THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Selene on October 6th, 2015, 9:39 pm

jumpy64 wrote:
Seneca wrote:Oh so now you are changing the rules? Actually, all the good jews in that movie were christians ;)

What about "Once upon a time in America?". I don't remember it but it is about Jewish mobsters. It is from 1984 but was restored in 2012.


As you said, it is from 1984... But the reference to Jewish mobsters is very interesting. That is also a topic I'd like to be addressed here. Hoi already mentioned it in a previous post.

I mean, we Italian get almost all the attention in Mafia related topics and movies, but what about guys like Meyer Lansky (who was even acquitted in 1974), Bugsy Siegel (who's even memorialized in a New York's synagogue), Lepke Buchalter and the National Crime Syndicate, to give just a few examples? We haven't seen as many movies about them, have we?


Jumpy, I don't mind you keep jumping from goalpost to goalpost, and that Hollywood and media have a higher than average % of Jews (at least based on names and/or own admittance) is no surprise either. That certain topics are taboo and others played out as long as the master psy-oplogist demands, is also no surprise, but what makes that "Jewish conspiracy" then so "Jewish"?

Which elements from the "Jewish cultural religious traditions" are uniquely and unavoidably linked to these conspiracies? Does the Torah or Talmud say "thou shalt deceive the world and kill your fellow Jews to get the "Holy Land" forever"? How come then that there are psychopathical, hoaxing, deceiving, egocentric, lying, enslaving, murdering Jews and at the same time Jews living according cultural or religious principles and -except their archaeic child mutilations- do no harm at all?

How can you ever sweep those two extremes together and call your painting "The Jewish Conspiracy In Plain Sight"? :wacko:

Selene
Selene
Member
 
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Selene on October 6th, 2015, 9:55 pm

jumpy64 wrote:
Selene wrote:Cities full of "cultural Jews" (as you labeled them, still a mystery to me how you can know that for all the conspirators around), are they living under a "Jewish_cult-reli conspiracy"? All those normal people having normal jobs and don't have any political or other power aspirations? The mayor of Amsterdam, Job Cohen, was a Jew (clear enough from the name), yet was criticised for being too multicultural-friendly (arguments for that are strong enough). Would you call promoting immigration of many muslims a "Jewish conspiracy"?? What is "Jewish" about it?


Selene, I just said I can't write much right now, but one of your objections is so easy to deal with that I'm doing it anyway.

I've already said that Jewish politicians and activists are extremely "multicultural-friendly", but just in foreign cities and States, while advocating even dna tests to preserve the "Jewness" (I hope I wrote it rightly) of Israel. And that I think it's part of their tactics to weaken other countries while preserving their own.


Jumpy, this is not a stereotypical forum. On other fora which you may be used to (or not), it's a matter of fighting or "discarding the argument", Cluesforum is different. What counts here is evidence, arguments and other heavy content. Not "dismissing the argument". I see no battle between us, even if my style may come across like it. I am curious and hard yet open to be convinced of more shifts in my world views than I've experienced in the recent past.

Now you jump to a hypothesis that ties into the "refugee crisis", propagandised and semi-hoaxed this summer and indeed the cultural marxism that some Jews are playing out on others, like mayor Cohrn.

But then forcing multiculturalism onto people (of which a decent percentage of Jews) making a "standard practice" of "Jewish conspiracies" becomes problematic with Israel? There the opposite policy is enforced...

Fine to have an hypothesis, but that doesn't make it suddenly an argument for a case you have only constructed the first definition and some sketches for the future of? In 7 pages.

No need for rushed replies either. My questions stand quietly in the sand. Talking of which, take some time to watch Shlomo. Tell me what you think. Does this "pure Jewness" really exist? And if it doesn't, how can you mix "DNA/genealogy/offspring laws" with the definition that you specifically set at non-biological yet "cultural and religious traditions"?
Selene
Member
 
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby ICfreely on October 6th, 2015, 10:00 pm

I get where you’re coming from Steve O. I don’t take any credit/responsibility for any ‘Christian accomplishments/atrocities’ either. Anyone trying to piece together clues to prove a suspicion, ‘educated’ guess or (dreaded) theory, will most likely end up ‘proving’ their a priori assumption(s). 'Let truth be thy authority' is lost on a lot of people.

BTW, I second your 'declaration of freedom of thought' from the rocketry post!

I am just curious as to how, and why, we are certain that there even is a "vacuum" in (outer) space.

Is it simply taken for granted, or has there been any concrete evidence put forth of the lack of "earth like" atmosphere above the Karman line (100 km above sea level)?

regards,

Steve O.

"when everyone is thinking the same thing, chances are no one is thinking at all"


Tutankhamen, halleluiah and mazel-mazel!
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 555
Joined: February 7th, 2015, 6:41 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby omaxsteve on October 6th, 2015, 10:25 pm

Seneca wrote:Steve, if you are seeing there is misinformation spread here, it would be helpful if you provide a meaningful quote. The quote from Hoi and Simon you provided about blood sucking is clearly not misinformation. Neither of them was implying that the majority of jews were doing it at this moment in history.
I think that the only misinformation in that quote was "There is not a single Jew, or person of any religion, that I know that would tolerate such behavior."
I don't think it is very useful posting info about HIV on an anti-propaganda website. (I like this term Hoi)


You are right, Seneca, I stand corrected. The practice of of suctioning the blood by mouth to genital contact was one that I had never heard before yesterday. I stand by my statement that I do not (personally) know anyone that would , or should, tolerate such behavior. The "misinformation" I attempted to address was to prevent a person happening upon that to be led to believe that this is common practice in the modern area throughout the entire Jewish population, which is incorrect.

