www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - I am dying and fuking hate it

reply "Tony" <tonytech08 gmail.com> writes:
I am afraid
Nov 16 2008
parent reply Marcin Kuszczak <aarti_please_no spam_interia.pl> writes:
Tony wrote:


 I am afraid


Well, I am not sure what you mean with your posts. Are you so frustrated with
this news group ;-)

In case if it's more serious...

Few weeks ago I lost my quite a close friend. He was only 37, had a great
family with 5-years old son. And his life ended unexpectedly. No one had even
thought that it might happen, but one day he started to complain about pain in
ears. The same day afternoon he died from stroke. Me and my other friends from
church were shocked by this death. 

We are living our lives day by day, achieving goals, fighting, working,
thinking, weeping and it seems to us that it is our mission, so we have to do
make it in such a way... But is it really all what can we expect? And who
promised us that we will have another day to discover why we are here. It's
good to remember that everyone here on this newsgroup will die someday,
although we prefer not to think too much about it. 

I know where my friend is currently. He did good decision someday in his life. 

Just in case you would like to get into it more:
please visit my website: http://www.zapytajmnie.com
I consider the part titled "Christian?" as the most important. You might want
to read it. In case you have more questions just drop me an e-mail (removing
please_no_spam from address).

-- 
Regards
Marcin Kuszczak (Aarti_pl)
-------------------------------------
Ask me why I believe in Jesus - http://www.zapytajmnie.com (en/pl)
Doost (port of few Boost libraries) - http://www.dsource.org/projects/doost/
-------------------------------------
Nov 16 2008
next sibling parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Hello Marcin,


 Tony wrote:
 

 I am afraid
 


 Well, I am not sure what you mean with your posts. Are you so
 frustrated with this news group ;-)
 
 In case if it's more serious...
 
 Few weeks ago I lost my quite a close friend. He was only 37, had a
 great family with 5-years old son. And his life ended unexpectedly. No
 one had even thought that it might happen, but one day he started to
 complain about pain in ears. The same day afternoon he died from
 stroke. Me and my other friends from church were shocked by this
 death.
 
 We are living our lives day by day, achieving goals, fighting,
 working, thinking, weeping and it seems to us that it is our mission,
 so we have to do make it in such a way... But is it really all what
 can we expect? And who promised us that we will have another day to
 discover why we are here. It's good to remember that everyone here on
 this newsgroup will die someday, although we prefer not to think too
 much about it.
 
 I know where my friend is currently. He did good decision someday in
 his life.
 
 Just in case you would like to get into it more:
 
 please visit my website: http://www.zapytajmnie.com
 
 I consider the part titled "Christian?" as the most important. You
 might want to read it. In case you have more questions just drop me an
 e-mail (removing please_no_spam from address).
 



I'm assumed it was an alias hijacking or sock puppetry.  This seems to happen 
here once in awhile, especially against those who have voiced a different 
opinion on D :P.  But I suppose you never know...

This is one things I'm learning too; people aren't always what they present 
themselves to be online.  Everyone has a very fragile life, with problems 
and suffering; taking offense too easily is not useful or productive here. 

The truth is that we are all dying (faster or slower than others), and it 
is good to consider what this means, ultimately... and to be ready to encourage 
those around us who are bearing this burden or are weakened by the thought 
of it.  Life is indeed short.

Marcin, my condolences to you for the loss of your friend.  May you, your 
family, and his family find calmness in the storm.

All the best,

John
Nov 16 2008
parent reply BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to John,


 we are all dying (faster or slower than others), and it is good to
 consider what this means, ultimately... and to be ready to encourage
 those around us who are bearing this burden or are weakened by the
 thought of it. Life is i
 


I'm to young to be this cynical but:

"In the long run we are all dead."
--John Maynard Keynes

http://www.bartleby.com/66/8/32508.html

(the firefox google wigit gives that quote as the first suggestion for "In 
the long", what does that say about people?)
Nov 16 2008
parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Hello BCS,


 Reply to John,
 

 we are all dying (faster or slower than others), and it is good to
 consider what this means, ultimately... and to be ready to encourage
 those around us who are bearing this burden or are weakened by the
 thought of it. Life is i
 


 I'm to young to be this cynical but:
 



He he.  Well, I think it's less to do with being too young and more to do 
what you have seen and experienced.  My statement was not meant to sound 
cynical, so much as realistic.  I might have said the same as you if it were 
not for my previous background as a paramedic for almsot 9 years.  

