, WE benefit here from the way that you have continued to educate yourself on relevant issues.

Thanks a million.  JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 29, 2006, 09:18:42 AM
Changing subjects: VIC! are you still here?
In a couple of your messages you wrote as if you are located in the Netherlands. Have I interpreted that correctly?  If so, is that as an ex-pat American, or as a genuine local?  That came as a surprise to me when I read it, because from your posts I just thought that you were in the US like most of the others here.    I had a 2-week CYCLING holiday in Holland away back in the early 1970s. After that I argued with anyone who told me that Holland is flat. It seemed that no matter in which direction I was riding; the bloody wind was always blowing against me, in my face; and there were always hills which I was trying to pedal UP. LOL.

Hi Johnny!

Sure, I'm still here, but spending time on my new site, which is getting more interesting by the day, if I say so myself. There's a link in my signature, feel free to lurk or join anytime. But I won't discuss or mention that here anymore, because I do not think that is appropriate.

As for your other question - no, I'm not a genuine local, just a genuine me.  ;)
Mongrel mix background and travel since childhood made me a local of none and at home everywhere. World class fool, that's me. LOL

Holland is mostly flat, but there are lots of bridges everywhere which can be quite steep. And wind, oh yeah. Too much of it. You must've been in the Eastern/Southern part where there are some hills or higher dunes.

Sitting at a roadhouse terrace in Adelaide Springs (NT) I saw this guy loaded down with backpacks and other stuff on a bicyle coming down the road from Darwin. As it was about 3pm it must've been around 35 C in the shade. I thought, only a Dutchman would be mad enough to bicycle in this heat in this remote place. He soon came to the roadhouse, unpacked and collapsed under a tree. So I went up to him and asked "Dutch?" whereupon he replied "Yes, how did you know?"
:D

As for those people who deny all technology and keep life simple, they have those here too in some of the more remote (if remote is at all possible in Holland) villages. I didn't find them to very tolerant towards anyone outside their little clique actually, the few times I interacted with them. And they start quoting the bible (usually Sodom and Gomorrha after a few minutes with me) so I tend to avoid them. Live and let live, just stay away from me, thanks.

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 29, 2006, 10:29:12 AM

Hi Johnny!

Sure, I'm still here, but spending time on my new site, which is getting more interesting by the day, if I say so myself. There's a link in my signature, feel free to lurk or join anytime. But I won't
:D

As for those people who deny all technology and keep life simple, they have those here too in some of the more remote (if remote is at all possible in Holland) villages. I didn't find them to very tolerant towards anyone outside their little clique actually, the few times I interacted with them. And they start quoting the bible (usually Sodom and Gomorrha after a few minutes with me) so I tend to avoid them. Live and let live, just stay away from me, thanks.
Vic

Hi Vic; gee, it seems like a long absence from both of us.
Thanks for answering my questions.

I shall have to go back to your site, and register this time, and check it out.
How great that it is going so well.
Are the visitor numbers up too? Hope so.

You sound like a real Mr International in lots of ways, even if you do call yourself a mongrel.
Hey talking about mongrels, I was working my way through the earlier pages of the captions thread yesterday, and encountered that picture of Jack lying on the ground asleep up in the range, with a dog lying beside him, which was almost camouflaged.

Well LouiseV did a caption calling the dog an Alsatian or German Shepherd.
But the dog was a blue heeler or kelpie.
Someone then pointed out this error, but it read to me as if it was just a joke; sort of along the lines of "that dog is NOT an Alsatian, it is a blue heeler; do you get it? a blue heeler"
So as they have a lot of jokes in that thread, I just thought that it was a friendly but correct joke. Well, next thing there was a bit of a kerfuffle over this "criticism". Wow, someone was thin-skinned. LOL.

But on your behalf, I will take exception to the world-class fool bit.
From our experience of you in here, just WORLD CLASS would be perfect -- unless we wanted to add MIND to it. That I would accept. But FOOL is not appropriate when we are talking of our Vic!  (Is it Doug? Come on here and back me up mate)

I shall have to remember your observation about their being Dutch when we see those guys cycling over here. I just thought that they were intrepid individuals. Like you say, the temperatures are so high -- or so cold at night or during winter. The roads are disgusting, the terrain is pretty crook too, and they are loaded down with their basic necessities for such a trip.
I just take my hat off to them Vic; I wouldn't even attempt it.
One year when we saw a fellow like that on a very hot day, way out in the semi-arid areas, whilst we were driving by in air-conditioned comfort; I stopped the car and we offered him some of our cold drinks from a container in the car. The guy was just so appreciative. Now that I recall that situation, he did have a foreign accent, but I cannot recall much more.

About those Brethren people: as Doug says, they have networks all over the world.
My grandmother used to give me the stamps off their letters to each other, for my collection wa y back then.  They were always lovely kind people to each other, but judgemental as you observe of those who behaved "sinfully".

Well, Nick came in and said that we were getting off topic -- maybe that excursion into the Brethren, from our Non-Believers' perspective will put us back on topic. LOL.

Sticking with the Brethren, I once found a web-site run by people who had LEFT the group. They were still usually very religious, but I think they left when breakaway groups formed or something.

Hoping to read more from you Vic.  -- and from some of you lurkers out there. We'd love to hear about your non-belief and BBM.   Bring it on.   Cheers all: JohnnyX.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: daannzzz on August 29, 2006, 02:40:14 PM
Not being eloquent (or a good speller) I don't post on this thread but I do read it. Did you see this story. This is the kind of stuff that is scary and makes me livid.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/28/senate.harris.ap/index.html
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on August 29, 2006, 02:44:36 PM
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2006/08/29/bc-jeffs.html

Check out this guy, 20 wives and 103 kids!  :-\

As for the Close Caption thread, alot of feelings were hurt in that thread, nuff said, it was suppose to be all about fun.

Oh and Vic I haven't joined your board yet, I am heading out again, maybe for a week, I promise one of these days I will get registered.  :-*
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 30, 2006, 04:01:44 AM
Not being eloquent (or a good speller) I don't post on this thread but I do read it. Did you see this story. This is the kind of stuff that is scary and makes me livid.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/28/senate.harris.ap/index.html

Hello Daanz. Thanks for coming out of lurkdom and joining in; and providing this hyperlink.
And your spelling was PERFECT. Go to the top of the class man.

But HOW you have joined in!

Is there some way that we can hide this from Doug and Vic?
Hey mods, can we make it unavailable for them to click on please?  LOL.

I shall not make any comment on it Daanz, but boy, we should have some beautiful replies to her contentions when our boys see it.  Let the game begin!      JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 30, 2006, 04:14:55 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2006/08/29/bc-jeffs.html

Check out this guy, 20 wives and 103 kids!  :-\

As for the Close Caption thread, alot of feelings were hurt in that thread, nuff said, it was suppose to be all about fun.

Oh and Vic I haven't joined your board yet, I am heading out again, maybe for a week, I promise one of these days I will get registered.  :-*

Hello again Lola, nice of you to drop by with this info.

Now, I have nothing against polygamy -- as a sex addict, that might be one way to keep me happy. ROFL.  However, I have problems enough with one spouse, the problems with many of them would just be compounded -- especially if they ganged up on me. LOL.

Maybe it is because of this attitude, that something in this report just makes me feel uneasy. Most probably it is just that I am a cynic; but I become very sceptical when someone who is already "in their sights" just because he or she is "different"; and then they add on all of these other things --- mmm ??   I would not take it all at face value.

Nevertheless Lola, thanks for providing it to us.

And so we move on to the Captions thread.  Even though I still haven't even reached the end of the first 200 pages, I have seen some of "those comments", especially when you just said a couple of words to suggest some issues.  I guess that my take on it all, in every thread here, is that we are ALL -- well, almost all -- hurting people, and when we are in that condition, there can be two impacts: One: we take umbrage very easily at the slightest comment; or Two: we do not necessarily choose our words as carefully as we might were we not so injured.
One of the MANY things which I love about this board is that it is relatively free from flaming; and that most of us try very diplomatically and nicely to disagree with some point in a posting, whilst also agreeing with other parts of it.   But I don't know for how much more of it I will wade through. I just LOVE the talent in there of RickB, and LouiseV, and yourself of course.  I also use it as an opportunity to view the stills of the film, where I can examine every detail. !!! LOL.

Oh, you must be as bad-minded as I am Lola, if you also are joining Vic's board.  Gee, in that case I had perhaps leave the captions thread behind, and get over there and swap yarns!  Oh no, my wife will kill me for never getting of this Board.  Hee Hee.   Cheerio to all: JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 30, 2006, 05:35:20 AM
And so we move on to the Captions thread.  Even though I still haven't even reached the end of the first 200 pages, I have seen some of "those comments", especially when you just said a couple of words to suggest some issues.

Not that I want to divert you from this thread, Johnny, but the PhotoCaps is well worth seeing all of it. Before I posted there I went through about 400+ pages, that was what it was up to then, because I didn't want to miss a single one. Not only is every angle possible on the Brokeback Mountain story covered there in gross and glorious detail, you even get a picture to go with it.
:)

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 30, 2006, 05:45:49 AM
Not being eloquent (or a good speller) I don't post on this thread but I do read it. Did you see this story. This is the kind of stuff that is scary and makes me livid.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/28/senate.harris.ap/index.html

I'm not that familiar with U.S. election rules and such but what amazes me is how someone with those views can even become a Senator. Is there no screening at all?

As I mentioned before, the Dutch have their own right wing religious nut party, but all of their views and Statement of Intent as organisation have to be well presented and laid out for anyone to access, so that anyone who votes for them is clearly aware of what they stand for. This minimises the chance that the mainstream would be deceived into electing them and keeps them on the fringe, never in the center of national politics.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 30, 2006, 05:50:57 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2006/08/29/bc-jeffs.html
Check out this guy, 20 wives and 103 kids!  :-\

It is always an eye opener to see how the religious fanatics find ways to justify their own actions while in the same breath condemning others that do the same.

I don't necessarily have a problem with polygamy, it is a normal practice in parts of the world, but it has to be voluntary, never coerced. Men like this aren't in it for the sex, I think, they're in it for the power they have over others.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Nax on August 30, 2006, 08:37:35 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/28/senate.harris.ap/index.html

Vic
Interesting item Vic, read it and you will see a dichotomy  Harris says:-

"separating religion and politics is "wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers.""

So if this is true there is no need to ensure the religious beliefs of Senators if God is already choosing them.  If they then pass laws that allow Gay marriage isn't that the will of God and not sin? lots of material for debate here  :D
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 30, 2006, 08:42:15 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/28/senate.harris.ap/index.html

Vic
Interesting item Vic, read it and you will see a dichotomy  Harris says:-

"separating religion and politics is "wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers.""

So if this is true there is no need to ensure the religious beliefs of Senators if God is already choosing them.  If they then pass laws that allow Gay marriage isn't that the will of God and not sin? lots of material for debate here  :D


When I read it I thought that by god she must have meant Bush and his cronies for they all presume themselves to be god-like anyway. (Btw, the item was posted by Daannzzz.) So, let's say I commit blasphemy and think that god didn't choose her to be a Senator, then who does?

