Alchemist,
So you believe stable society should be founded on changing opinions and values of scientific theory: your own theory being the best practise that could eventually prove to be fantacy. If shift in scientific opinion happens to be your foundation for social behaviour; then allow those who prefer a stable definition of the psychological sciences to hold their opinions. Whose’ scientific opinion is keeping you updated? I happen to believe in the unchanging Designer of a changing universe who said 600 BC about man that empirical knowledge would increase (Daniel 12: 4), not the latest theory.

“Directional Evolution”
1. Is there ordered rational unfolding or random mutational developments in the genes?
2. Is all new ideas a progressive improvement in intellectual theory and experiential knowledge and temporary absolute?
3. Is there conscious life in level 4 beyond the present?

How did you form this view?
1. Taught by others past opinions / theory
2. Came by personal intuition, a hunch you felt to be right today
3. A conclusion drawn by empirical stable scientific research
4. Is your desire to be right merely a fantacy?

Will the human genome reach the 4th dimension before human abuse or an asteroid destroy the earth? Does the Christian teaching of the higher human consciousness for the righteous pure, in the eternal spiritual afterlife, compare?

Is evolution an unfolding of latent power from within the human genome to higher conscious life form or random accidental mutations; if so then I suggest you stand back and let it just happen directionally or randomly. Otherwise you are imposing intellectual design to change a natural evolutionary direction. You are causing change in direction by Creatorial design. Let it happen! Do not concern yourself with religious fanatics they will pass and your kind will reign supreme in a 4th dimension, or your kind will impose their view on all latent developers.

When we know the opinion you are advocating we can evaluate and critique it as an answer to the conflicting opinion of the human condition. However, beware you may be vilified as an unstable deluded fruitcake

David,
I totally agree with your last post. Excellent! Atheists assume they are the only ones with the right way, all the truth and the ultimate enlightenment.

Quotes like this,"It is like trying to communicate with concrete - does being religious mean being losing the ability for critical thinking?" Critical thinking?

“Unstable deluded fruitcake?”

It’s difficult to be reverent while giggling, sorry. I feel that if the legislation will simply provide a forum the equivalent of this thread, then yes get rid of it

Been fishing. Made a loaf of unleavened bread (organic) fish on toast, fed the crew drank some Tasmanian wine, had to try and stop laughing. It is enlightening when the religious provide us with their best moral and ethical outbursts, enabling us to understand where they are firmly stuck. Note, the examples of their moral teachings, always resorting to violence, semantic or physical. Thats why we are about to suffer another religious war.

Explaining to the religious what possibilities may lay before us, is impossible. An ordered society is one that should be based on evolving understanding, not questionable fantasy. It also should be based on the acceptance of difference and not enslavement to violent fallacies.

Theoretically it's reasonable to assume that our universe may be a drop of water falling from a tap, when it hits the ground, the universe we know may just splatter. This fall from the tap may take in our concept of time, billions of years. In the concept of time from the taps dimension, it may be one second. I am not saying that this is true, but it is more theoretically possible than someone who doesn't exist, that preaches love peace and harmony, yet within the example provided by its follows, it is filled with hate, violence and all manner of immoral acts against the life forms of this planet. Not very progressive or ethical.

Good fun, drawing out the reality of how the religious really do express themselves and implement their beleifs, just like fishing, dangle the bait and they bite ferociously.

Dear god, or Jesus, please come back and rescue all your follows, and take them to heaven. So that they may share with you and each other, their example of the good life you offer them.

Signed, unstable, deluded fruitcake,(organic, with lots of fruit, nuts and wholemeal grains).

PS, By the way, fruitcake is the most popular cake in the world, made in most countries and provided for most festive occasions, because of its variety, taste and ability to bring pleasure to those that indulge in it

I'm w/you hutlen. Anyways 'ere's another little kernel for the thread.

Seems there’s a small group here who love to dish it out but can’t take it. They want freedom to cast aspersions on other religions and belief systems, but, as Xena has clearly demonstrated, can’t take it when their own belief system is criticised.

Looks like I’m going to be ‘presumptuous’ again, here’s another couple of quotes from Gandhi.

(For the intellectually challenged – my previous post was about religion in general – not a specific religion – the following refers to religion in general too. And BTW ‘reason’ has not been demonstrated hence the post).

Therefore I submit the following from the wisdom of Gandhi.

I hope this is self explanatory – don’t have time to spell it out.

“A religion that takes no account of practical affairs and does not help to solve them is no religion.”

And here’s another one for people who are swift to anger as a result of their arrogance

“Anger is the enemy of non-violence and pride is a monster that swallows it up.“

Now I guess the 'fruits' will slap my wrist again.

Aaaahh freedom of speech gotta love it.

This is unmitigated hogwash Alchemist - too much Tasmanian wine?

I have no difficulty in accepting differences of opinion.

Rather, it seems you are the one having the difficulty in accepting that the religious might have an opinion they wish to express and will not be cowered by the kind of bullyboy tactics you and your fellow lazy God haters like to employ. The only posts "filled with hate" and "violent fallacies" appear to be those of your own and fellow GHs.

It sometimes helps to read what you've written before you post it, but perhaps you enjoy rhetorical flourishes - saves you the effort of actually, thoughtfully, interacting with your opponent.