In contrast to other parts of the world, I think the majority of North
Americans 
have been relatively sheltered from the effects of it.  Perhaps most people 
give it as little thought as possible.




 "In the long run we are all dead."
 --John Maynard Keynes
 http://www.bartleby.com/66/8/32508.html
 
 (the firefox google wigit gives that quote as the first suggestion for
 "In the long", what does that say about people?)
Nov 16 2008
parent reply BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to John,


 Hello BCS,
 

 Reply to John,
 

 we are all dying (faster or slower than others), and it is good to
 consider what this means, ultimately... and to be ready to encourage
 those around us who are bearing this burden or are weakened by the
 thought of it. Life is i
 


 I'm to young to be this cynical but:
 


 He he.  Well, I think it's less to do with being too young and more to
 do what you have seen and experienced.  My statement was not meant to
 sound cynical, so much as realistic.  I might have said the same as
 you if it were not for my previous background as a paramedic for
 almsot 9 years.
 
 In contrast to other parts of the world, I think the majority of North
 Americans have been relatively sheltered from the effects of it.
 Perhaps most people give it as little thought as possible.
 


That is, in fact, exactly what I was referring to. That someone as young 
as me (OTOH I'm not that young any more) is as much a cynic as I am even 
in as nice a country and with as nice a life as I have say something about 
the world at large.
Nov 16 2008
parent John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Hello BCS,


 Reply to John,
 

 Hello BCS,
 

 Reply to John,
 

 we are all dying (faster or slower than others), and it is good to
 consider what this means, ultimately... and to be ready to
 encourage those around us who are bearing this burden or are
 weakened by the thought of it. Life is i
 


 I'm to young to be this cynical but:
 


 He he.  Well, I think it's less to do with being too young and more
 to do what you have seen and experienced.  My statement was not meant
 to sound cynical, so much as realistic.  I might have said the same
 as you if it were not for my previous background as a paramedic for
 almsot 9 years.
 
 In contrast to other parts of the world, I think the majority of
 North Americans have been relatively sheltered from the effects of
 it. Perhaps most people give it as little thought as possible.
 


 That is, in fact, exactly what I was referring to. That someone as
 young as me (OTOH I'm not that young any more) is as much a cynic as I
 am even in as nice a country and with as nice a life as I have say
 something about the world at large.
 



Oh right.  I see what you were saying now.

-JJR
Nov 16 2008
prev sibling parent reply Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
Marcin Kuszczak wrote:

 Tony wrote:
 

 I am afraid


 
 Well, I am not sure what you mean with your posts. Are you so frustrated with
this news group ;-)
 
 In case if it's more serious...
 
 Few weeks ago I lost my quite a close friend. He was only 37, had a great
family with 5-years old son. And his life ended unexpectedly. No one had even
thought that it might happen, but one day he started to complain about pain in
ears. The same day afternoon he died from stroke. Me and my other friends from
church were shocked by this death. 
 
 We are living our lives day by day, achieving goals, fighting, working,
thinking, weeping and it seems to us that it is our mission, so we have to do
make it in such a way... But is it really all what can we expect? And who
promised us that we will have another day to discover why we are here. It's
good to remember that everyone here on this newsgroup will die someday,
although we prefer not to think too much about it. 
 
 I know where my friend is currently. He did good decision someday in his life. 
 
 Just in case you would like to get into it more:
 please visit my website: http://www.zapytajmnie.com
 I consider the part titled "Christian?" as the most important. You might want
to read it. In case you have more questions just drop me an e-mail (removing
please_no_spam from address).
 


Ah yes, another example of the always-popular "kick 'em while they're 
down" method of religious conversion.

(As if the original post was anything but spam)

  - Gregor Richards
Nov 16 2008
next sibling parent John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Hello Gregor,


 Marcin Kuszczak wrote:
 

 Tony wrote:
 

 I am afraid
 


 Well, I am not sure what you mean with your posts. Are you so
 frustrated with this news group ;-)
 
 In case if it's more serious...
 
