Temple-making money

[vbelle]

Exactly...some people abusing religion as a way to get money..
You can get to heaven by paying God..
And "bless" those people who believe that is the case
If priests were selling penitentiary (is this the right word?) letter few centuries ago..well...others also doing the same now, in different form.

A friend of mine was going to donate money some time back, and i asked her if she have check that they actually channel the money to those who needs it..and she said: as long as i have the right intention...if those people abuse the money..then at least i have done my share..sigh....

[prkravi]

[quote="vbelle"] as long as i have the right intention...if those people abuse the money..then at least i have done my share..sigh....[/quote]

This is very common, I would like to term it - Washing away the Guilt and Responsibility.

Or should I say, Transferring the guilt, to someone else. The moment someone says - "My intentions were good, not yours" the person is actually shifting responsibility and guilt on to the other. And in most cases the person at the receiving end, has no remorse he doesnt care as long as the money keeps pouring in...its his income you see?

So who is at fault? The Conner or the Connee? I says - CONNEE!! its your responsibility to not get conned! and encourage people who con.
(I doubt if Conner / Connee exist in the dictionary though)

So now VBelle, do you think it was the Temple that had put up all those Menu items at fault or is it the People who patronised it and induced this idea in the temple?

[sundaymorningstaple]

You can get to heaven by paying God..

All I want to know is......is there anybody who has come back to let us know it works? Yep, an that's why religion is the biggest con job in history and it's still ongoing.

[vbelle]

So now VBelle, do you think it was the Temple that had put up all those Menu items at fault or is it the People who patronised it and induced this idea in the temple?

Both parties I'd say...one for manipulating others and one for not thinking...


And SMS..

no one has ever come back and tell us it works..indeed

Religion always causes debate..
As a scientist...i shouldnt refer myself as one ;p.. but as someone who studied science..as much as many things in religion dont make sense..you also return to that point where you have no answer of what started the whole world and universe..

So, The truth is out there..
somewhere

[sundaymorningstaple]

..you also return to that point where you have no answer of what started the whole world and universe..

And that's the silliness of it to me, I could care less. Who cares who started the party? You can't change it. You gonna complain to someone because you were forced to go?

[Wind In My Hair]

LOL Judging by my last credit card bill it does corroborate the idea that God created man in his own image.

LOL It also proves that God is a woman

Your assertion is moot to atheists.

But not moot to a theist

[JR8]

You can get to heaven by paying God..

All I want to know is......is there anybody who has come back to let us know it works? Yep, an that's why religion is the biggest con job in history and it's still ongoing.

'Climate Change' has got to be right up there...

[scarbowl]

Well, at least there is some evidence to debate when it comes to climate change.

[Mary Hatch Bailey]

You can get to heaven by paying God..

All I want to know is......is there anybody who has come back to let us know it works? Yep, an that's why religion is the biggest con job in history and it's still ongoing.

'Climate Change' has got to be right up there...

Climate change is a well-documented and scientifically undisputed phenomenon. The last ice age (and all the others) are evidence of climate change.

[JR8]

All I want to know is......is there anybody who has come back to let us know it works? Yep, an that's why religion is the biggest con job in history and it's still ongoing.

'Climate Change' has got to be right up there...

Climate change is a well-documented and scientifically undisputed phenomenon. The last ice age (and all the others) are evidence of climate change.

Okey dokey I'll rephrase that...

The 'antropogenic climate change industry' has got to be right up there...

[nakatago]

'Climate Change' has got to be right up there...

Climate change is a well-documented and scientifically undisputed phenomenon. The last ice age (and all the others) are evidence of climate change.

Okey dokey I'll rephrase that...

The 'antropogenic climate change industry' has got to be right up there...

climate change is real. man definitely had a hand in it. carbon credits, "green" certifications, and all those buzzwords, however, are one big sham. leave it to mankind to fubar things, even abstract ones.

[JR8]

Words like 'definitely' are used by politicians not scientists

[nakatago]

Words like 'definitely' are used by politicians not scientists

that doesn't even make sense

[JR8]

Words like 'definitely' are used by politicians not scientists

that doesn't even make sense

Oh dearie me, here we go! It makes sense to me...

Scientists carrying out research rarely come out with sweeping conclusions that something is definite. I'd suggest that they are more likely to use phrasing like 'It appears probable', or 'Our work suggests' and so on. That is because a piece of research is always open to other scientists debunking it in future, therefore by definition one cannot claim it it definite.

I think this applies even more so where you not looking at what has happened (i.e. fact based), but are modelling and projecting into the future. You are doing no more than making predictions, and one definite is that they can never be definite, you are dealing with probabilities.

Now consider politicians. They are going to get no traction and make no headway if they come out and announce ‘Research suggests that there is a 50-65% probability that carbon dioxide is a contributing factor in climate change and therefore we need to raise trillions of dollars in new taxes from you to attempt to avert the possibility that that is correct’. Between the scientists and politicians the probabilities morph into absolutes and imperatives. The IPCC reports are a good example of that whole linguistic journey taking place in a single document, the front section being a briefing document for politicians.

I recall about 5 or so years ago, when David Miliband was the UK Climate Change Secretary he appeared on a politics discussion show and was absolutely adamant that man made climate change was a bullet-proof fact. He used phrases like ‘The science is settled’, ‘the causes are beyond dispute’, ‘there is total consensus in the scientific community’, none of which of course could be true. I looked on pretty stunned. Basically this language is designed to immediately close any debate, to not allow a scientific possibility to be considered as just that, i.e. something open to debate and testing. It is saying ‘Look, it’s a fact, now moving on this is how we intend to address this fact’.

Not too long after that I came upon a paper from a UK think-tank called the IPPR. It was unashamedly a briefing document for politicians on how to sell the climate change issue to the public. As I recall it was written communications psychologists. There sure enough was one section on what language, words and phrases, to use and there was ‘definite, settled, consensus, beyond question, everybody agrees’ and so much more. I wish I could find it again as it was a master-class in selling something very expensive to a sceptical customer. Another thing it repeated, ‘If you state enough times that man-made climate change is unquestionable’, eventually the audience will believe that to be true.

Sorry for rambling on so long, I hope my comment is a little clearer now

[JR8]

Here is a link to a one page summary of the paper, that will give you a pretty good flavour. If you dig around on the site anyone particularly interested will be able to find the whole document downloadable for free...
http://www.ippr.org.uk/pressreleases/?id=2240