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: brokebacktom on August 30, 2006, 09:16:03 AM
HI all-

I just found this thread. I'm glad I did.
I thing about K. Harris is that she is a nut. Seperation between Church and State is not to protect the State but to protect the Church. It what I have been sating for years, 'The Religious Right is the Taliban of the USA.'

Tom
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: daannzzz on August 30, 2006, 10:14:32 AM
I consider the relgious right Anti-Amercans. No matter what they say our government is a living breathing and changing reference. It can not adhear to only one set of rules passed hundreds of years ago. It has to change as we learn and evolve. Why are so many humans so stuck on tradition? What is it about tradition (even if it is wrong and hurtful) that so many people cling too like a baby blanket?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Scott6373 on August 30, 2006, 10:22:31 AM
I consider the relgious right Anti-Amercans. No matter what they say our government is a living breathing and changing reference. It can not adhear to only one set of rules passed hundreds of years ago. It has to change as we learn and evolve. Why are so many humans so stuck on tradition? What is it about tradition (even if it is wrong and hurtful) that so many people cling too like a baby blanket?

It's so basic as to be almost invisible.  tradition=the known.  Change =the unknown.  99% of people are afraid of the unknown.  The probelm arises when my unknown and your unknown are different.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: angel on August 30, 2006, 11:12:56 AM
HI all-

I just found this thread. I'm glad I did.
I thing about K. Harris is that she is a nut. Seperation between Church and State is not to protect the State but to protect the Church. It what I have been sating for years, 'The Religious Right is the Taliban of the USA.'

Tom

I agree that the American religious right and the Taliban, are both fundamentalist, anti-humanist, authoritarian, murderous, ignorant dogmatists.

But I've always read, and thought that the separation of Church and State was intended by our (bigoted, gender-biased, genocidal, Christian etc.) forefathers to protect the State from being seized, directly or indirectly, by a dangerous religious movement.

But I guess that plan went to shit. Bush's medieval policies are only the latest incarnation of this effect.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: brokebacktom on August 30, 2006, 08:07:53 PM
Angel--

I heard that too. But I aslo heard it was to keep The Jews and The Catholics from gaining Political power. Plaese don't forget the Quakers, they wanted to end slavery.

But now we got a more scary religion, one that thinks they will be Raptured up into Heaven and be saved.

Tom 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 30, 2006, 09:09:12 PM
Quote
But on your behalf, I will take exception to the world-class fool bit.
From our experience of you in here, just WORLD CLASS would be perfect -- unless we wanted to add MIND to it. That I would accept. But FOOL is not appropriate when we are talking of our Vic!  (Is it Doug? Come on here and back me up mate)

Yes, certainly agree with you there Johnney!

Quote
Well, Nick came in and said that we were getting off topic -- maybe that excursion into the Brethren, from our Non-Believers' perspective will put us back on topic. LOL.

Yes, I saw that... The question begs to be answered is how can a thread called Non believers have an off topic?  The topic would seem to me to be anything that any non-believer wants to talk about, and of course, the believers are welcome to add their topics as well... so the only thing I can see that can be off topic is those that cross the forum rules.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 30, 2006, 09:36:24 PM
Not being eloquent (or a good speller) I don't post on this thread but I do read it. Did you see this story. This is the kind of stuff that is scary and makes me livid.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/28/senate.harris.ap/index.html

This is the kind of crap that makes me so mad I can hardly see straight!  It is so moronic that it is not even funny. That this women has more than one vote for her is an insult to humanity!

Quote
"U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris told a religious journal that separation of church and state is "a lie" and God and the nation's founding fathers did not intend the country be "a nation of secular laws."

The lie is this statement! The founding fathers went to great lengths to make it so that religion was separate from the state, for they just came out from under state run religion and had traveled to a new world to get away from it. Yeah, they wanted to keep their religion for their group, but they did not want anything to do with the state coming in and telling them what they could pray and believe in.  After long fights, the founding fathers came to the conclusion that God belongs only between the man and his God, that no outer force, government, man, or group, had the right to put their view upon others. Only by secular laws was their religious freedom protected.  Religious Freedom can only exist in an environment that keeps it separate from the powers of state.  It can only exist where every view is free to exist and not be forced upon others, that take secular law.  What Harris is wanting is a taliban style state religion, of course, she only wants her version...

Quote
"The Republican candidate for U.S. Senate also said that if Christians are not elected, politicians will "legislate sin," including abortion and gay marriage."

Harris thinks:  Yeah, those damn heathens will legislate freedom of religion, freedom of choice, and freedom of association... we can not have any of that, no we must have legislation of our version of religion, or death, only sex for producing children, none of that fun stuff ever again, and we will watch to make sure... and those damn faggots... well they are the cause of all evil everyone knows that.  Too bad we got rid of the laws to kill them, and those black bastards... I sure miss the good ol' days when we had the freedom to do what we wanted to do...

Quote
Harris said in the interview, published Thursday, saying separating religion and politics is "wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers."

Harris thinks: That is why it is ok to manipulate those heathen voters, we are the hand of God and are just to make sure the right rulers are voted in.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 30, 2006, 09:53:11 PM
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2006/08/29/bc-jeffs.html

Check out this guy, 20 wives and 103 kids!  :-\

As for the Close Caption thread, alot of feelings were hurt in that thread, nuff said, it was suppose to be all about fun.

Oh and Vic I haven't joined your board yet, I am heading out again, maybe for a week, I promise one of these days I will get registered.  :-*

Make ya wonder about those women does it not?  Why would any women want to share a man with 19 other women?  Would they not be more like single mothers? Then think about a man who wanted to put up with 20 women with 103 kids in tow? 

I do not have a problem with consenting adults doing whatever they desire, as long as no one is having force or threat of force used against them, including the children. Another concern is what happens to all the young men who are confronted with the fact that most of the women are taken up by these few men? Are they to be just sexless and slaves of work?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on August 30, 2006, 10:09:07 PM
I consider the relgious right Anti-Amercans. No matter what they say our government is a living breathing and changing reference. It can not adhear to only one set of rules passed hundreds of years ago. It has to change as we learn and evolve. Why are so many humans so stuck on tradition? What is it about tradition (even if it is wrong and hurtful) that so many people cling too like a baby blanket?

You will note that those that cling to tradition like this are those that it is a big advantage for.  If it makes it easier for you, if it allows you to claim superiority, claim right, allows you to have it over another person, or group, then many will fight tooth and nail to protect it.  If you are actually compassionate, actually care for others, actually understand freedom, and actually love, then you will find many of these traditions are just wrong and hurtful.  Many do a half way thing, they cling to the things that make them ok, but do not follow those things that make them not ok, now if they could allow for all others to do the same. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on August 31, 2006, 06:32:59 AM
[

Quote
Well, Nick came in and said that we were getting off topic -- maybe that excursion into the Brethren, from our Non-Believers' perspective will put us back on topic. LOL.

Yes, I saw that... The question begs to be answered is how can a thread called Non believers have an off topic?  The topic would seem to me to be anything that any non-believer wants to talk about, and of course, the believers are welcome to add their topics as well... so the only thing I can see that can be off topic is those that cross the forum rules.

That's our man!  See, you guys have educated me to be the same sort of radicals that you are. LOL.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on August 31, 2006, 07:27:13 AM
http://www.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/globalchristianity/resources.php

According to the above site, and it seems fairly accurate in comparison to other sites I checked, the percentage of global non-believers has risen dramatically over the past 30 years from approx. 650m to 950 million (based on non-religious plus atheists).

So I would say, now that about 16% of the global population has done with religion altogether, whereas it used to be only about 6%, there is a definite trend towards non-believers, at least as far as the established religious organizations go.

Christians (in total) outnumber muslims by about 3 to 2, but that figure is changing as the christian birth rate is dropping and the muslim birth rate rising.

Anyone for Mecca?
;)
Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on September 01, 2006, 05:35:19 AM
http://www.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/globalchristianity/resources.php

According to the above site ... the percentage of global non-believers has risen dramatically over the past 30 years from approx. 650m to 950 million (based on non-religious plus atheists).

So I would say, now that about 16% of the global population has done with religion altogether, whereas it used to be only about 6%, there is a definite trend towards non-believers, at least as far as the established religious organizations go.
Vic

Thanks for the link and the synopsis Vic. Gee, we are still in the minority though, by a long way. It just goes to show that we still have little chance of having any power as a group in the political field, by comparison with the religious right etc.      JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 01, 2006, 07:02:52 AM

I do not have a problem with consenting adults doing whatever they desire, as long as no one is having force or threat of force used against them, including the children. Another concern is what happens to all the young men who are confronted with the fact that most of the women are taken up by these few men? Are they to be just sexless and slaves of work?


(CNN) -- Polygamist sect leader Warren Jeffs warned a teenage girl forced into a "spiritual marriage" to submit to sex with her husband or face "losing your salvation," Utah authorities claimed in an affidavit.

The five-page document was filed in Las Vegas, Nevada, on Thursday in support of two charges that Jeffs' practice of arranging marriages between young girls and older men makes him an accomplice to rape.

<snip>

"No matter what happens you cannot fight with the priesthood because if you do you'll lose your salvation," he said, according to the affidavit.

Followers have told authorities that Jeffs has said he "will not be subject to earthly courts," the affidavit states. 


http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/31/jeffs.affidavit/index.html
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 01, 2006, 07:12:14 AM
"No matter what happens you cannot fight with the priesthood because if you do you'll lose your salvation," he said, according to the affidavit.
Followers have told authorities that Jeffs has said he "will not be subject to earthly courts," the affidavit states. 

How often haven't we heard this before? Good thing for the rest of us mere mortals is that he will be subject to both. Earth court first, and, if there is such a ridiculous thing as saint Peter waiting at the gate of heaven with a book, I have little doubt he'd be cast in hell as soon as he shows his face. For people like this guy it's almost a shame hell doesn't exist, although some time in jail should be close to it with a bit of luck.

As for losing my salvation, well, let's just say that was lost a long time ago the first time I got into bed with a man. Oddly enough I've always considered that to be my salvation rather than living a life of lies.

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 01, 2006, 11:04:56 AM
Yea ya big fat sinner! lol    The only person going to hell around here is this guy, and I do believe in hell, and oh yes he is well on his way!  ;D
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 01, 2006, 03:02:15 PM
should i post here or not ? should i or not ?


weeeellll, lola is posting as well and nobody ran her off yet so i guess i can dare it  ;D

just ended up here today...don't even kow how and why....geezz, you have some interesting dicussions going on here !

guess i should leave a thought here as well so i don't just take up your space, right ?


Quote
Yea ya big fat sinner! lol    The only person going to hell around here is this guy, and I do believe in hell, and oh yes he is well on his way!

so, i'll just say that i agree with lola. and who is to decide who's going to hell anyway ? i can't stomach people who believe that THEY have the only truth and KNOW everything, including what god (or who/whatever is there somewhere....out there...oir anywhere else) thinks about some fellow humans.....
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 01, 2006, 03:54:04 PM
Yea ya big fat sinner! lol    The only person going to hell around here is this guy, and I do believe in hell, and oh yes he is well on his way!  ;D

If there is such a thing as a sinner this guy would qualify.  I do not believe in a hell, so think we need to hold these people responsible for their actions in the here and now.  We should take the steps necessary to keep innocents free from such people, even if they have delusions of being a warrior of god.  If there is a god then he can do what he thinks is right later on. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 01, 2006, 04:09:33 PM
should i post here or not ? should i or not ?