 Few weeks ago I lost my quite a close friend. He was only 37, had a
 great family with 5-years old son. And his life ended unexpectedly.
 No one had even thought that it might happen, but one day he started
 to complain about pain in ears. The same day afternoon he died from
 stroke. Me and my other friends from church were shocked by this
 death.
 
 We are living our lives day by day, achieving goals, fighting,
 working, thinking, weeping and it seems to us that it is our mission,
 so we have to do make it in such a way... But is it really all what
 can we expect? And who promised us that we will have another day to
 discover why we are here. It's good to remember that everyone here on
 this newsgroup will die someday, although we prefer not to think too
 much about it.
 
 I know where my friend is currently. He did good decision someday in
 his life.
 
 Just in case you would like to get into it more:
 
 please visit my website: http://www.zapytajmnie.com
 
 I consider the part titled "Christian?" as the most important. You
 might want to read it. In case you have more questions just drop me
 an e-mail (removing please_no_spam from address).
 


 Ah yes, another example of the always-popular "kick 'em while they're
 down" method of religious conversion.
 
 (As if the original post was anything but spam)
 
 - Gregor Richards
 



Yes, it is most likely a spam post, but  you don't know that for sure, do 
you?

I'm sorry?  "Kicking 'em while they're down" ?  You must have been exposed 
to some harsh tactics such that you presume some fairly nefarious motives.... 
motives which you are unable to determine for yourself; nor does your biased 
position allow you to acertain clearly.  It looked very much like empathy 
to me, something you appear to lack.  Shall I postulate on your motives as 
well, Gregor?

You, of course, are entitled to your opinion.  But, if this were, for some 
"inconceivable reason", a cry for help (in a public forum, no less), you 
yourself could not have shown better that you "could care less".

We, unfortunately, have a difficult task.  If we don't say anything... we 
apparently don't care.  If we do say something... we must have evil  motives.

The best you accomplish Gregor in saying this is continuing the fear-mongering 
of what you perceive all "religious" behavior constitutes.  If you are worried 
about religious control tactics, I would pay careful attention to the tactics 
you yourself use to belittle, deride and embarass others.  It all comes from 
the same source... a determination to force people to think the way you think 
they should think.  I believe Marcin was attempting to offer a person the 
opportunity to seek of their own freewill outside this list.  There was no 
force or control in it at all, just a desire to encourage.

Perhaps I made a mistake in writing this publicly, and in the future should 
take this off list.  If this is the case, I encourage people to respond telling 
me to do so.  I apologize if this was considered an offensive post.

Later,

-JJR
Nov 16 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to Gregor,



 Ah yes, another example of the always-popular "kick 'em while they're
 down" method of religious conversion.
 
 (As if the original post was anything but spam)
 
 - Gregor Richards
 


If you ignore the actual suggestion and read it just as "Here's what I find 
helps in situations like that" there is nothing at all to object to in what 
you are objecting to. (If you have a hard time seeing that, compare it to 
someone suggesting a link to a bar directory.) So you must be objecting to 
the content. OK, well do you have any suggestions to make? Anything you can 
suggest I can probably come up with a way to claim offence about. So all 
that's left is to say nothing, and I can find fault with that as well.

Now I'll concede that the "kick 'em while they're down" approach does happen 
(and is wrong), but it's usually phrased more like "Your an evil person and 
you're suffering because of it". What was said looked nothing at all like 
that to me.
Nov 16 2008
prev sibling parent reply Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
Gregor Richards wrote:

 Ah yes, another example of the always-popular "kick 'em while they're 
 down" method of religious conversion.
 
 (As if the original post was anything but spam)
 
  - Gregor Richards


I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants to 
convert, they probably know where to get more information on how to do 
so. Additionally, mentioning religion in a forum such as this is an 
invitation for a flame war that does no one any good and never serves to 
convert anyone to a religion.

Still, your post seems likely to incite more flame.
Nov 16 2008
parent reply BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to Christopher,


 I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants
 to convert, they probably know where to get more information
 on how to do so.


I agree that trying to *force* religion on anyone is wrong. However, inviting 
someone to explore it (and that's all I saw) is not.


 mentioning religion in a forum such as this is an
 invitation for a flame war



Oddly, here it doesn't tend to become a flame war, just one of The Epic OT 
Debates. (requiter plug for a digitalmars.ot NG)
Nov 16 2008
next sibling parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Hello BCS,


 Reply to Christopher,
 

 I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants
 to convert, they probably know where to get more information
 on how to do so.


