Offshoot discussion of "what religion are you" thread

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Before the thread is completely overrun by nudity (all fine and proper, mind you, but not the subject for this particular thread ), I'll jump in, and say that I would recommend Matrix quite heartily. A very good movie....
WARNING: The following text will doubtless sicken some.

Some say that the guy who wrote it was a Christian, and in a way it is allegorical to a Christian viewpoint. I don't know if this is true or not, but I can definitely see similarities.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by RÃ*an

EG - Is Matrix worth seeing?

YES!
There's lots and lots of philosophy and religion in it. There are minor problems of some extraneous romantic material, but aside from that, and the rather long fight scenes, it's great

Gwai, I think you could probably apply The Matrix to many religions and philosophy. Buddhism and Christianity are just two obvious examples. I can't speak for the writers/directors (the Wachowski brothers), but I got the impression that their intention was not to make it allegory for any particular religion, or make it part of any sort of philosophy, but to make references to them all.

Okay, I know this is rather off-topic, but hey, it's sort of about religion...did you notice all the references to mythology and religions? Like the more obscure ones? There was Persephone, from the Greeks, but that was REALLY obvious, especially to anyone who knows her story, but there was also Kali, the Hindu death/destruction/chaos Goddess Among others. Of course. Ok, this really belongs in the Matrix thread...sorry!

[Rían]

Thanks, EG and Gwai, I'll go see it!


*still chuckling over "helck"*

Billy Joe - "Hey, Bobby Joe, that new preacher's slicker than snot on a doorknob!"

Bobby Jo - "Yup, Billy Joe - we're goin' to helck in a handbasket!"


Or perhaps it should be Sven and Lars - "helck" sounds rather Nordic....

[Artanis]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Or perhaps it should be Sven and Lars - "helck" sounds rather Nordic....

You know, there is actually a town in Norway called 'Hell'.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
WARNING: The following text will doubtless sicken some.

*reads spoiler, then vomits* Well, that wasn't much of a warning! Thanks a lot!

I agree with EG, I thought the dance/sex scene was too long and too much. Could have done without it. Or at least, cut it a bit shorter, please. The fight scene was a bit long... Agent Smiths coming out of every door and opening... eek! like cockroaches.

Artanis: LOL! A town called Hell.... Bwaahahahahaha!!! Interesting. *imagines conversation: "Where do you live?" "Hell" "lol, no really?" "Hell" "*sigh* FINE! DON'T TELL ME!!! *walks away*" * funny!

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Um....there wasn't a sex scene in Matrix...

[Ruinel]

No... I assumed she meant Reloaded. There was one in Reloaded. You haven't seen it?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

No, not yet. Though it's on my "to-see" list.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
No, not yet. Though it's on my "to-see" list.

Knowing your chasteness I can only imagine you would have your hands over your eyes during the sex scene anyway.

[Rían]

How funny, Artanis!

"I'm just going to pop over to Hell for lunch - wanna join me?"

How do you say "Hell" in Norwegian?

by Ruinel
I thought the dance/sex scene was too long and too much...

Reminds me of a funny commentary I read about police shows on TV - one of the comments was that every investigation will at some point end up involving strippers or a nude bar!

by EG
Did you notice all the references to mythology and religions?

I'll have to keep an eye out for that - thanks for pointing it out.

Well, my in-laws car is all better, my father-in-law has recovered (nasty little food-poisoning episode - gotta watch those hole-in-the-wall Korean BBQ places - the rest of us were fine, but he's really susceptible to salmonella and got terribly sick), and they're heading back home - SKIVVY TIME!!

And I'm planning to try to finish up the discussion on Hell (NOT the one in Norway) after lunch, if I can.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
How do you say "Hell" in Norwegian?

As in English.
See pictures from Hell here.
I was wrong in calling it a town though, it's a village.

So you see, going to Hell isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[Ruinel]

oooh.. I want to go to helvetet.

[Rían]

OK! Enough fun and games for me! Time to finish EG's question (to the best of my limited brainpower)

------------------------------------


The final angle I want to discuss here, about the topic of hell, is justice and a rightful abhorrance of evil.

And I'm afraid I'm going to have to RE-quote EG's thoughts, because it's been a few pages since I quoted them and meant to get to them that day *sigh* (isn't there some pithy saying about the road to helck being paved with good intentions? )

some quotes from EG, with reference numbers added by me
4) So, your scenario with the serial murderer/pedophile. The very idea of that makes my skin crawl, but for this reason: I cannot comprehend the kind of horror that would inflict. I don't want that happening to me, therefore I don't do it to others. Golden Rule of sorts. Nobody deserves that kind of abuse, and everyone deserves their life, once they are a semi-independant being (ok please no abortion debates here! ). So, yes, that person should be punished.

(5) However, human society has priority in the punishment as we have built a society on general principles of trying to make said society work. (NOT moral principles, in my view.) So that theoretical person should be punished by society for breaking the law which is there to protect the rights of citizens, thus making society work.

(6) I do not, however, believe that this person should be killed...rather, imprisoned and perhaps made to think on their actions.