You should! All are welcome.


Quote
weeeellll, lola is posting as well and nobody ran her off yet so i guess i can dare it  ;D

just ended up here today...don't even kow how and why....geezz, you have some interesting dicussions going on here !

guess i should leave a thought here as well so i don't just take up your space, right ?

It is just cyber space, there is plenty at this point... so write away... suggest some topics, who knows what some of us heathens might think? LOL!


Quote
so, i'll just say that i agree with lola. and who is to decide who's going to hell anyway ? i can't stomach people who believe that THEY have the only truth and KNOW everything, including what god (or who/whatever is there somewhere....out there...oir anywhere else) thinks about some fellow humans.....

Well said, I agree.  We have a whole lot of "christians" that assume they are the end all of who gets saved and who does not, just on that merit alone, if I understand the books I have read, suggests they do not qualify for saving. Pride, making idols, etc.  My biggest pet peeve is people who decide they are god warriors, as if an all powerful, all knowing, all loving god would have need of such, they invariably manipulate others at the expense of their freedoms, of their loves, and of their sanity, of course usually to their own advantage.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: AHappyMan on September 01, 2006, 04:57:56 PM
I couldn't agree more. This guy is an evil man. I hate to see religious people using their faith to gain power. Its destroys thier faith not increase it. SAD SAD SAD!!!

Tom 

"If God could see the atrocities being commited in His name, He'd never stop throwing up".- Hannah and Her Sisters

Rick
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: angel on September 01, 2006, 06:24:59 PM
(snip)
so, i'll just say that i agree with lola. and who is to decide who's going to hell anyway ? i can't stomach people who believe that THEY have the only truth and KNOW everything, including what god (or who/whatever is there somewhere....out there...oir anywhere else) thinks about some fellow humans.....

And that's the real problem in terms of raising our ire.

Although I'm an atheist, I believe in freedom of all types, including religion. Almost all of my close friends are religious or at least believe in god. But they are a humanist, non-judgmental lot. Most are pacifists, pro choice, pro gay marriage, etc.

I rarely discuss religion with them. When I do it is only because they find it hard to comprehend that I'm a non-believer. Because we have the same values.

The religious right OTOH, is always talking about "values' as they support illegal and immoral wars, spread hatred and fear, and try to push us back into the dark ages with their creationism in schools bullshit.

They are dangerous. This is more than just a difference in opinions. They embrace policies that support or ignore genocide. Willful ignorance is one of their earmarks. The politics of fear are their tools.

BBM scares them. What else would cause this film to be called "controversial" in this day and age. It was much less controversial in the more secular  European Union.

The consensus in Europe seems to be that fundamentalist, militant Muslims are the greatest threat to world peace. The second greatest threat? The USA with our born-again, (I refuse to call him a cowboy in respect to BBM), religious, right-wing, dumbass President with the sub-zero IQ.

And his constituency! Preacher says vote and I vote. Preacher tells me what to think, so I don't.

God help us all!
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 02, 2006, 01:36:54 AM
You should! All are welcome.

thank you for the warm welcome ! think i'll pass by here from time to time, seems a nice place ! ;)


Quote
My biggest pet peeve is people who decide they are god warriors, as if an all powerful, all knowing, all loving god would have need of such, they invariably manipulate others at the expense of their freedoms, of their loves, and of their sanity, of course usually to their own advantage.

that's something i don't get at all. who comes up with the idea of being god's warrior ? most of those people must not have read the bible at all...i mean, jesus was a peaceful man, he promoted pacifism (the thing with left and right cheek, sorry, english is not my first language, so i'm not able to quote the bible in english). so how in god's name could they colme up with the idea of being WARRIORS ??
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 02, 2006, 01:42:53 AM
Almost all of my close friends are religious or at least believe in god. But they are a humanist, non-judgmental lot. Most are pacifists, pro choice, pro gay marriage, etc.

guess that's where i would fit in as well...believing in god (sorry, i know this is a non-believers thread but i really enjoy expanding my horizon and listening to other people's opinions ! and i'm not a "missinary", i don't want to preach to anybody !) but "with brain". thinking about things and being open-minded. at least i hope so.


Quote
BBM scares them. What else would cause this film to be called "controversial" in this day and age. It was much less controversial in the more secular  European Union.

The consensus in Europe seems to be that fundamentalist, militant Muslims are the greatest threat to world peace. The second greatest threat? The USA with our born-again, (I refuse to call him a cowboy in respect to BBM), religious, right-wing, dumbass President with the sub-zero IQ.

you are right. in both cases. i am from europe, things are VERY different here. not even the church said anything against BBM. and the other thing is right as well. we're not sure whether we should be more afraid of muslim terrorists or of the US.  :(
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 02, 2006, 02:21:11 AM
you are right. in both cases. i am from europe, things are VERY different here. not even the church said anything against BBM. and the other thing is right as well. we're not sure whether we should be more afraid of muslim terrorists or of the US.  :(

Both, because, just like in the Cold War, we're in the middle, in between.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: angel on September 02, 2006, 05:09:42 AM
you are right. in both cases. i am from europe, things are VERY different here. not even the church said anything against BBM. and the other thing is right as well. we're not sure whether we should be more afraid of muslim terrorists or of the US.  :(

Both, because, just like in the Cold War, we're in the middle, in between.

It's more like Europe seemed stuck in the middle between 2 "super-powers" whose squabbling threatened oblivion. The Soviet Union at least lacked the religious fervor to inspire suicide attacks.

Now they're stuck between hordes of ferocious fanatics on one side, and a sanctimonious bunch of greedy, well-armed and stupid Americans (read conservative republicans) on the other, both of whom feel they have God on their side.

disclaimer: I do realize that most Americans are neither stupid nor greedy.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Nick_F on September 02, 2006, 06:36:13 AM
Guys this is such a good thread I have moved you to the permanent discussions area.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 02, 2006, 10:57:15 AM
Now they're stuck between hordes of ferocious fanatics on one side, and a sanctimonious bunch of greedy, well-armed and stupid Americans (read conservative republicans) on the other, both of whom feel they have God on their side.


you know what's so funny ? europeans, the religious fanatics who brought the inquisition and witchhunts over mankind, are now considered the non-religious ones  ::) but maybe that should also fill us with hope - let islam age and "ripe" and give the americans time to "emancipate" from religious fanatism and we might come back to a world ruled by reason and rationality. well - if we survive in the meantime and no bush or al-kaida blows us from this nice planet.... ::)
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 12:02:58 PM


But now we got a more scary religion, one that thinks they will be Raptured up into Heaven and be saved.

Tom 

I was watching a very interesting documentary the other day, think it was on the one of the free thinking channels, anyway it was about evangelical people.  They was interviewing them on the end times war, and Prez Bush.  They want the end times war, can not wait for it, if it was tomorrow it would not be soon enough.  They believe that Jesus will come to take them away before the war begins, and they will not have to suffer through it.  They are all for doing anything to kick it off.  They are really for Bush because they believe he will get them to the end war.  They was commenting how he will be a hero for all time if the end war comes on his watch.  They point to the gays, abortion, etc as proof of the end times, and they can not wait for Jesus to come back and rule for 1,000 years. 

They will support anything that will bring that time sooner.  Of course, when they get what they want, they will be the ones wailing and gnashing of teeth, like the rest of us, when Jesus fails to show, when the pain, suffering, and death shows no difference between those who believe and those who do not qualify. 

They should understand this by looking around them now, the believers die just as horrible as "unjust" ones when tornadoes, fires, hurricanes, floods, wars, shootings, poisonings, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc comes to their doors.  There no difference in the death rates of the devout and the non-devout.  The difference between the "protected" and the "non-protected" is not discernible, when all factors are taken in account.

I worry greatly that this current administration is being guided to start a world war that will end all life on the planet.  Just my opinion...

The questions that come to my mind are these:  Why does an all powerful god need people to start the end time war?  Of what value is an end time war to an all loving god, all merciful god? Why would he let it happen in the first place?  Would not a loving god teach them to accept each other as valuable in and of themselves?  Why does an all loving god not stop the child molesters?  Why does an all merciful god allow a government using his name kill thousands of innocents?  Why does a god allow a man to destroy the lives of others with outright lies?  There among thousands of other questions...  Just my thoughts...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 01:06:18 PM
that's something i don't get at all. who comes up with the idea of being god's warrior ? most of those people must not have read the bible at all...i mean, jesus was a peaceful man, he promoted pacifism (the thing with left and right cheek, sorry, english is not my first language, so i'm not able to quote the bible in english). so how in god's name could they colme up with the idea of being WARRIORS ??

I do not know where they came up with the idea, but it is strongly entrenched.  Have you heard about the video game they have out now for their kids?  The whole premise is that they are god's warriors, and they go in and kill all who do not fit with their religion.  It is a brutal game of virtual guns, knifes and hate.  The one scene shown the other night was set in New York City where they was mowing down "faggots and other such trash" with machine guns, then if one was still wiggling when done they would stab them with a knife.  The kids that was playing was having a good ol' time.  Yep, more of that "christian" love in the making, and we are worried about fundamentalists in the middle east??? 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 01:13:16 PM
you are right. in both cases. i am from europe, things are VERY different here. not even the church said anything against BBM. and the other thing is right as well. we're not sure whether we should be more afraid of muslim terrorists or of the US.  :(

Both, because, just like in the Cold War, we're in the middle, in between.

I know I am very worried about both, because there is only a turban of difference that separates their belief systems, yeah the names are different, but the goals are the same.  Both are just as dangerous, and as radical, though the US one is much more sneaky about it all, at least for the time being...  Just my humble opinion...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 01:31:13 PM
Guys this is such a good thread I have moved you to the permanent discussions area.

Wow, Nick, thanks, I really appreciate it! 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 01:50:02 PM

you know what's so funny ? europeans, the religious fanatics who brought the inquisition and witchhunts over mankind, are now considered the non-religious ones  ::) but maybe that should also fill us with hope - let islam age and "ripe" and give the americans time to "emancipate" from religious fanatism and we might come back to a world ruled by reason and rationality. well - if we survive in the meantime and no bush or al-kaida blows us from this nice planet.... ::)

It does have a little ring of hope, but I do not like the odds on the two blowing this planet to a lifeless dust ball.  With the use of Depleted Uranium in our weapons, with a half life of only 5 billion years, one has to wonder if they will even need to blow up this planet to make it lifeless?  And what it is going to take for rational thought to return, and will it be too late?  Already the wind blows the DU dust into Europe... it has already been found in radiation traps there.  Will god step in then and stop the birth defects, the cancers? Already our boys coming home from this war and have badies with severe birth defects, and the Iraq women are having many babies with defects, yet not hardly a word on the news.  Does not this seems grounds for war crimes? 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 02, 2006, 02:06:56 PM
I do not know where they came up with the idea, but it is strongly entrenched.  Have you heard about the video game they have out now for their kids?  The whole premise is that they are god's warriors, and they go in and kill all who do not fit with their religion.  It is a brutal game of virtual guns, knifes and hate.  The one scene shown the other night was set in New York City where they was mowing down "faggots and other such trash" with machine guns, then if one was still wiggling when done they would stab them with a knife.  The kids that was playing was having a good ol' time.  Yep, more of that "christian" love in the making, and we are worried about fundamentalists in the middle east??? 