 I agree that trying to *force* religion on anyone is wrong. However,
 inviting someone to explore it (and that's all I saw) is not.
 


Perhaps the OP is getting a real kick out of this discussion already. ;-)

Here's my "little" analysis of the situation.  It's full of speculation and 
philosophizing and no proselytizing! ;)  Coming from me, most of you know 
what to expect, so take it or leave it.  I tried to be as circumspect as 
possible. :)

The OP was doing one of three things:

(1) was drunk and posted to the newsgroup in an unhappy state (Not a joke! 
This could happen)
(2) was an alias hijacker hoping to incite debate for "no good reason" but 
to watch some fireworks
(3) was trully seeking help

IF and only IF (3) was the case, this plea for help, in my estimation, was 
warranted a response from whomever (even at the risk of looking silly if 
it were spam), and I believe Marcin did it in a very non-intrusive and
circumspect 
manner.  In fact, no one seemed to notice that this was an opportunity for 
Marcin to deeply empathize his own hurt with another.  I consider that quite 
insensitive.  Even more so, given that there have been so many incidences 
of filthy innuendo and swearing that goes without comment here, it seems 
inconsistant that one is jumped on as soon as he tries to encourage another 
in a way that has made sense to him.  I wish I could quote previous posters 
that said something like "if you don't like, don't read it."  This is not 
a response I agree with, but I think it would be fair to turn that statement 
back on such a poster. :)

Now given that, the fact that a few here find it distasteful to respond in 
any manner nebulously referred to as "religious" even if the help is called 
for, I asume the correct response in most cases is to respond privately if 
that is possible.  Since, in many cases, email addresses are not valid in 
this newsgroup, then a simple post as above seems practical.  

There will always be elements that are offended by anything said because 
our cultural climate has been primed to incite social wariness between what 
is typically segregated into "secular" and the "religious".  Frankly, our 
days are sorrily riddled with examples of individuals using religion for 
a vehicle for control tactics on people, probably since it's one of the easiest 
ways to capture a mass mindset; so I understand the precident for that line 
of thinking.  But I submit that this is /not/ necessarily because of the 
content of religion (although for some religions, it is very much so), but 
because, if a certain number of people tend to think a certain way, it is 
easiest for a controlling element to adopt and maneuver based on current 
mindsets rather than to change minds; this really should be referred to as 
a sort of mass hijacking where people can be maneuvered /a little/ from there 
original ideas to believe the controlling elements extensions to it.  

I propose that the modern secular world is just as subject to this
psychological 
influence and exercises it just a readily through media, education systems 
and politics.  I cry foul when I hear it being leveled singularly on the 
religious institution.  Use of such an argument is control tactic in itself 
because it is an argument of convenience and rhetoric with no rigourous
continuity. 
 Control is effectively abused within whichever ideologies are culturally 
significant for the time.  This is the nature of the human mind, and we are 
all, to different degrees, susceptible to it.  More independent minded
individuals 
are often spurned and rejected from social structures.  While this "rejection" 
may seem like a tendancy of "controlling" religions only, nothing could be 
further from the truth (I would call that a popular myth).  You will see 
it in scientific communities, academic systems, and politics... where the 
non-conformists are pushed out, derided, rejected for various forms of
"thinking" 
differently.  Some are pushed out for valid reasons, others are pushed out 
because they refuse to follow the popular vote or speak out against /popular/ 
thought processes (eg in scientific communities).  

Related question: is the idea of democracy, where the majority is always 
"right", a valid system of determining law or leadership?  And the corollary: 
Does democracy really exist when control elements such as the media have 
unprecidented influence on the mass of people or where significant funding 
is the basis of political visibility?  Does the democratic process closely 
parallel the laws of logic in terms of validity of a majority's vote? 
Disclaimer: 
this question should not to be taken as an opinion for or against democracy. 
 It is just a musing on the ultimate effecacy of it.

