theworldofdreams.com

Joram Lionheart wrote:Unlike you Bayn, I don't regularly engage in metal masturbation (you seem to be quite the expert, though).

Perhaps you mean mental stimulation? Initiating personal attacks on Bayn does not attest your position, in fact it derides you.

simon wrote:

Joram Lionheart wrote:Unlike you Bayn, I don't regularly engage in metal masturbation (you seem to be quite the expert, though).

Perhaps you mean mental stimulation?

No I meant to say it like that. Those are his words not mine. He accused me of doing that on another post.

Where can I ascertain that statement at?

simon wrote:Where can I ascertain that statement at?

If you don't believe me, go through his posts and check. I'm not about to do the work for you now, would I?

Joram Lionheart wrote:

simon wrote:

Joram Lionheart wrote:Unlike you Bayn, I don't regularly engage in metal masturbation (you seem to be quite the expert, though).

Perhaps you mean mental stimulation?

No I meant to say it like that. Those are his words not mine. He accused me of doing that on another post.

Joram, Joram, Joram. What ARE we going to do with you?

This is the relevant section of my post:

Didn't say that either, Joram. You really need to learn to look at things objectively and accurately. I said that religion cannot really be argued seriously because it involves faith. When you start doing that it isn't a "serious" argument, it is mere mental masturbation.

I see that you took the generic "you" as meaning "Joram". I remarked that you need to look at things objectively and accurately. I then clarified my statement that religion cannot be argued seriously because it has to involve faith and when "you" engage in that it is mere mental masturbation.
*sigh*
You always walk around with a chip on your shoulder? Where does this insecurity come from? You, meaning you personally, really should chill out, pray, meditate, take your medication regularly, find some inner peace, something!

Joram Lionheart wrote:

2)To protect subordinates from bosses who may allow religious biases to interfere with how they treat the people they supervise.

Huh? First of all, not everyone is the boss. Usually there's only a few people with the power to fire/hire someone. Secondly, what you are saying amounts to implying that bosses should have no religious biases (i.e. no religion). Yes, bosses should be atheists, but then atheists have a bias too. For that matter EVERYONE IN THIS PLANET has a bias. Does that mean they shouldn't be the boss of anyone?
You can't stop a person from being biased anymore than you can stop a human from making mistakes. You can try to ensure the person is not making biased decisions but the fact that I believe in God and I'm open about it shouldn't automatically disqualify me from holding a position of power.

I don't know about the claim that bosses would in effect have to have no religion but a situation where a boss were to tell thier workers "Everyone who does not pray to my god first thing every morning when they get in will be fired." would clearly be unacceptable.

::sits back and masterbates::
Funny thing is, I am accomplishing more than all of you by actualy going hands on!
Bottom line, if faggs, homos, queers, gays, or to be politicaly correct, the heterosexualy challenged, want to pump each others behinds, or play with each other in pleasant stimulating ways, what if anything does it have to do with you or anyone else so long as they do it in their own private rooms? Hey watching two guys make out sickens me beyond your imagination! but, watching two chicks do it turns my motor faster than a 500 shot of nitrous. What is marriage but a piece of paper and a title? Is this America or some other dictatorship?
Well that was a stupid question lol so long as King George is in charge. It's kinda like the FCC and their new crap, if you don't like what's on the tube or radio, guess what, there is this fantastic feature known as the on/off switch! Hell I bet you could even change stations to something you do like!! Intolerant assholes are what makes it hard to live life in any society. It was so much simpler when everyone hated whites or blacks I tell ya, where are the good old days!! Just remember, if not for the lesbian community, we would have hardly any of the realy great porn we have today!

HATE, the perfect family value!!

Yes you dumb idiots this was satire, with a spattering of irony for seasoning.

He's Baaaaaaaaaaccccckkkkk!


hehe

Eldric wrote:I don't know about the claim that bosses would in effect have to have no religion but a situation where a boss were to tell thier workers "Everyone who does not pray to my god first thing every morning when they get in will be fired." would clearly be unacceptable.

This again strikes at the issue of forcing versus allowing. What if the boss likes to pray first thing in the morning (by himself or with other people who'd want to join him) should he (they) be prohibited from doing so? I've seen people get infuriated and blow blood vessels because someone's said to them "I'll pray for you, brother (or sister)." It is wrong to force people to practice religion against their will (Jesus would have never tried to do this). But I believe it is also wrong to force people not to display any trait of religiosity because they dislike their God/religion. In this age of cultural acceptance and tolerance, of diversity and "celebrating" one's culture, why should we try to prevent people (in thought and/or actions) from displaying their religious practices? If Jesus got a job at walmart, how long do you think he would last? (not to mention Buddha, Mohammed, etc)

Joram Lionheart wrote:This again strikes at the issue of forcing versus allowing. What if the boss likes to pray first thing in the morning (by himself or with other people who'd want to join him) should he (they) be prohibited from doing so?

uh yeah?

wouldn't it make those who don't join look dumb?