(7) Something like that. I have my own personal beliefs in addition, but since those sorts of beliefs are, especially in our society where we have freedom of religion, our own and therefore the punishment should be left to society as a whole and not simply to God, karma, the devil, or whatever else may be out there.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

YAY, more answers! *grin*

Now I just hope I'm in a decent enough mental state to comprehend what you're writing, which I'm afraid I haven't been these past few days

[Rían]

I see several themes in your post, EG -

from (4) - I'm glad to hear that that scenario makes your "skin crawl"! I sure hope that is the reaction of everyone that reads this. Obviously, it's NOT the reaction of the person that does these types of things (or possibly, to be generous, and to cover all possibilities, it might make his skin crawl, but the desire to do it is stronger. And again, these people are considered "abnormal", so "normal" must be YOUR reaction, EG! ).
And I think you are right to say that those types of action inflict "horror". Again, I hope everyone here would agree, and I think they do. You said that you don't want these types of things happening to you. Why? Because, among other reasons, they are horrific.

from (5) - Yes, I agree about laws and society. However, in addition, it's good for PEOPLE to NOT have horrible things inflicted on them, totally apart from what it does to society.

To make the point a little clearer, let's take away the murder part and leave the rape of the child. Now, the child has not died, so that horrible action won't hurt society, right? It only hurts the child. You may point out that society will be hurt because the child was traumatized by the event; well, that just makes my point again - why was the child traumatized? Because it was a horrible thing to have happened to him/her. So you cannot say that "the good of society" is the only driving force here - there is also a "good of a person" thing involved. Besides, I think that every law that is good for society is also good for the people, individually, that make up society. (they may not be fun - like jury duty is not fun - but they are for the GOOD of people and society).

from (6) - I won't get into level of punishment here, because it doesn't really matter - what DOES matter, and what you DO see (and I agree with you), is that the person should be punished. And what's really interesting, and what I don't often see, (and what I agree with! ) is your thought that somehow the person should be made to reflect upon what he/she has done.

from (7) - Again, WHO doesn't really matter to me at this point; it's that you see that SOMEONE or SOME ENTITY should punish the creep.


Any thoughts? I'll continue tomorrow. Sorry, it somehow got quite late again! (The Entmoot time warp effect in action again! )

[Rían]

Hey, EG, I see you're on now, too! I really need to get off now, but I wanted to call to your attention that I re-worded parts of my comment on (5) to make it a little clearer - would you please re-read it?

I'll look forward to your comments tomorrow

ps - did you sail this weekend? Was the wind cooperating this time?

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Okay, ready to reply!
Nothing extraordinary or all that philisophical, because it's late and I've had a long day (okay not that bad but oh well) but here goes. And I like the numbering system so I'll use it. Oh, and I apologize for taking up so much space quoting, but it makes it easier on me!

Originally posted by RÃ*an
I see several themes in your post, EG -

from (4) - I'm glad to hear that that scenario makes your "skin crawl"! I sure hope that is the reaction of everyone that reads this. Obviously, it's NOT the reaction of the person that does these types of things (or possibly, to be generous, and to cover all possibilities, it might make his skin crawl, but the desire to do it is stronger. And again, these people are considered "abnormal", so "normal" must be YOUR reaction, EG! ).
And I think you are right to say that those types of action inflict "horror". Again, I hope everyone here would agree, and I think they do. You said that you don't want these types of things happening to you. Why? Because, among other reasons, they are horrific.

from (5) - Yes, I agree about laws and society. However, that means that it is GOOD for people/society to NOT have horrible things inflicted on them.

To make the point a little clearer, let's take away the murder part and leave the rape of the child. Now, the child has not died, so that horrible action won't hurt society, right? Or WILL it hurt society? You may point out that society will be hurt because the child was traumatized by the event; well, that just makes my point again - why was the child traumatized? Because it was a horrible thing to have happened to him/her. So you cannot say that "the good of society" is the only driving force here.

4. I suppose it is the majority feeling in our society that what this hypothetical person does is "wrong."
Yes, they are horrific, partly because of the suffering going on as it happens, but also because the person suffers for the rest of their life, from the emotional/mental (and physical!) harm this person has caused. Okay, so we agree on this point. Good.

5. Hmm. I'll call this 5a. A bit of nit-picky stuff first: Are you putting words in my mouth--er, post? Because I don't think I said the word "good." *please don't take this as me getting defensive. i'm not. it just seemed the only way to say what i meant. nothing more, am not mad at you or anything * So, it makes society work, but I would like to avoid using words like "good" and "bad," because that implies a moral view, which I'm not using for my side of this debate.
And here is where I go on a tangent about morality and the "good" of society: Making society work is not necessarily "good." We assume it is, because, we as a species generally want the species to continue. That's just nature. And people harming each other in terrible ways, like in your example, don't help society.
Okay, on to the rest of (5)...
If the child was not murdered, but left alive, that could be quite harmful...if not even more harmful...to society than murdering said child. Because if left alive, as I said before, the experience will have a strong negative impact on the child's mental and emotional health. This could cause much leftover trauma later in life, and there are many ways this child's case could go from there: For one, if this child was brought up in a generally abusive environment, he/she could grow up to visit the same horrors upon other children, because this is how the child learned to act. Alternately, the child could grow up with some serious trauma that could affect the way he/she lives his/her life in many other ways. The point is, it's not just murder that harms society. It is still not "healthy" for the society as a whole for such things to happen. Thus I can say it is "for the good of society," though I'd prefer to use a word other than good

Will continue on the next post...I'm getting close to the limit!