I'm not one for censure but, as an avid gamer, I find some of these games disturbing in their message. War games are one thing, that's soldier against soldier, military style, and that is bad enough, but okay, it's reality. Soldiers are there to fight other soldiers, etc.

However, when they start translating this into "civilian" scenarios, as did Carmageddon a few years back, I have doubts. They are too simplistically racist, too thinly veiled in their "nazist" type message, and I think they should be taken off the shelves as it is mostly younger kids that play them rather than adults. At the least computer games should get a rating system like films do. As adults we can put these things into perspective, kids tend to take them at face value and then incorporate it into their own belief systems. And that is a different story.

Vic
 

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 02, 2006, 04:08:29 PM
desertrat--
I feel as you do, being an agnostic rather than an atheist. But, as an agnostic, it's far easier to rattle of a list of what I DON'T believe in than what I DO believe in. I believe in the broadest concept of God possible, period. This leaves an open door to investigate others' beliefs and practices--as an outside observer.

Yes, this concept is uncomfortably vague for most Christians, who think that my definition of God is so broad as to be meaningless. And some atheists say that an agnostic is an atheist with no balls! Maybe my beliefs will progress toward atheism eventually, and maybe not. When I think of the insanity of the popular concept of God, sitting on a throne with a long flowing beard, with Jesus hovering somewhere nearby...watching evil done in his name and doing nothing....well, I don't buy it. I want no part in such a horror.

It's a chidish concept of God, like some kind of Santa Claus in the sky, ready to hand out gifts to some and a lump of coal to others. I've got to believe that, if there's a God, he's at least as progressive and free of prejudice as the best humans. How can he (or she!) not be? I predict that, as the human race evolves, one of the things to fall away will be homophobia and racism. Thus our concept of God will keep pace with human beliefs, until we cease needing a God to hold our hands entirely. We're not there yet; I'M not there yet. But I see this as a natural human progression, and secular humanism will fill the needs that religion serves now. Provided we don't blow up the planet first, or turn it into a cesspool of toxic chemicals.

Organized religion has caused more misery and violence than anything in history...the sooner we grow out of it, the better.

Thanks, Doug for this thread....can an agnostic still be considered a non-believer? I hope so, because I  think this thread is the cat's pajamas!

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 02, 2006, 05:15:57 PM
jer009,
i'm pretty sure that this thread should be for agnostics as well....or we simply have to open a new one  :D

i completely understand your position, having "suffered" a similar one. i am not an agnostic, i believe in god. i grew up catholic, my family is very closely involved into our church community. still, my family was always open-minded and my brother and i were encouraged by our parents to go our own ways and question things. having grown up in a the community of our church, being close to the people, i never felt like completely "abandoning" them and i still go to church when i'm there in the weekend. i feel good with the general beliefs of the catholic church (= the things jesus said). i just don't believe in any things the pope says. first of all, he isn't holy to me but just a human. humans make mistakes. i don't believe in dogmas. a human can't "define" anything "definite" or "ultimate" because we ARE human and can make mistakes. well, that's only some examples. anyway, i was critizised lots of times (interestingly not by people from my church community, they always accepted my beliefs) that i am "making up my own religion" and just "pick out the things i like". well, that might be true. but as a thinking and questioning person, don't i HAVE to question things and refuse things that go against my conscience (assuming that god GAVE me that conscience as a tool for finding the right way and the right decisions) ?

in my experience, those people who tell you that you are not a "right" one (whatever - a "atheist with no balls" or a "do-it-yourself religion-maker"), they just have troubles thinking or questioning things themselves. they need to see things black or white because their brain isn't large enough to perceive shades of grey.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: angel on September 02, 2006, 06:55:57 PM
Hail to the "cafeteria catholics", or whatever religion one is born into. Not choosing does mean not thinking.

It reminds me of Eric Fromm's Escape From Freedom, published in the 60s. it explores how so many people are willing to sacrifice their freedom so they don't have to make the tough decisions. They can order a meal, but do not have the moral fiber to really do the right thing. They need to be told.

While people who say the types of things we read from desertrat are thinking for themselves. Don't let anyone call you an atheist without balls. You obviously have what it takes to make your own decisions.

This implies taking responsibility for one's own actions. I find the religious fanatics never really do this. They fall back on two things mainly. "It is god's will", as if they would know that if there were a god. Or, if they slip, like being caught as a pedophile, they plead "we are all sinners. I repent. I'm still better than you (i.e. people like me) because I was saved."

One of my brothers is a  "born again" christian, as are some of my cousins with whom I used to be close. They are like hypocritical stepford wife acting, inane little people. I can't stand to speak with them. They claim compassion as they support war, capitol punishment...we all know the rest. To me they are the biggest transgressors of what is the right thing to do. When I say 'right". I am only referring to the simple "do unto others..." thing. Treat each other humanely. Know that there is a right and wrong, and try to do right. But think, goddammit! There are no answers in some 2000 or 5000 year old book that was "written by god". How do they believe this crap?
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 07:53:29 PM
I'm not one for censure but, as an avid gamer, I find some of these games disturbing in their message. War games are one thing, that's soldier against soldier, military style, and that is bad enough, but okay, it's reality. Soldiers are there to fight other soldiers, etc.

However, when they start translating this into "civilian" scenarios, as did Carmageddon a few years back, I have doubts. They are too simplistically racist, too thinly veiled in their "nazist" type message, and I think they should be taken off the shelves as it is mostly younger kids that play them rather than adults. At the least computer games should get a rating system like films do. As adults we can put these things into perspective, kids tend to take them at face value and then incorporate it into their own belief systems. And that is a different story.

Vic

I do not want them censored either, however, I have to wonder about parents that would let, let alone encourage, playing such a game. What ever happened to teaching children "Thou Shall Not Kill"?  If someone was smart they would track every sale of this game, and watch them for domestic terrorist activity.   Just a thought...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 08:40:49 PM
And some atheists say that an agnostic is an atheist with no balls! Maybe my beliefs will progress toward atheism eventually, and maybe not.

I take a little different route... perhaps a little more fact based... I know this maybe radical... an agnostic is an agnostic. 

Quote
When I think of the insanity of the popular concept of God, sitting on a throne with a long flowing beard, with Jesus hovering somewhere nearby...watching evil done in his name and doing nothing....well, I don't buy it. I want no part in such a horror.

Me neither...

Quote
It's a chidish concept of God, like some kind of Santa Claus in the sky, ready to hand out gifts to some and a lump of coal to others. I've got to believe that, if there's a God, he's at least as progressive and free of prejudice as the best humans. How can he (or she!) not be? I predict that, as the human race evolves, one of the things to fall away will be homophobia and racism. Thus our concept of God will keep pace with human beliefs, until we cease needing a God to hold our hands entirely. We're not there yet; I'M not there yet. But I see this as a natural human progression, and secular humanism will fill the needs that religion serves now. Provided we don't blow up the planet first, or turn it into a cesspool of toxic chemicals.

I sure like your vision of the future!  I think this is why some of them are fighting so hard and nasty, they can see the writing on the wall, they are dinosaurs and are becoming extinct.

Quote
Organized religion has caused more misery and violence than anything in history...the sooner we grow out of it, the better.

Amen to that!  Nearly every war has a religious component, that if it was replaced with a human beings are the highest value there would not be war. 

Quote
Thanks, Doug for this thread....can an agnostic still be considered a non-believer? I hope so, because I  think this thread is the cat's pajamas!

Absolutely an agnostic is a non-believer!  Even some of the believers here, are non-believers in my book.  They do not believe in being god warriors. They do not believe that their version of belief is the one and only valid way. They do not believe that harming, or even killing others, in the name of god is a good thing.  They do not believe that restricting others rights is right and just.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 02, 2006, 09:26:34 PM
While people who say the types of things we read from desertrat are thinking for themselves. Don't let anyone call you an atheist without balls. You obviously have what it takes to make your own decisions.

Sure agree with that!  Besides what does "atheist without balls" mean, sadly it means disrespect of the individual, that somehow one is not equal to the "pure" other.  It is bullshit... another case of making "us" verses "them", instead of accepting "we" with slight variations.

Quote
This implies taking responsibility for one's own actions. I find the religious fanatics never really do this. They fall back on two things mainly. "It is god's will", as if they would know that if there were a god. Or, if they slip, like being caught as a pedophile, they plead "we are all sinners. I repent. I'm still better than you (i.e. people like me) because I was saved."

You are so right there, religious nuts never take responsibility for the damage they do to innocent others.  The third thing is many believe they are sent by god to be his warriors. Why he/she/it would want such flawed people for warriors is beyond me, when with a flick of a finger he could change everything.  They are to "save" everybody, and condemn those that resist. Of course, they "save" by scaring the hell out of people, "you are going to hell" or "you are damned".  They never take responsibility for getting laws and rules enacted that take freedom away, either. 

Quote
One of my brothers is a  "born again" christian, as are some of my cousins with whom I used to be close. They are like hypocritical stepford wife acting, inane little people. I can't stand to speak with them. They claim compassion as they support war, capitol punishment...we all know the rest. To me they are the biggest transgressors of what is the right thing to do. When I say 'right". I am only referring to the simple "do unto others..." thing. Treat each other humanely. Know that there is a right and wrong, and try to do right. But think, goddammit! There are no answers in some 2000 or 5000 year old book that was "written by god". How do they believe this crap?

I hear ya... if you ever figure it out I would be interested in hearing about it. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on September 03, 2006, 06:02:20 AM
Hi again all.
I just had a dummy-spit on the Affected thread, and decided that in the future I would not post anywhere on the board -- but you people are just so stimulating, that you have lured me out again -- as usual, not with anything deep to say; but instead to APPLAUD each of you; and to welcome you Desertrat, Jer009 to this great thread.

Angel: you wrote:

...To me they are the biggest transgressors of what is the right thing to do. When I say 'right". I am only referring to the simple "do unto others..." thing. Treat each other humanely. Know that there is a right and wrong, and try to do right. But think, goddammit! There are no answers in some 2000 or 5000 year old book that was "written by god". How do they believe this crap?

Oh brother! I am so in agreement with you!

On a slightly different topic (yes, I know that I always do this), back a page, one of you mentioned the former Soviet Union.

One of my personal regrets is at how naive I am. When I heard on the news that the Berlin Wall came down, and the Soviet Union was broken up, I CRIED. (A rare event for me prior to BBM. LOL).
My tears were tears of joy, that now we had the opportunity for a real and lasting world peace, with left-wing and right-wing ideologies now a thing of the past; and as one of you just said, hopefully a world-wide secular humanism would emerge.
Subsequently, it was to my deep regret to discover that your Prez, our aussie Prime Minister, and Blair in Britain; have all joined forces in this power vacuum, to IMPOSE their views on the entire world.  How *** arrogant!  And how destructive of a potential world peace.