Forgive me everyone, I am having a hard time using the quote button when quoting several things in the post. These quotes are Joram's.

What if your religion requires you to pray verbally (and there's a few that do)?

Then I suppose I would go ahead and pray verbally if I didn't feel too self-conscious about it.

And what does "pushing it on someone else" constitute?

Handing out Bible tracts, banging on your door, threats of Hell...

If I decide to pray outside my classroom, how is that pushing it on someone else?

I never said it was.

If you don't like what I'm saying you don't have to listen to me. Heck you don't even have to look at me.

Absolutely. It is not against the law for a student to pray verbally in school. The Community College and public high school I attended both had Christian Youth Organizations. And I graduated in 1991...not 1951.

If you want your kids to pray the mormon prayer, send them to mormon Bible school.

Exactly. If you want your kids to be led in prayer in school, pick a school of the denomination of your choice.

And yet no one is discouraging (more like prohibiting) political talk in the work place. You see the blatant double standard? You can say whatever you want about Republicans and Democrats, but God forbid (no pun intended) that the name of God ever comes up.

Joram, when I gave the reasons listed for disallowing religious discussion in the work place, I was just trying to imagine why the companies you have worked for had those policies. I have had over 10 employers in my life so far, and I have had discussions about both religion and politics with no ill effects or prohibitions. I don't know where you live or work, but I haven't encountered this "God Prosecution" that you seem so worked up about. Perhaps it is your approach when speaking to people?

Huh? First of all, not everyone is the boss. Usually there's only a few people with the power to fire/hire someone.

I have heard about Pagans losing their jobs because a boss found out from a co-worker that they were not a good Christian. Not everyone needs to be the boss, Joram, for the boss to find out.

Secondly, what you are saying amounts to implying that bosses should have no religious biases (i.e. no religion).

Joram, if you are going to tell ME what I am saying, please, do try to get it right.

I said one reason it makes sense not to discuss your religion at work is because, like it or not, some people are biased and will potentially use it against you. Now you have me advocating Atheism.
That is quite a leap.

You can't stop a person from being biased anymore than you can stop a human from making mistakes.

No, you can't. My point is that you can stop giving them ammo. This reminds me of the wannabe Wiccans who cry about being persecuted by Christians in the workplace. My philosophy is if you look like a goth freak covered in pentacle jewelry and act like a complete new age nut at work, don't cry when people think you are a flake.

the fact that I believe in God and I'm open about it shouldn't automatically disqualify me from holding a position of power.

If it does, find a new job. Bush is openly Christian...which position of power does your faith prevent YOU from holding?

They apply universally to ANY instance where religious issues are being dicussed. It doesn't matter if it's going on between two consenting adults, or that both parties are willing to engage in that conversation. If a third party (which is none of his/her damn business anyway)overhears you talking about God, you can very well be fired from your job.

I don't personally know any Christian who has lost a job for discussing religion with someone who wanted to discuss it.

I disagree.

You are entitled to.

Nia Atei wrote:I don't personally know any Christian who has lost a job for discussing religion with someone who wanted to discuss it.

I do.

Joram, I agree that no law should prevent ANYONE from worshipping WHATEVER deity they want, as long as no one else is forced to.

The Law says we have freedom of religion. Law is upheld (or not) by biased humans. In a perfect world, maybe, we could all get past our prejudices. Until then we all have to live together and just deal with the world as it is. If that means not discussing religion at work (in your case), either don't do it, or find a job with a boss who doesn't care.

Nia Atei wrote:If it does, find another job. Bush is openly Christian...which position of power does your faith prevent YOU from holding?

I don't have the Republican party, the Christian right, and millions of dollars in contributions and personal assets to back me up. Forgive us if not all of us have the same financial and public influence to pursue the kind of life we'd like to lead. I thought this was the land of opportunity and freedom, I guess I was wrong.
For all your defense of homosexuals and how they're not hurting anyone, you certainly have a narrowminded view on religious rights.

Joram Lionheart wrote:This again strikes at the issue of forcing versus allowing.*snippage*

Cool, more points of agreement

Allowing is great, forcing is bad.

Nia's point read to me that it was important to protect people from boss bias based on the bosses religious beliefs, your disagreement seemed to indicate that protection was not important. IE someone could be fired for not following the bosses faith and that would be fine.