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Here's the rest:

from (6) - I won't get into level of punishment here, because it doesn't really matter - what DOES matter, and what you DO see (and I agree with you), is that the person should be punished. And what's really interesting, and what I don't often see, (and what I agree with! ) is your thought that somehow the person should be made to reflect upon what he/she has done.

from (7) - Again, WHO doesn't really matter to me at this point; it's that you see that SOMEONE or SOME ENTITY should punish the creep.

6. YAY! Agreement!
I see punishment less as a deterrent to crime (because, I in my pessemistic way, I believe there will always be crime...) and more as something personal for the person committing the crime. (Another reason I oppose the death penalty, but that's another subject...heh...) I think punishment is more about society exacting vengeance and making someone consider their faults, than anything else. The vengeance bit is partly because personal quests for vengeance don't seem to work so well (this is just my experience) but also because that person has caused harm not just to an individual, but to society as a whole, by harming one person. Does this make sense? And more importantly, do you think I'm being consistent with what I've said before? Because often I find I'm contradicting myself.

7. Well, I'll say again, I think that's society's place, but I'm sure on this point we can agree to disagree (Yes, the person should be punished. I have no doubt in my mind of that. But the person has harmed society, so society should punish them. I suppose you could say that the person has also harmed God, and I could even fish up an argument to back that statement (not that I'd believe it) but I guess that's another matter of its own. Or am I missing something? I dunno, I guess it all comes down to the existance of god, but then, if society punishes the person, who cares what happens in the afterlife? Because they'll either be punished again for their actions or they won't. Hmm, more on this later, it's getting late...)

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
(3 continued)

Your analysis is simplistic in another way, too, IMO - you're saying that whatever God commands is "good". I would say that whatever God commands is "right" and "just" and "the perfect choice for the situation" - it is "good" in THOSE senses, and not in a silly, fluffy type of meaningless "good" sense. In THIS case, what was commanded was also sorrowful, but because of the free will that God has, in His wisdom, allowed us, it was necessary. I would NOT use "good" for this situation, because I think the meaning of the word is not adequate for the situation, esp. the common, popular meaning.

Would you please reconsider your view that it's a simple subject, and look up Wayfarer's posts? He had quite a few posts on this subject, and I think they were very good. I can add some more thoughts next week, too, if you would like me to.

(4) I can, and I did

I've been busy for a while - SARS, or the precautions against-has hit us pretty heavily- but I want to get back to this.

Not to be overly simplistic, but as far as I can see you are saying that killing helpless women and children and sending young girls into slavery is "right " and "just" and "the perfect choice for the situation".

Sorry, I've been looking for Wayfarer's posts- are they on this thread?- haven't found them- but would SOMEBODY please explain how this is not simple?? All I hear is that this is deep, or not simple- nobody says how or why.

"Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men."

To me, this is no problem- it's the records of a pastoral tribe sweeping out of the desert and taking the cities of a more settled people, and following the usual massacre, pillage and rape, declaring that their tribal God justified it all.

Situational ethics: you are a warrior of Israel; you confront a Midianite mother holding her baby boy to her breast.

You kill the mother, who brings contamination to Israel; you pick up the baby.

What do you do? C'mon, no dodging the choice: this time, according to your God , you should splatter his brains against the rocks.

Rian says go for it- how about you???

[Rían]

Hey, GrayMouser, nice to see you back! Sorry about the SARS problems I think the precautionary measures will help to stop the spread of SARS, but what a MAJOR pain for everyday life!!!

BTW, did you see my post immediately after the one you quoted from? I think it is so very important to this subject that I will REQUOTE it here for you:

by RÃ*an on another thread, to GrayMouser's Numbers 31 topic
And re the pregnant women - do you think abortion should be legal? If 'yes', go to 1; if 'no', go to 2.

1. Then please don't use the example of 'pregnant women' for a cheap emotional effect, since you think it should be legal to kill a baby growing inside a pregnant woman. (please skip 2 and go to 3)

2. I'm so glad you realize what a terrible thing abortion is. (please go to 3)

And my option 3 was to take the discussion to this thread. So which choice did you select?


And I would be happy to talk about this topic, but like I've said before, I don't intend to give snappy, simplistic answers to complex subjects. I don't think that approach is fair to either the person asking or to the topic. So others, go ahead if you want to and talk about this, but I won't be able to get to it until after I finish EG's discussion on hell, then IP and Hobbit's questions. Do you want to table your discussion until then, GrayMouser? Shall I PM you when I'm ready to discuss yours? Or would you like to go back a few pages and jump into the hell discussion? I would enjoy hearing your input on that topic.

Here's the beginning of where we really jump into the discussion on hell : start of topic. It starts on what I have as page 60 (your settings may be different).