In British constitutional law, there is a concept of "checks and balances" in order to keep abuses of power under control. Sadly, it seems that in the international political order we need similar balances for the same reason.  For the past 30 or 40 years, many considered that China would provide this balance; and then on a population and economic basis, perhaps India might. Meanwhile, it seems that we are experiencing the emergence of competing ideologies between the christian and the muslim as being the components of such a balance. 

It seems that everyone in power has forgotten that old cartoon illustrating Woodrow-Wilson's concept:  of two goats chained together, who start off pulling in opposite directions to eat from some bushes, but neither can attain its goal; so they quickly learn to co-operate and go TOGETHER first to eat together from  one bush, and then to amble together off to the other bush to again eat together.  Such a simple lesson, already at large on the world stage; and yet these F...ing IGNORANT power-players ignore its effectiveness.
Regards to each of you; and Nick: thanks for so deservedly promoting the thread. JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jenjen on September 03, 2006, 01:19:30 PM
Just discovered this thread - it looks great!  I'm going to catch up on the pages here and will come back in a few. 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: CactusGal on September 04, 2006, 12:25:47 PM

Although I'm an atheist, I believe in freedom of all types, including religion. Almost all of my close friends are religious or at least believe in god. But they are a humanist, non-judgmental lot. Most are pacifists, pro choice, pro gay marriage, etc.

I rarely discuss religion with them. When I do it is only because they find it hard to comprehend that I'm a non-believer. Because we have the same values.


Angel -- This really fits where I stand today -- I too rarely discuss this issue with friends and family because they too can't believe that I am a non-believer.   It's so re-freshing to find others who have thought this out for themselves and come to their own conclusions rather than continuing down a path of belief that was thrust upon them at birth.   

To me it's not nearly as important  whether one is an agnostic or aethist -- it's only important that the person has come to the understanding that whatever they believe (or not) is just as valid as anyone else's opinion/ideas.  After all, there is no proof!  It took me a long time to understand that I could trust myself and my ideas; that I didn't have to accept the thoughts and ideas of others even if I thought these people to be exceptionally brillant in other aspects of life. 

I'm a lot more at peace today than ever before, because I truly "believe" in my own conclusions and can finally, publicly reject the conjecture of religions.    Jan
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 04, 2006, 02:13:05 PM
First, a belated thank you to Nick for moving this thread to the main discussion area. I don't know if the move was the reason, but this thread is hopping, and I couldn't be happier.

Destertrat-
I was raised Catholic too. Sometime after my first communion, I became aware of the Catholic Church's position on abortion, and I left the Church for good. I'm surprised myself that it wasn't the Church's position on homosexuality that did it, but the point is I left and never looked back.

I say, Hooray for "cafeteria Catholics". You are a freethinker, not a sheep, and you're sensible enough to choose for yourself what makes sense to you and what doesn't. You say your family is involved in the Church. I think that is why so many people go to church, regardless of denomination: for a sense of community and to feel a part of something larger. As the world becomes more secular, it's good to keep in mind that it's the sense of community and feeling a part of something greater is what we crave, not the (often homophobic) homilies of the preacher. Then the question will be, What can we do to get the same thing without the Church?.

And you're right, there's no proof that there is a God, so everything we say and write about God is Man's interpretation of the various holy books. And men make mistakes, especially concerning the Bible. Written over 2,000 years ago, translated dozens of times by people who may have had their own agendas, in a different culture than ours, with some practices considered barbaric by modern standards. Add to this that believers routinely cherry- pick certain verses that should be enforced, and  conveniently ignore others.

Your comment about "Shades of gray" is spot-on. My sister has gradually become a very conservative Christion, and my brother and I can only look on in sadness. She has made homophobic remarks, and when I called her on it, she repeats what she's hearing from the pulpit. Homosexuality is a sin, you'd better repent, etc. I saw a bumper sticker years ago which sums up her beliefs: "The Bible said it, I be live it, that settles it." No room for shades of grey, things are either black or they're white. No room for discussion or compromise.

I can see why she fled into the open arms of the church; after four failed marriages she need a father figure--God--to comfort her. That's her choice, of course, but I wish she would've chosen one that was less focused on hate, all the while preaching love.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 04, 2006, 02:21:52 PM
Wecome to JohnnyX to the thread...I'm glad you decided to stay!
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 04, 2006, 03:53:54 PM
jer009, thank you for your kind comment. it feels so good to find people out there who can understand. usually i feel like in a sandwich - beaten from both sides...(btw., i like the term "cafeteria catholics" :D)

i'm so sorry about your sister. it must be so hard to see a person change like that. see how this loving, caring person turns into a hateful bigot. i can understand how and why people hate the church who turns and changes people like that.

and it is a complete mystery to me how poeple can intentionally "misunderstand" everything the bible/ jesus or whoever says about love and compassion. well, maybe they also kind of "blind out" things they don'tb want to see - like i might do it at times with bible parts i don't want to see. that makes it so immensely dificult to discuss the whole matter. absolutism is always easy - "it is like i say and that's it." freedom of thinking is the difficult part.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Desecra on September 05, 2006, 08:12:19 AM
I don't think it's necessarily that people misunderstand the message of love and compassion in the bible.  The bible gives quite mixed messages.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 05, 2006, 11:34:12 AM
Doug-
 when you say, "Even the believers are non-believers in my book.", I agree. I suspect that if you backed most believers into a corner, you would find that their alleged faith is wishy-washy at best. Large portions of the Bible are ignored by everyone as irrelevant to modern life.

The terms "atheist" or "agnostic"  scare most people...they don't want to commit themselves, even if those terms apply. There's a stigma associated with them, there's associations with "Godless Communists" or memories of Madelain Murry O'Hare, who was seen as a very divisive figure.

If you backed some believers into a corner further, they are likely to declare, "Without God, there would be no moral code, chaos would rule."  I think a person can be moral without a belief in God. There are people living their lives, quietly going about their business, without a belief in a supernatural power. They just don't announce their non-belief with trumpets.

Desecra--
You're right about mixed messages in the Bible. You could use the Bible to support any issue, depending on which passage supports your argument. The Bible was even used to support slavery, which we see as abhorrent now.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 05, 2006, 12:08:07 PM
Desertrat-

I sympathize with feeling like a sandwich. It can be a job worthy of Henry Kissinger to mediate both sides.

BTW, "cafeteria Catholics" is not original, although I would love to take credit for it. As a former Catholic myself, my ears perked up when I first heard the term. Angel used it in the topmost post on this page.

And it's not used as a compliment, either. I would like to rehabilitate the term, however. The ability to take what is useful to you and leave behind what doesn't shows intelligence and the ability to discriminate. It shows backbone, and It's a wholesome change from sheeplike behavior.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 05, 2006, 12:58:05 PM
I don't think it's necessarily that people misunderstand the message of love and compassion in the bible.  The bible gives quite mixed messages.

of course you are right. the bible is a book written by humans. humans who were children of their time and saw things through the "glasses" of their culture and time. another aspect of the "mixed messages" are the sometimes even contradicting statements between old and new testament. the old testament is worse than a horror story at times - full of war, violence and vengeance. the new testament suddenly says a lot about peace and gentleness. what to believe now ? the more "extreme" of the christians put more emphasis on the old testament whereas the "moderate" ones put more weight on the new testament, in particular what jesus said.

if you're intereted in my point of view, i'd recommend to read the bible. it makes a very interesting (hi)story book. always bear in mind that it only is a mirror of its time. use common sense. and then make your own decisions.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 05, 2006, 01:03:06 PM
I would like to rehabilitate the term, however.

i'm with you on that. i like the expression. once, because "cafeteria" and "coffee house" in austria, with our long tradition in coffee house culture, is a word that evokes pictures of intellectuals, students sipping a coffee and discussing philosophy. so, it implies thinking independently. and second, because a cafeteria is something far away from a church. i prefer taking faith questions out of that "holy" or "sacred" space. faith/ life philosophy/ the views about the universe and everything else are questions that are HERE, in our every day life. so i like prefer discussing them in my everyday life and not in some taboo-afflicted "sacred" space.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Desecra on September 05, 2006, 01:13:31 PM
Desertrat - I've read the Bible and still dip in now and then.  I agree with you that it's an interesting read as a reflection of the times.  Some of it must have served a purpose in sorting out legal matters, etc.  There are some good stories in there too :).
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jonas on September 05, 2006, 01:23:40 PM
Hello all,

I recently discovered this thread and have read some pages, not all of them. Very interesting discussions and everybody shows a good deal of scholarship. I must confess that I find Doug's points of view very clear and true to his worldview which I might add is very Ayn Randian.

Now, from what I've read, and I haven't read all pages as I wrote before so what follows may have been discussed before, anyway, basically I'd like to know if any of you have been through a devastating personal situation where you see no way out and all's left is "God" or something.

Personally I've been through that situation, and believe me, I've read some Ayn Rand books and considered myself your standard worldly non-believer gay guy until a life threatening situation hit (not a disease) and all that beautiful logic and reason came tumbling down (please, don't think I'm proselytizing or anything, I'm just sharing my experience). So, what to do when such thing happens? what to do when your emotions override your logic and worldview?

What have you done in such situations? how would you react?

I'm really interested in hearing your opinions
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 05, 2006, 02:16:27 PM
jonas....i have no idea !

pray maybe ? i mean, if suddenly, for whatever reason, you find praying helps, why not doing it ? there's no "non-believers police" who will find out and tell everybody....i personally see praying more as an introspect...sorting things out...i mean, there is not proof it really is a conversation with some higher power, is there ?

i prefer the lines blurry...that's why i like the word "agnostic" so much...it keeps the doors open - in both directions.

and if there really is a god, he is WAY above our pathetic little hypocrisy....he wouldn't have lists, making litle dots for every time you went to church or asked him for a favour or thanked him or so. a GOD wouldn't do such little things. he would see directly in your heart.

i'm not sure what animals do in life-theratening situations...but maybe it is something that's deep inside us that "handing over" our fate in times of deep crisis makes it more bareable, because we don't have to take the full "responsibilty" and can "believe" in fate, god, whatever else....
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 05, 2006, 04:53:02 PM
Doug-
 when you say, "Even the believers are non-believers in my book.", I agree. I suspect that if you backed most believers into a corner, you would find that their alleged faith is wishy-washy at best. Large portions of the Bible are ignored by everyone as irrelevant to modern life.

Even the religious right group does that, does it stick in your craw like it does mine? They can use one passage to take another person's freedom away, while at the same time ignoring the passages that would take their own freedom away.  It seems to turn on whether it benefits them or not.   

Quote
The terms "atheist" or "agnostic"  scare most people...they don't want to commit themselves, even if those terms apply. There's a stigma associated with them, there's associations with "Godless Communists" or memories of Madelain Murry O'Hare, who was seen as a very divisive figure.

If you backed some believers into a corner further, they are likely to declare, "Without God, there would be no moral code, chaos would rule."  I think a person can be moral without a belief in God. There are people living their lives, quietly going about their business, without a belief in a supernatural power. They just don't announce their non-belief with trumpets.

