Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (73805)	7/22/2001 8:08:46 PM
From: IngotWeTrust	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116862

E. Charters...may I ask a clarification? Please differentiate for me YOUR definition(s) of "religion" and YOUR definition(s) of "spirituality?" I frankly believe, in so doing, you will find that Rarebird is now and has consistently held to his self-descriptor of being "Non-religious." However, he has claimed in other places what his religious preferences are, with education being one, and I forget no, what the other one was, but I believe it to be "knowledge." However, all that being said, I fervently believe Rarebird has a great level of spirituality that is true to his core. So, when I read Rarebird's "religious commentary postings" --which BTW are seldom without tie-in's to the topic of gold, FWTW---and I keep in mind the his "religion definition" and the clarion differences between religion and spirituality, one can hear the man speak clearly and perhaps garner food for thought instead of fostering animous and defensiveness. None of us on this thread should ever be taken out of historical context FWIW... and he has a long and fascinating contributory history on this thread! Just a "golden" thought--- Also, FWIW, I'm not sure "most of the US" shares his opinion, because, FWISA, most of the USA has used religious practices and bigotry in the name of God [Version 2001.07] and hasn't stopped to think just what "religion is" and spirituality is and come down on one side of the other... and... BTST (<---by the same token) I'm further assured that the majority in the USA does NOT give a flying fig about the POG But, to take the point and stretch it to include a conclusion that all religious peoples in the USA do NOT care about the price of Gold is a false hypothesis. Reminds me of the old saw: What is red and goes "ding-a-ling?" A bell? No, sorry, but you're close...it's a red ding-a-ling Okay, so What is silver and goes "ding-a-ling?" I s'pose a silver ding-a-ling. YES, y'er right. Good one! Okay, last one: What's red and silver and goes "ding-a-ling?" Okay, A red and silver ding-a-ling! Nope, BZZZZZZZz, wrong answer... It's a firetruck, silly! Same difference. We have POG ding-a-lings We have GATA ding-a-lings We have Derivative ding-a-lings And we have.... firetrucks. Selah. gold_tutor I suppose a silver

To: E. Charters who wrote (73805)	7/23/2001 1:58:31 AM
From: Rarebird	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116862

<I am sure it is source of constant irritation.> Not in the least. The problem with you is that you assume too much. That is to say, you think you know when you don't know. Religious Tolerance for me is not a grudging acceptance of that which is fundamentally intolerable, as it appears to be for you. I'm tolerant of Christianity because I view it as a viable option within a humane orientation. Why? Lots of people don't have the courage, intelligence or character to become spiritually self-reliant and truely independent. Everyone can't be a brain like you, Charters<g>. To be sure, Christianity is based on a premise that cannot be proven scientifically. But the humanistic position is likewise based on a premise that can not be scientifically proven to be true. I would refer you here to the paper I posted: Message 16112760 <the only way to reconcile such fundamental differences is to outlaw religion as too dangerous to practice in a peaceful society> I thought about this when I was a teenager. Sure, it's inhumane the way Muslims and Hindus, Catholics and Protestants have treated each other. But you can't outlaw religious faith. As a humanist, what I do is try to get people to realize that their faith just represents one of many viable ways to look at the world. There are a great majority of Christians on the East and West Coast who realize that their Faith may be wrong; but they still continue to believe. Christianity is the desire for an eternal happiness. In itself, I see nothing wrong with that. I think it is possible to be religious and humane towards others. The problem arises when Religious Faith becomes Absolute Knowledge and Certainty and it forms political and social coalitions like the "Moral Majority", which wants to transform others into its own image and values. <are you saying minority opinions are unpopular and therefore wrong?> No, not necessarily. That would depend on the opinion. There was a majority opinion in Nazi Germany, where Hitler was elected by Democratic means. So, a majority opinion here was clearly morally wrong and was fought against with lethal weapons.