Dinner for two at Calico's restaurant on Beale street. (eat in only, gratuities not included)
On Jun 27, 8:07 am, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > What do I win? > > On Jun 26, 4:05 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You don't have to beg, lol. > > OK! You win. {;-] > > > On Jun 26, 3:44 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I beg to differ Sir Slip. Vicious, heavy, flagitious, heinous, > > > iniquitous, irreclaimable, irredeemable, unredeemable, unreformable, > > > nefarious, villainous, peccable, peccant, obscene, vile, > > > reprehensible, extremely wicked, deeply criminal, horrible, wicked ... > > > Each of these terms are easily recognizable by any and all of us and > > > determine to one degree or another the degree of badness an act or > > > person has achieved all on their own. > > > > Terms such as evil, sinful, ungodly, of the devil, satan, malefic, > > > having or exerting a malignant influence, malevolent stars, a malefic > > > force and a slew of others imply a degree of badness lower than can be > > > imagined and strongly implies the existence of a supreme being and a > > > supreme villian of which we are mere pawns in need of forgiveness and > > > redemption. > > > > It just seems to me that the human species has labored long enough > > > under the yoke of guilt and worthlessness that our religions heap upon > > > us. For those who counter with the rapture that allegedly captures > > > some of the faithful, remember that it takes blind belief and faith in > > > a supreme being in order to achieve that rapturous state of bliss. > > > I'm sorry but did someone once say that ignorance is also bliss? > > > > We do not need a supreme being to tell us what is good and bad. We > > > can figure it out on our own if for no other reason than that we're so > > > good at it -- being bad that is. So let's take Christ, Muhammad, > > > Buddha, Krishna, and all the other manifestations and put them in > > > their proper place in the well-illuminated handsomely decorated corner > > > display hutch of ancient worships and begin to deal with things on an > > > even playing ground. Anyone who brings in god or any of it's minions > > > is automatically disqualified. There is only one rule that is > > > needed. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The worse > > > someone does you the badder they are and vice versa. > > > > On Jun 26, 7:09 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Exactly, the degrees of which something is good or bad, happy or sad > > > > etc. There are other words that describe these degrees. A person > > > > who wins lotto might not just be happy but elated, ecstatic or > > > > exhilarated. So what word describes, in your world, the worst of the > > > > bad? Is there such a thing as an evil deed that is not religiously > > > > affiliated? Maybe I've been disassociated with religious context for > > > > so long I don't get the religious slant. I tend to put more religious > > > > emphasis on words like diabolic or satanic. Evil to me is worst than > > > > wickedness. I do agree that religions have instituted much > > > > ecclesiastical subjugation throughout history which by their very > > > > nature could be interpreted as evil (as they define it), however I > > > > wouldn't assign the word evil exclusively to religious entities in our > > > > time. It's just another word for me. > > > > > On Jun 25, 6:53 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Just as nothing is black and white, nothing is pure good or pure bad. > > > > > It's always a matter of degree, I think. My personal views on > > > > > religion neither interfere with my objective perceptions of relgion > > > > > nor mitigate the degree of oppressive control most religions have > > > > > exercised through the delicate art of evil. (with nods to Rigsey.) > > > > > > On Jun 25, 3:17 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Sounds good on the surface, Gruff, but what about the extremes of > > > > > > bad? Do we view heinous crimes as just bad behavior? Perhaps your > > > > > > perception of evil is maligned by personal views towards religion. > > > > > > Does evil only have a religious connotation? > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 4:28 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Evil is a religious term of art designed to put the fear of god > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > you by classifying some human behavior as bad and other, far > > > > > > > worse, > > > > > > > evil, because you only suffer temporarily for being bad but if > > > > > > > you're > > > > > > > evil you go straight to hell and burn for all eternity. I > > > > > > > prefer to > > > > > > > use the terms good and bad to classify human behavior. Good and > > > > > > > bad > > > > > > > do not carry the baggage of religion and thus make for a more > > > > > > > perfect > > > > > > > balance of judgment. > > > > > > > > On Jun 24, 1:51 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > A simple question, or is it? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