Yeah, that one always raises my blood pressure "Without God, there would be moral code, chaos would rule", the other really makes my blood boil is "If you do not believe in God, you do not believe in anything."  One does not need an old dusty book, or an authority figure to tell you what is right or wrong... you just need a heart, a little compassion, and rational thought.  What those that say this are saying is "We are too stupid, so cold, so out of it, that without someone telling us, we can not know right from wrong."   I must say, even with someone telling them, they do not know right from wrong.  In fact, the someone usually has an agenda, and is manipulating these others.

Quote
Desecra--
You're right about mixed messages in the Bible. You could use the Bible to support any issue, depending on which passage supports your argument. The Bible was even used to support slavery, which we see as abhorrent now.

Yeah, like we are told that Jesus is a very compassionate guy... yet, there is a passage where Jesus says something like "Happy is the man that dashes thy little ones against the rocks."   Or that God, and company is all about family values, yet there is a couple of passages something like "If you do not hate your Mother, Father, Sister and Bother, even yourself, you can not be a follower of mine."  "If someone temps you away from me, kill them."  You know, nice things like that.  I can get the exact quotes if need be.  Or how about all the noise about prayer in school, and public places, when Jesus says something like, "Do not be like the hypocrates that pray in public, even the church,  but go into your secrete closet to pray, the prayer in secrete will be answered in secrete."  Seems they have not read their own good book...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 05, 2006, 05:27:55 PM
Hello all,

I recently discovered this thread and have read some pages, not all of them. Very interesting discussions and everybody shows a good deal of scholarship. I must confess that I find Doug's points of view very clear and true to his worldview which I might add is very Ayn Randian.

I love Ayn Rand, but some of her ideas do have major flaws.   Her ideas require people who are morally conscious, a lot of the big business today is not that way, IMHO.

Quote
Now, from what I've read, and I haven't read all pages as I wrote before so what follows may have been discussed before, anyway, basically I'd like to know if any of you have been through a devastating personal situation where you see no way out and all's left is "God" or something.

Personally I've been through that situation, and believe me, I've read some Ayn Rand books and considered myself your standard worldly non-believer gay guy until a life threatening situation hit (not a disease) and all that beautiful logic and reason came tumbling down (please, don't think I'm proselytizing or anything, I'm just sharing my experience). So, what to do when such thing happens? what to do when your emotions override your logic and worldview?

When your emotions override your logic and worldview, it just happens.  Once you get back to a more normal place, then you must start the task of resolving contradictions.   When you have resolved the contradictions you will have a much clearer understanding of the reality.  And there are times when for one reason or another, you can not resolve the contradictions, then you must accept them, but keep them labeled as "unknowable" or "suspect".  If you build any premises based upon them, understand you may be building upon quicksand, what may look solid at the time, very will may come crumbling down around your shoulders.

Quote
What have you done in such situations? how would you react?

One reacts as they react, then afterwards one needs to understand it, so the next time they may react differently.  To understand where illusion takes off from reality, look for the contradictions, then resolve them.  In case you forgot from Ayn, the only axiom premise is "Existence exists".  Axiom is self evident.  Since the law of identity says something can't be and not be at the same time, contradictions can not exist in reality. Reality can be culled out by knowing that.  
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 05, 2006, 06:04:26 PM
pray maybe ? i mean, if suddenly, for whatever reason, you find praying helps, why not doing it ? there's no "non-believers police" who will find out and tell everybody....i personally see praying more as an introspect...sorting things out...i mean, there is not proof it really is a conversation with some higher power, is there ?

Yes, of course this is quite what most of us do. There something completely separate from objective reality, that is one's personal subjective reality, in the subjective reality anything that can be believed is real.  Real to that person.  This is why hypnosis works.  Of course, when the subjective reality and the objective reality do not agree, there are contradictions. One's job is to try to align their subjective reality with objective reality as much as possible, this is true understanding.  Many people mistake their subjective reality for objective reality, and they do not note, nor resolve contradictions, their "facts" are not facts, they are jumble of bits and pieces of facts, beliefs and hopes. BTW, a fact does not have to be believed to be obvious, and that is a good test, if you have to believe it before you can experience it, then the odds are great it is a subjective reality item, not an objective reality item.  Just some thoughts...   

Quote
i prefer the lines blurry...that's why i like the word "agnostic" so much...it keeps the doors open - in both directions.

and if there really is a god, he is WAY above our pathetic little hypocrisy....he wouldn't have lists, making litle dots for every time you went to church or asked him for a favour or thanked him or so. a GOD wouldn't do such little things. he would see directly in your heart.

Agree, and if he wanted to change you, he would do so direct by touching your heart and mind, he would not send out god warriors to do it.  The "Free Will" excuse is just that. 

Quote
i'm not sure what animals do in life-theratening situations...

They scream out in a sound that very much sounds like the sound they made when they called their Mother.   So, they hand out their fate to what they knew as something that would protect them.  That is why we blurt out "Jesus Christ" when we are nearly hit by an oncoming car. 
 
Quote
but maybe it is something that's deep inside us that "handing over" our fate in times of deep crisis makes it more bareable, because we don't have to take the full "responsibilty" and can "believe" in fate, god, whatever else....

Could be just a reaction, like jumping back when we see a snake.  We are wired with many reactions that we consciously can not accept as being outside of our control.  Many of them can be controlled once we understand the reality.  Just my opinion...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: brokebacktom on September 05, 2006, 07:37:51 PM
Hi all

As a believer(I hope I'm not kicked out of here), I find your insights to be more honest and truthful than the Believers. I mean you know morew about the History of the Bible,  The history of the Christain faith, and know whats in the Bible than most Christains do. I find that to be very sad. Some of the Christains I know don't even read the Bible, they get what they are told at church. God save them. I feel very sorry for them. Thanks for all of your insights. I hope I'm still able to belong here.

Tom
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on September 05, 2006, 09:09:24 PM
Hi all

As a believer(I hope I'm not kicked out of here), I find your insights to be more honest and truthful than the Believers.
... Thanks for all of your insights. I hope I'm still able to belong here.

Tom

Hello Tom and WELCOME to a great, deep, discussion thread.

If you look back into the earlier pages (luckily there are not that many), you will find some really great interactions between Doug (and we know where he stands. LOL) and Lola (who is a believer).

Based on that, you will surely see that you are welcome here.
And the words which you wrote are a tribute to those great minds and hearts who post here. (Myself excepted of course, I am just an "appreciator" of their erudition).

I sincerely hope that you will enjoy your visits here; and will post when the urge moves you.
(I was about to say "when the spirit moves you", but that sounds too much like a believer. ROFL.)                JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jonas on September 05, 2006, 09:10:09 PM
There are some "facts of life" that really piss me off...and what pisses me off is this, in an objective evaluation of existence there are statistical occurrences, that means, if something happens to you at random, statistics show that this may or may not happen to you again, but when things start happening to you in a row, and I don't mean just three times...I mean, more than that, when things start to show a weird pattern then you can't but think "wait a minute...life's not supposed to be like this" there seems to be an "external" intervention here. Some people call it "Luck", psychologists may call it "repeated behavior", but in the case I'm talking about...it's not that you "do" X something and then the consequence is Y, of course if you keep doing X the consequence will always be Y, what I'm talking about is that you're just standing there when Y happens, then later Y happens again...and again... and you haven't done X....

Did you all see "Matrix"?, I hope so, do you remember that little scene when Neo is walking inside some old building with the gang and he notices that a black cat seems to be "repeating" a movement and the others tell them that's when the "Matrix" is changing the script, well, I get that weird feeling when those above mentioned things happen. When the objective reality is not "behaving" as it should. When someone or something keeps throwing curve balls at me....


Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on September 05, 2006, 09:21:35 PM
Hello all,

I recently discovered this thread and have read some pages, not all of them. Very interesting discussions and everybody shows a good deal of scholarship. ...

... basically I'd like to know if any of you have been through a devastating personal situation where you see no way out and all's left is "God" or something.

Personally I've been through that situation, and believe me, I've read some Ayn Rand books and considered myself your standard worldly non-believer gay guy until a life threatening situation hit (not a disease) and all that beautiful logic and reason came tumbling down (please, don't think I'm proselytizing or anything, I'm just sharing my experience). So, what to do when such thing happens? what to do when your emotions override your logic and worldview?

What have you done in such situations? how would you react?

I'm really interested in hearing your opinions

Hello Jonas, and a hearty welcome to you here.

I have written before that the book which pushed me off the agnostic fence, and into the atheist camp, is "The Selfish Gene" by Professor Richard Dawkins. 

His approach seems to be that there is nothing other than pure EVOLUTION.

So, in accord with that, I THINK that my NEW approach would be to ignore any pleas to a higher deity or any "other"; and just to either accept the situation; or to look within oneself for some answers.

Of course, this is all in the abstract; so what I would actually do if ever confronted with this situation might be different.

To my mind, the main reason why in such situations we might seek assistance from some "other" is because we have been CONDITIONED within our religious societies to do so. Therefore I do not believe that seeking any such outside assistance is a sign that there definitely is an other.

But I also can relate, from my former agnotic self, to Desertrat's viewpoint of: what the heck, any port in a storm, there can be no harm in trying everything, whether one believes or not.

Hell, although I think that Doug disagreed when I said it once before; my take is that my Non-Belief is still a BELIEF, and therefore I might be completely wrong in that belief of non-belief (if you get my drift).  So, if I am wrong; well keep all options open. LOL.

But that was my former agnostic's viewpoint; it is not my current Dawkins-inspired evolutionist approach.

Thank you for a great question.  Now we shall both await the informed responses from those whom we come here to read.  .........come on guys and gals.    Regards: JohnnyX.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 05, 2006, 10:30:48 PM
Doug-
Yes, when the religious right use one passage to take away one group's freedoms, while ignoring another passage that would take their freedoms away...truly it depends on who it benefits. This hypocrisy and cynicism is disgusting.

As to the "You don't believe in God so you don't believe in anything", that's nonsense. I don't need any book to tell me that I should treat people decently, that the Golden Rule is not just fair and just, but practical as well. If I screw someone over to get ahead, sooner or later there will come a time when the shoe is on the other foot.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 05, 2006, 11:35:36 PM
Welcome to the thread, Jonas and brokebacktom! It's a very lively thread Doug is hosting, and I'm glad you found it.

I have some comments on Ayn Rand's Objectivism, but I will wait a while to make them.

Jonas,
 You asked how we would cope with situations that are life- threatening, and what choice we would make. I have two situations that fit your description: one I would prefer not to go into right now, and the other I will discuss here.

In 2001 I had a stroke at the age of 40. I thought I was too young to have a stroke, but I had one anyway. My boyfriend rushed me to the emergency room, where I spent what seemed like hours (it may actually have been hours). I was transfered to another hospital, where my doctor had admitting privileges, and there I spent close to a month. There were endless tests, and spinal taps, and on and on.

I know what happened now, but at the time, I didn't . If I was going to pray, this would have been the time. As it happened, I was too busy trying to figure things out...praying was the last thing on my mind. At one point, in the hospital, a priest came to call. I don't remember if I could speak at all at that point, but he got the message somehow that I had no need of his services.