Now, I do not deny that their are huge abuses of control in religion, nor 
will I support such abuse of control structures... but this necessarily depends 
on the definition of such a "control" structure because many religions exercise 
no more control than your average secular, academic, scientific, or political 
community, including all relevant psychological tactics such as peer pressure 
and social stereotyping and rejection.  Some sort of "control" structure 
will always be part of every system -- we see it in every aspect of life, 
government, science, and society.  You can't escape it.  Students wouldn't 
get their degrees without it. On the lower level, we wouldn't have operating 
systems, compilers, word processors, scientific machinations, personnel
management, 
or anything without a control structure.  The same will apply to the
application 
of worldviews and society.

Since this is probably obvious to most people, I think the main accusation 
against any attempt to share a worldview with another is the risk of
psychological 
intimidation or abuse; this is, I believe, the implied meaning of Gregor's 
accusation.  This will always be a matter for debate when the topic of
worldviews 
and morality/ethics comes into play, where perhaps the secularist will accuse 
the "religious" element of using physcological intimidation as a /motive/ 
for conversion (may be true in situations, but is a dangerous hasty
generalization 
for all situations), while the "religious" element throws back the accusation 
by saying the secularist intimidates by derision and deprecation of any that 
adopt the "religious" element.  While some control elements will indeed abuse 
religion this way, I want to emphasize that this is not an intrinsic part 
of the Christian faith itself, and thus to accuse one of such motivation 
is implicitly bigotted since the person appeals only to his own experience 
and completely disregards an objective observation of a given situation. 
 We're all clouded with such tendancies, and it should be in everybody's 
interest to keep as clear-headed as possible in such situations.  I try hard 
to do so myself.

And thus any accusation based only on bias against a worldview is necessarily 
invalid and disingenuous, although I do recognize the major precident for 
the train of thought that thinks this way.

In summary, I mainly take issue to those who make hasty generalizations about 
the relationship of religion and psychological control on society... since 
you can find just as many "control tactics" in different "so-called" secular 
and philosophical systems, politics, and bodies.  There is indeed huge abuse 
in the area of religion and control, but it's irrational to see it reduced 
souly as a biproduct of it when it really exists across all worldview barriers 
in alarming proportions; if this is true, then it most certainly isn't a 
bi-product of the idea of religion; it is an element intrinsic to the human 
condition.  The psychology of it is everywhere, and the abuse of it repeats 
itself over and over throughout history.  



 mentioning religion in a forum such as this is an
 invitation for a flame war


 Oddly, here it doesn't tend to become a flame war, just one of The
 Epic OT Debates. (requiter plug for a digitalmars.ot NG)
 


LOL! ... I tend to agree with that last statement.  A flame strikes me as 
name-calling fest. I'm hoping there will be less and less of it here whatever 
the discussion.

-JJR
Nov 16 2008
parent reply "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"John Reimer" <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:28b70f8ce3c28cb162db563ba40 news.digitalmars.com...

 Hello BCS,


 Reply to Christopher,


 I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants
 to convert, they probably know where to get more information
 on how to do so.


 I agree that trying to *force* religion on anyone is wrong. However,
 inviting someone to explore it (and that's all I saw) is not.


 Perhaps the OP is getting a real kick out of this discussion already. ;-)

 Here's my "little" analysis of the situation.  It's full of speculation 
 and philosophizing and no proselytizing! ;)  Coming from me, most of you 
 know what to expect, so take it or leave it.  I tried to be as circumspect 
 as possible. :)

 The OP was doing one of three things:

 (1) was drunk and posted to the newsgroup in an unhappy state (Not a joke! 
 This could happen)
 (2) was an alias hijacker hoping to incite debate for "no good reason" but 
 to watch some fireworks
 (3) was trully seeking help


I thought the same things. But I'm a bit...weird...and also had a fourth:
(4) was in the middle of a failing stand-up comedy routine. (hey, it could 
happen! ok, maybe not...)

Also, I know I probably shouldn't, but I'm going to have to take the 
reference to methods of religious conversion as an opportunity to point out 
the way that I..."found Jesus": http://www.normalbobsmith.com/findjesus/  (I 
don't think it would be offensive to anyone religious or otherwise, it seems 
good-natured enough. Apologies if you are offended.) After all, it's not 
like I'll ever find a more relevant opportunity to link to that on a 
programming language newsgroup.

Sorry I don't have anything more constructive (or at all constructive) to 
add to this conversation... :(
Nov 16 2008
next sibling parent "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> wrote in message 
news:gfqvu8$1lsq$1 digitalmars.com...