Long story short, my arms were affected, including my dominant hand. But even worse, I couldn't speak. I couldn't write--my mom actually framed the first time I was able to sign my name. Interestingly, I found to my delight and relief that I could still read, although it gave me a headache if I read for more than a few minutes at a time.

It also affected my cognative abilities. Even simple tasks were difficult for me. After that came physical therapy, and a string of speech therapists. The last one said, "There's nothing else I can do for you.", and I was let loose on the world, stuttering, stammering and with what speech therapists call benignly, "Word finding difficulties". The stuttering I could get used to, but the word finding problems were absolute torture. It was like having a word on the tip of your tongue and not being able to retrieve it....only dozens of times a day. This also would have been an ideal opportunity to pray, if only for patience.

Through it all, I remained my ornery agnostic self. I never called out to God to help me, never asked God why he had done this to me at such a young age.  As frustrated as I was, I felt it was up to me to go through the therapy, etc. No God required. Mind you, I'm an agnostic, not an atheist, so I could have prayed, but I didn't feel the need to.

So, now I type using the HP Method--Hunt and Peck. Seriously, I'm glad I can operate a computer at all, and writing stimulates my brain. (And I can use all the brain stimulation I can get!)

Sorry if this is too long; editing was always my downfall. I hope this helps, Jonas.
Good night and good luck.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 06, 2006, 12:05:28 AM
Jonas,
It sounds like you are describing what Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung called "Synchronicity"--a meaningful coincidence. You might be interested in the book, "There Are No Accidents: Synchronicity and the Stories of Our Lives" by Robert H. Hopcke, published by Riverhead Books.

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 06, 2006, 01:51:44 AM
Quote from: Johnny X
I have written before that the book which pushed me off the agnostic fence, and into the atheist camp, is "The Selfish Gene" by Professor Richard Dawkins.

His approach seems to be that there is nothing other than pure EVOLUTION.

You mentioned this book before, Johhny and it is on my "to read" list because Evolution is all I have ever believed in as the only true "force" at work at any or all times. For me it also explains the complex sexuality humans are subject to (re: Nature vs Nurture thread). Nature will try anything and the successful continue, albeit in time spans beyond human reckoning.

And, in the end, I don't have much doubt, alarming as they now seem, that these religious nuts will run into the walls of their own making.

Quote from: Jer009
As to the "You don't believe in God so you don't believe in anything", that's nonsense. I don't need any book to tell me that I should treat people decently, that the Golden Rule is not just fair and just, but practical as well. If I screw someone over to get ahead, sooner or later there will come a time when the shoe is on the other foot.
...
It sounds like you are describing what Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung called "Synchronicity"--a meaningful coincidence. You might be interested in the book, "There Are No Accidents: Synchronicity and the Stories of Our Lives" by Robert H. Hopcke, published by Riverhead Books.

All three major religions have social guidelines which are very similar. Social guidelines have nothing to do with religion, they are rules to create a civil order to facilitate human interaction and civilisation. If anything, religion interferes with that, trying to impose rules based on a (for me) non-existent higher power.

IMHO the rise of Christianity caused the fall of the Roman Empire by converting the social order the Romans had imposed, and held for centuries (the Pax Romana), to a religiously based order which had nothing to do with societal practicalities, eventually causing a 1000 years of chaos and disorder in Europe, the Dark Ages, until the Renaissance. A view which is of course hotly contested by the church. So no, we don't need religion to prescribe behaviour rules, if anything it hinders progress (as we can see in Islam) and causes chaos and misunderstanding. Keep state and church separate!

Jung has always rang true to me, again, because he believed in the power of nature and how it affects humanity. There are no coincidences.

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 06, 2006, 06:45:55 AM
jer009, wow, that is quite a story about your stroke....how wonderful that you were able to recover ! it sure takes a lot of willpower and strength to go through something like that. i'm glad you did (and don't worry abot long posts, we're happy you ARE able to post ! ;))!

Through it all, I remained my ornery agnostic self. I never called out to God to help me, never asked God why he had done this to me at such a young age.  As frustrated as I was, I felt it was up to me to go through the therapy, etc. No God required. Mind you, I'm an agnostic, not an atheist, so I could have prayed, but I didn't feel the need to.

good that you were able to trust in yourself. i think every approach is possible - non-religious people who stay non-religious, non-religious people who get religious, but also religious people who lose their faith in the face of tragedy. and i wouldn't judge ANYBODY. life is hard enough at times, we need to grab onto every straw we can get.

actually, the only thing i can get really angry about is people judging me. unfortunately, i have to put up with that quite regularly: that i am no "real" catholic cause i don't believe in all the things the church says. and if i were honest and consequent in my actions, i would leave the church. that comes out of the mouth of people who ALSO stay in the catholic church, and only for one reason - to have a traditional, catholic wedding. talking about hypocrisy.....
i don't think that anybody has the right to judge me because i put people over principles. i dearly love the people in my church community. and to me, they are a lot more important than what any pope could ever say.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 06, 2006, 07:49:18 AM
Hi all

As a believer(I hope I'm not kicked out of here), I find your insights to be more honest and truthful than the Believers. I mean you know morew about the History of the Bible,  The history of the Christain faith, and know whats in the Bible than most Christains do. I find that to be very sad. Some of the Christains I know don't even read the Bible, they get what they are told at church. God save them. I feel very sorry for them. Thanks for all of your insights. I hope I'm still able to belong here.

Tom

Of course, you are welcome here!  My only thought of a requirement is that you talk about why and how you come to your conclusions, without quoting the bible or authority figure.  Then again, that is just my thought.  Do as you think is right...

I have read the bible to the best of my ability.  To me it is very hard to read, because it is almost like reading someone who is manic-depressive, who is constantly drifting between dreams states and reality, and a little schizophrenia thrown in for good measure. The contradictions drive me crazy, god says he is love, but also says he is evil...  Jesus says to love the children, but to dash them against the rocks...  There is the god of love, who says to he comes to bring war...   There is Jesus to bring families together, but who has come to divide them...  Then there is the talking donkey...  I can give the passages if they are needed.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 06, 2006, 08:18:19 AM
To me it is very hard to read, because it is almost like reading someone who is manic-depressive, who is constantly drifting between dreams states and reality, and a little schizophrenia thrown in for good measure. The contradictions drive me crazy, god says he is love, but also says he is evil...  Jesus says to love the children, but to dash them against the rocks...  There is the god of love, who says to he comes to bring war...   There is Jesus to bring families together, but who has come to divide them...  Then there is the talking donkey...  I can give the passages if they are needed.

hahaha...like reading huxley.....or salinger.... :D :D
though the bible somehow uses more colourful language. let's say anne rice meets aldous huxley  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Doug2017 on September 06, 2006, 08:34:17 AM
There are some "facts of life" that really piss me off...and what pisses me off is this, in an objective evaluation of existence there are statistical occurrences, that means, if something happens to you at random, statistics show that this may or may not happen to you again, but when things start happening to you in a row, and I don't mean just three times...I mean, more than that, when things start to show a weird pattern then you can't but think "wait a minute...life's not supposed to be like this" there seems to be an "external" intervention here. Some people call it "Luck", psychologists may call it "repeated behavior", but in the case I'm talking about...it's not that you "do" X something and then the consequence is Y, of course if you keep doing X the consequence will always be Y, what I'm talking about is that you're just standing there when Y happens, then later Y happens again...and again... and you haven't done X....

Did you all see "Matrix"?, I hope so, do you remember that little scene when Neo is walking inside some old building with the gang and he notices that a black cat seems to be "repeating" a movement and the others tell them that's when the "Matrix" is changing the script, well, I get that weird feeling when those above mentioned things happen. When the objective reality is not "behaving" as it should. When someone or something keeps throwing curve balls at me....

What can someone say to that?  What you experience is what you experience, your only recourse is to resolve any contradictions that come to your attention. 

The only thing that comes to mind is being struck by lightning, the odds are very great that one will never get hit, but to the few people that get hit multiple times, it is 100%.  That is the way statistics work, the more the occurrence the smaller the odds, but in a universe of infinite time, any event, with any possibility will happen an infinite number of times, where they are nearly all at once or not is not matterial.  Of course, we do not know if there is infinite time. None of which requires a someone or something throwing curve balls... just an opinion.

I loved the matrix, it has a lot of lessions about illusion being used as reality, they have just taken it to a max level.  We have much of the same thing in the world now.  The vast majority of accepted ideas in this world are illusions, they are only contain enough reality to make they easy to swallow...
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: desertrat on September 06, 2006, 08:39:15 AM
I loved the matrix, it has a lot of lessions about illusion being used as reality, they have just taken it to a max level.  We have much of the same thing in the world now.  The vast majority of accepted ideas in this world are illusions, they are only contain enough reality to make they easy to swallow...

don't get me started...LOVED that movie....it caused hours of brain-wrenching discussions with my friends (we love discussions other people would call mindfucking  ;D). can i get my red pill now, please ?  ;D
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 06, 2006, 11:03:51 AM
Desertrat,
Thanks for the kind words! And yes, I agree that sometimes we need to grasp at straws, but when the crisis is over, we can (hopefully) revert to a non-crisis state. Or not...We're all at different stages in our lives, no one can tell you what you "should do". "Judge not, lest you be judged." ;)

And for those of you who are intrested in "The Matrix" movies, (as I am), here's a couple of books that may interst you:

Taking The Red Pill: Science, Philosophy and Religion In The Matrix by Glenn Yeffeth, editor

Like A Splinter In Your Mind: The Philosophy Behind The Matrix Trilogy by Matt Lawrence

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 06, 2006, 11:14:44 AM
Doug,
Your post about reading the Bible had me howling with laughter! It's so true, especially the part about it reading like a manic depressive wrote it.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 06, 2006, 11:46:13 AM
More Matrix Mania, for those interested:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0975258605/ref=wl_it_dp/104-9921135-0784706?ie=UTF8&coliid=I3CAX781DCHXEV&colid=3LWKLP2S09JTP

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812695720/ref=wl_it_dp/104-9921135-0784706?ie=UTF8&coliid=IH3H6JKLXLXUQ&colid=3LWKLP2S09JTP

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/081269502X/ref=wl_it_dp/104-9921135-0784706?ie=UTF8&coliid=I32L0AORY8Y39T&colid=3LWKLP2S09JTP

Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: jonas on September 06, 2006, 08:45:17 PM
Jonas,
It sounds like you are describing what Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung called "Synchronicity"--a meaningful coincidence. You might be interested in the book, "There Are No Accidents: Synchronicity and the Stories of Our Lives" by Robert H. Hopcke, published by Riverhead Books.



Yes, I've heard about that book, in fact I've read three books by that author. I gotta get me that book....
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 07, 2006, 11:45:22 AM
Jonas,
It sounds like you are describing what Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung called "Synchronicity"--a meaningful coincidence. You might be interested in the book, "There Are No Accidents: Synchronicity and the Stories of Our Lives" by Robert H. Hopcke, published by Riverhead Books.