 "John Reimer" <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote in message 
 news:28b70f8ce3c28cb162db563ba40 news.digitalmars.com...

 Hello BCS,


 Reply to Christopher,


 I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants
 to convert, they probably know where to get more information
 on how to do so.


 I agree that trying to *force* religion on anyone is wrong. However,
 inviting someone to explore it (and that's all I saw) is not.


 Perhaps the OP is getting a real kick out of this discussion already. ;-)

 Here's my "little" analysis of the situation.  It's full of speculation 
 and philosophizing and no proselytizing! ;)  Coming from me, most of you 
 know what to expect, so take it or leave it.  I tried to be as 
 circumspect as possible. :)

 The OP was doing one of three things:

 (1) was drunk and posted to the newsgroup in an unhappy state (Not a 
 joke! This could happen)
 (2) was an alias hijacker hoping to incite debate for "no good reason" 
 but to watch some fireworks
 (3) was trully seeking help


 I thought the same things. But I'm a bit...weird...and also had a fourth:
 (4) was in the middle of a failing stand-up comedy routine. (hey, it could 
 happen! ok, maybe not...)


The paranoid in me would also like to add:
(5) was conducting an informal psychology experiment.

I actually am half serious about this one but admit that the likelyhood is 
extremely slim, particularly compared to the first three.


 Also, I know I probably shouldn't, but I'm going to have to take the 
 reference to methods of religious conversion as an opportunity to point 
 out the way that I..."found Jesus": 
 http://www.normalbobsmith.com/findjesus/  (I don't think it would be 
 offensive to anyone religious or otherwise, it seems good-natured enough. 
 Apologies if you are offended.) After all, it's not like I'll ever find a 
 more relevant opportunity to link to that on a programming language 
 newsgroup.

 Sorry I don't have anything more constructive (or at all constructive) to 
 add to this conversation... :(
Nov 16 2008
prev sibling parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Hello Nick,


 "John Reimer" <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:28b70f8ce3c28cb162db563ba40 news.digitalmars.com...
 

 Hello BCS,
 

 Reply to Christopher,
 

 I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants
 to convert, they probably know where to get more information
 on how to do so.


 I agree that trying to *force* religion on anyone is wrong. However,
 inviting someone to explore it (and that's all I saw) is not.
 


 Perhaps the OP is getting a real kick out of this discussion already.
 ;-)
 
 Here's my "little" analysis of the situation.  It's full of
 speculation and philosophizing and no proselytizing! ;)  Coming from
 me, most of you know what to expect, so take it or leave it.  I tried
 to be as circumspect as possible. :)
 
 The OP was doing one of three things:
 
 (1) was drunk and posted to the newsgroup in an unhappy state (Not a
 joke!
 This could happen)
 (2) was an alias hijacker hoping to incite debate for "no good
 reason" but
 to watch some fireworks
 (3) was trully seeking help


 I thought the same things. But I'm a bit...weird...and also had a
 fourth: (4) was in the middle of a failing stand-up comedy routine.
 (hey, it could happen! ok, maybe not...)
 



Yeah, I guess there's always a few more options in there, eh? :)



 Also, I know I probably shouldn't, but I'm going to have to take the
 reference to methods of religious conversion as an opportunity to
 point out the way that I..."found Jesus":
 http://www.normalbobsmith.com/findjesus/  (I don't think it would be
 offensive to anyone religious or otherwise, it seems good-natured
 enough. Apologies if you are offended.) After all, it's not like I'll
 ever find a more relevant opportunity to link to that on a programming
 language newsgroup.
 



That link unfortunately demonstrates (perhaps accurately) how (non)seriously 
the modern American Christian community is taken, especially in light of 
modern television evangelism and the prosperity groups where pastors compete 
for the largest congregations.  It's become insipid, cheep, weak, and
hypocritical. 
 While I'm sorry to see it represented this way and believe the truth behind 
it is much more real than is demonstrated in many modern churches today, 
I do understand why it would be lampooned this way.



 Sorry I don't have anything more constructive (or at all constructive)
 to add to this conversation... :(
 



I guess I'll survive. :)

-JJR
Nov 16 2008
next sibling parent "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"John Reimer" <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:28b70f8ce4828cb164ea7d841c0 news.digitalmars.com...

 Hello Nick,


 "John Reimer" <terminal.node gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:28b70f8ce3c28cb162db563ba40 news.digitalmars.com...


 Hello BCS,


 Reply to Christopher,


 I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants
 to convert, they probably know where to get more information
 on how to do so.


 I agree that trying to *force* religion on anyone is wrong. However,
 inviting someone to explore it (and that's all I saw) is not.


 Perhaps the OP is getting a real kick out of this discussion already.
 ;-)

 Here's my "little" analysis of the situation.  It's full of
 speculation and philosophizing and no proselytizing! ;)  Coming from
 me, most of you know what to expect, so take it or leave it.  I tried
 to be as circumspect as possible. :)

 The OP was doing one of three things:

 (1) was drunk and posted to the newsgroup in an unhappy state (Not a
 joke!
 This could happen)
 (2) was an alias hijacker hoping to incite debate for "no good
 reason" but
 to watch some fireworks
 (3) was trully seeking help


 I thought the same things. But I'm a bit...weird...and also had a
 fourth: (4) was in the middle of a failing stand-up comedy routine.
 (hey, it could happen! ok, maybe not...)



 Yeah, I guess there's always a few more options in there, eh? :)



 Also, I know I probably shouldn't, but I'm going to have to take the
 reference to methods of religious conversion as an opportunity to
 point out the way that I..."found Jesus":
 http://www.normalbobsmith.com/findjesus/  (I don't think it would be
 offensive to anyone religious or otherwise, it seems good-natured
 enough. Apologies if you are offended.) After all, it's not like I'll
 ever find a more relevant opportunity to link to that on a programming
 language newsgroup.



 That link unfortunately demonstrates (perhaps accurately) how 
 (non)seriously the modern American Christian community is taken, 
 especially in light of modern television evangelism and the prosperity 
 groups where pastors compete for the largest congregations.  It's become 
 insipid, cheep, weak, and hypocritical. While I'm sorry to see it 
 represented this way and believe the truth behind it is much more real 
 than is demonstrated in many modern churches today, I do understand why it 
 would be lampooned this way.


Many of the people who disagree with christianity (or western religion in 
general) don't consider such groups to actually be part of those religions 
in the first place. As such, the exploitative groups that pretend to be part 
of a particular religion have often become a bit of a straw man in the 
counter-arguments against those who argue against religion. (No offense 
intended).

But that said, I'm not going claim that there are or aren't other good 
counter-arguments against those who argue against religion, or overtly state 
which side I'm on, because I've engaged in such discussions before (both on- 
and off-line) and the end result is always somewhere between nobody 
convincing anyone of anything and everyone's feathers getting ruffled.

As for the specific link, it's really just a play on words, I'm not sure I'd 
read quite so much into it. Heck, my mother comes from an irish-catholic 
background, and even she found it more funny than anything. *shrug*.


 Sorry I don't have anything more constructive (or at all constructive)
 to add to this conversation... :(



 I guess I'll survive. :)

 -JJR
Nov 17 2008
prev sibling parent Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
John Reimer wrote:

 That link unfortunately demonstrates (perhaps accurately) how 
 (non)seriously the modern American Christian community is taken, 


Bah! No good pun should go unsaid, however irreverent. :P
Nov 17 2008
prev sibling parent dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> writes:
== Quote from BCS (ao pathlink.com)'s article

 Reply to Christopher,

 I sympathize with your dislike of proselytizing. If someone wants
 to convert, they probably know where to get more information
 on how to do so.


 I agree that trying to *force* religion on anyone is wrong. However, inviting
 someone to explore it (and that's all I saw) is not.

 mentioning religion in a forum such as this is an
 invitation for a flame war


 Oddly, here it doesn't tend to become a flame war, just one of The Epic OT
 Debates. (requiter plug for a digitalmars.ot NG)


I think part of the problem is that most educated people from, say, the U.S.,
and
most of the Muslim world, are a bit ticked off about the way religion is mixed
with politics in their countries.  I believe that some have come to see religion
as a "mistreat women, gays, people with unconventional lifestyles, etc. because
God says so" club.  While frustration at people who abuse their religion to
justify intolerant political policies is understandable, it's a shame when this
frustration is taken out on *all* religion.
Nov 16 2008