[/quote

It's a good book, but not light reading, as you know if you've alredy got some books from the same author.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 07, 2006, 11:49:04 AM
Sorry about that, Jonas. I'm just getting the hang of quoting, and I don't think I've quite got it yet.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 08, 2006, 02:04:10 PM

Destertrat-
I was raised Catholic too. Sometime after my first communion, I became aware of the Catholic Church's position on abortion, and I left the Church for good. I'm surprised myself that it wasn't the Church's position on homosexuality that did it, but the point is I left and never looked back.


First communion is done in the second grade, were you that young when you decided to leave the church??
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: brokebacktom on September 08, 2006, 02:31:29 PM
Jeroo9

I had my first Communion in the 1st grade. So, when did you Leave? I left when I went to college, and I never was Confirmed either by the Church. I started to question them when I was in a private highschool. I could understand their position against birth control. For me it didn't make sense. So, for me I would like to know more about your desision to leave.

Tom
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 09, 2006, 10:34:59 AM
Lola and brokebacktom--

I have almost no memory about the details, it was so long ago. But  I think I was about 11. I don't know if I'm mis-remembering. I don't know many 11-year olds who have an opinion on abortion.

But I remember it was AFTER my first communion, because I remember it was treated as a very big, deal and everybody made a big fuss. I had to wear a suit, there were pictures taken.

Some time after that--I don't know how long--I learned about the Church's stand on abortion. It seemed to me that it was the woman's body and it was her choice.

The point is, I left the Church at an early age. I have since watched the Church continue down the path of homophobia, and it confirms I made the right decision in leaving.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 09, 2006, 11:10:08 AM
brokebacktom--
The Church's position on abortion was the first one I became aware of. Next was homosexuality, and that was a hot potato. I don't remember where I was in terms of coming out, either to myself or others. But it seemed like another case where the Church was butting in where it didn't belong.

I'm an agnostic, and my ideal society is one of secular humanists. The Catholic Church is hierarchal, rigid and slow to adapt to modern concerns and circumstances.I have known good and sincere Catholics, and to you I say, My quarrel is not with you but with your church. I apologize in advance for any Catholics who are offended.

Those Catholics that are trying to change the Church from within, and groups who are pressuring    the Church to modernize from without, are to be applauded, but there won't be any change until Catholics have a more liberal Pope--more liberal than the current one. Don't hold your breath.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 09, 2006, 01:01:44 PM
brokebacktom--
oops, I meant I meant that the Church is patriarchal, not hierarchical.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: JohnnyX on September 09, 2006, 03:37:29 PM
brokebacktom--
oops, I meant I meant that the Church is patriarchal, not hierarchical.

Jer009: My feelings are that it is BOTH.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: brokebacktom on September 09, 2006, 05:05:04 PM
Jer009--

THANKS for sharing. I too agree with JohnnyX its BOTH. Boy, leaving the Church at a young age, it must have been hard. For me, I started to question the Church when I was in High School. Again thanks for sharing your story.

Tom
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Jer009 on September 10, 2006, 12:58:03 AM
brokebacktom--
Gee, high school must have been tough. Teenagers have enough of a hard time without being ostracized because of religion or lack of it. If you want to share any stories, please do.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 10, 2006, 03:01:58 PM
Lola and brokebacktom--

I have almost no memory about the details, it was so long ago. But  I think I was about 11. I don't know if I'm mis-remembering. I don't know many 11-year olds who have an opinion on abortion.

But I remember it was AFTER my first communion, because I remember it was treated as a very big, deal and everybody made a big fuss. I had to wear a suit, there were pictures taken.

Some time after that--I don't know how long--I learned about the Church's stand on abortion. It seemed to me that it was the woman's body and it was her choice.

The point is, I left the Church at an early age. I have since watched the Church continue down the path of homophobia, and it confirms I made the right decision in leaving.

Well first communion is Grade 2 (at least that is when my boys had it) and yes there are suits and ties and it is a big deal.  Confirmation is Grade 8, that is also a big deal.

I think that is when kids really become aware and maybe start to question.   I couldn't see it after first communion, but definitley after confirmation. 

By High School (grade 9) they are trying to figure it all out.  My son never really questioned much until late high school years and college and university.  And of course the more science he learned, the more he really questioned.

My kids have never lost their faith, but did lose some faith in the Catholic church, I think there is a big difference in those two things.


As for abortion, I think it is wrong, very wrong, but at the same time I don't necessairly think the decision to have one or not should be taken away from me.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: john john on September 10, 2006, 03:45:34 PM
The province of Quebec(Canada) lived through what was to be called the "Quiet Revolution" during the fifties and sixties. Us French Canadians where repressed by the wealthier English speaking minority (we were told to "speak white"!) and governed by a fundamentalist Catholic government. To simplify things I would say that under the pressure the French majority just plain dropped the Catholic church like a rock in sign of protest. The city of Montreal was said to be the Steeple City it had so many churches, they have been empty and crumbling ever since, a lot of them are now condos. The French left the Church and took control of the economy and the governments that followed established separation of church and state. The church leaders lost all credibility as did the Pope. I know of no one that is religious around me. I am old enough to remember those hard times and will not even consider putting any religion back in my life. What we lived through in those days (without violence) is exactly what should now happen in the the other fundamentalist states around the world. If people leave the church in protest for controlling their ever thought and action there will be no more oppression. Being made to feel guilty for who we where backfired in the face of the condescending and controlling Catholic priests. We are now the dominant French majority trying our best to survive another battle, the acceptance of the religious rights of immigrants who bring with them the ghost of our past, unfair,sexist,controlling religions.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 10, 2006, 04:23:14 PM
Well first communion is Grade 2 (at least that is when my boys had it) and yes there are suits and ties and it is a big deal.  Confirmation is Grade 8, that is also a big deal.

I honestly don't think I ever had "faith" in god or the church. Even as a kid the whole thing just seemed bizarre to me, but I do remember being in church at age 8 and thinking "this is all nonsense". I was in a catholic primary school then and we had to pray several times a day, which really bugged me, but I didn't have much choice as it was either speak up or get punished. Both my sister and I refused to go to a private catholic secondary (high school) though, and instead we were put in a public school.

As for abortion, I'm for it. If either of the parents don't want the child, especially the mother, I don't think it should be born, and possibly live a life of being resented, poor, addicted, or whatever negativity it may inherit for being unwanted in the first place. So the law should definitely allow, if not actively encourage, abortion in anything but a loving family.

I do think the father should have a say in it, however, not only the mother, at least where the situation is one with the parents in a relationship.

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 10, 2006, 04:41:56 PM

I do think the father should have a say in it, however, not only the mother, at least where the situation is one with the parents in a relationship.


Can't agree with that one, it is the womens body and ultimatley her final decision. I know that sounds unfair and maybe it is, but I can't see it any other way.

I feel bad for a man who wants to keep a child and the women wants rid of it, but I can't muster up much sympathy for a man who says get rid of it, when the women decides to keep it.

As for faith, I think your parents faith is a big influence.  We were religious, so were all their friends and their friends parents, so they never knew any other way to be.

Like I said now that they are grown they do question "organized religion" but not their faith in God.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 10, 2006, 05:18:30 PM

I do think the father should have a say in it, however, not only the mother, at least where the situation is one with the parents in a relationship.


Can't agree with that one, it is the womens body and ultimatley her final decision. I know that sounds unfair and maybe it is, but I can't see it any other way.

I feel bad for a man who wants to keep a child and the women wants rid of it, but I can't muster up much sympathy for a man who says get rid of it, when the women decides to keep it.

That's a typical woman's point of view, and I'm not going to debate it with you. :)
But it's probably the main reason I refused to father children in the past (when I was asked) because they only wanted my sperm and not my involvement, and I said "no".

Quote
As for faith, I think your parents faith is a big influence.  We were religious, so were all their friends and their friends parents, so they never knew any other way to be.

My grandmother was a devout Roman Catholic (Portuguese), she used to walk around the house before we went to bed as kids with her rosemary beads and holy water and chase away any evil spirits who may have its eyes on her grandchildren. And my mother was devout too until she met my father, who had lost any and all faith in a higher power after three and a half years in a Japanese POW camp during WW2.

So when we refused to attend another catholic school they let us believe what we wanted. Something I am most grateful for because we would have clashed over that.

Vic
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 10, 2006, 05:24:56 PM
Yep it is a woman's point of view.  ;)   And just like I said the Parents do influence, much more than a Grandparent ever could.  Things may have been different, if your Dad had different ideas.  I am assuming you came along, after your Mom met your Dad! lol
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 10, 2006, 05:34:13 PM
Yep it is a woman's point of view.  ;)   And just like I said the Parents do influence, much more than a Grandparent ever could.  Things may have been different, if your Dad had different ideas.  I am assuming you came along, after your Mom met your Dad! lol

Yes, I'm the youngest of the lot.

I really don't think it would have made much difference. My father let my mother have her way with the church thing until he noticed we weren't interested. He was a quiet man, I don't remember him speaking one way or another about it, really. But he was all for free choice. He was also the only one that never ever made a negative remark about me being gay. It didn't matter to him in the least. I was his son and that was all there was to it.

I went to church occasionally with friends and family until I was about 12, then I put a definitive stop to it. Never liked people telling me what to do and this guy up front sending everyone to hell for the littlest thing wasn't something that interested, nor frightened, me very much. So I sent him to hell and never looked back. ;)

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 10, 2006, 05:55:38 PM

I went to church occasionally with friends and family until I was about 12, then I put a definitive stop to it. Never liked people telling me what to do and this guy up front sending everyone to hell for the littlest thing wasn't something that interested, nor frightened, me very much. So I sent him to hell and never looked back. ;)

Vic
 

That doesn't sound like a Catholic church, at least not one I ever attended.  My kids never knew fire and brimstone stuff.  I remember once they saw Billy Graham on TV and he scared the crap out of them! lol

I guess we have been lucky, they always had wonderful Priests, people they could relate to and talk to, non judgemental.  Of course my kids are alot younger than you and me, these are different times...........I hope.  And as I say, I can only speak for my church in my town, can't speak for everyone everywhere and their experiences, good and bad.

I know from this thread some people have had horrid experiences, that makes me very sad.
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Vic on September 10, 2006, 06:02:04 PM
Since we're talking about it, I remember earlier encounters with the RCC. At age 6 we had moved to Spain for a while and there I was put into a typical Spanish RC school with priests/teachers. Not understanding the language, and ever the defiant one, I was repeatedly caned (until my father came to the school to grab this teacher by the neck literally), so I wasn't very interested in this RC thing from a very early age, and, as I grew older and understood more, I soon lost interest altogether.

Vic
 
Title: Re: Non believers who love Brokeback Mountain
Post by: Lola on September 10, 2006, 06:14:23 PM
Since we're talking about it, I remember earlier encounters with the RCC. At age 6 we had moved to Spain for a while and there I was put into a typical Spanish RC school with priests/teachers. Not understanding the language, and ever the defiant one, I was repeatedly caned (until my father came to the school to grab this teacher by the neck literally), so I wasn't very interested in this RC thing from a very early age, and, as I grew older and understood more, I soon lost interest altogether.

Vic
 

That sounds old school.  No one would cane one of my kids and live to tell about it.  I am 47 and I remember going to school in Europe, I was 5 or 6 and my earliest memories (in a public school, my Parents were Protesant) was of kids getting the strap and the ruler across the