A video does not have to be proven to be "faked' for it to be labelled misleading.

As concerns the post that references HIV, it is my understanding that while the origin of the disease is one of the major "hoaxes' that are discusssed here, I am unaware of any controversy about the devastation and the importance of trying to quell the spread. That being said the article mentioned other benefits of circumcision besides it's apparent effectiveness in curtailing the spread of HIV.

regards,

Steve O.
omaxsteve
Member
 
Posts: 192
Joined: March 29th, 2010, 1:44 am

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Seneca on October 6th, 2015, 10:30 pm

Selene wrote:Now you jump to a hypothesis that ties into the "refugee crisis", propagandised and semi-hoaxed this summer and indeed the cultural marxism that some Jews are playing out on others, like mayor Cohrn.

But then forcing multiculturalism onto people (of which a decent percentage of Jews) making a "standard practice" of "Jewish conspiracies" becomes problematic with Israel? There the opposite policy is enforced...

Fine to have an hypothesis, but that doesn't make it suddenly an argument for a case you have only constructed the first definition and some sketches for the future of? In 7 pages.


Jumpy64 isn't jumping to a hypothesis. He had mentioned this already in his first post:
jumpy64 wrote:They even have a collective name for the rest of the world, talking about it as an inferior species even in their religious texts. Consider this: in a "multicultural" world where everybody is supposed to say "no to racism", they can be openly and often viciously racist (and act upon their racism in very concrete ways, not just theorize about it), and have people not noticing or justifying it.

And not only that. They're even considered "progressive freedom-fighters" by most people because in the last couple of centuries at least they've been actually leading organizations that fight for the rights of “oppressed minorities” and immigrants. Admirable, you might say. But the problem is that, in the most blatant case of "double standards", in their own state they do the exact opposite of what they preach in others, expanding their borders with terroristic violence and closing them to anybody who doesn't belong to their race (they even have DNA tests to insure that!). They want us to think that race is just a form of "cultural conditioning", while they do everything to preserve their own.

And isn't it significant that they're fighting their battles for the rights of minorities exclusively in the countries were the predominant race is still (but most probably not for long) the one their religious texts consider their worst enemy? They seem to be applying to the West the "divide and conquer" tactics that their sacred books, but also their religious and political leaders, often preach openly about. And they’re doing it to the point of taking us to the verge of what can be considered, to all effects and purposes, a genocide against the targeted race.

It seems pretty clear to me that there is only one ethnic group in the world who really stands to benefit from the havoc that "multiculturalism" and mass immigration (to mention just a couple of main problems of our times, but this group seems to be behind several others too, like the usury of banking systems, for example) is causing in the western world. It seems just reasonable to think it must be the same group that spreads these phenomena in the rest of the world while protecting itself from them.


But I agree he needs to provide evidence. Here is some http://jlb.oxfordjournals.org/content/e ... sv027.full
The Israeli State recently announced that it may begin to use genetic tests to determine whether potential immigrants are Jewish or not. This development would demand a rethinking of Israeli law on the issue of the definition of Jewishness.


Selene wrote:No need for rushed replies either. My questions stand quietly in the sand. Talking of which, take some time to watch Shlomo. Tell me what you think. Does this "pure Jewness" really exist? And if it doesn't, how can you mix "DNA/genealogy/offspring laws" with the definition that you specifically set at non-biological yet "cultural and religious traditions"?


I watched the Shlomo lecture and it was interesting although not new. But it made me think about the Jewish state and its relation to the other conspiracies. But it appears that people are still not getting what I meant.
Seneca
Member
 
Posts: 446
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Selene on October 6th, 2015, 10:35 pm

omaxsteve wrote:As concerns the post that references HIV, it is my understanding that while the origin of the disease is one of the major "hoaxes' that are discusssed here, I am unaware of any controversy about the devastation and the importance of trying to quell the spread. That being said the article mentioned other benefits of circumcision besides it's apparent effectiveness in curtailing the spread of HIV.

regards,

Steve O.


Dear Steve, not having seen an HIVirus or anything alike, my position is the same as yours.

But a narrative that your are repeating here about "circumcision helps against AIDS" is either a double hoax in one or a missolution (cf. misinformation) against a real disease (or hoax).

This is the sales pitch...

The eventual sociodramatic effect amongst healthy sexual Homo sapiens becomes clear when the still-dominant Catholic Church actively disencourage a real protection against an either real or fake disease; condoms.

"What the heck, I'm circumcised, screw you" :rolleyes:

Jewish culture and successful sales are rather positive than negative correlating...
Selene
Member
 
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Critical Mass on October 6th, 2015, 10:40 pm

omaxsteve wrote:Finally on the subject of circumcision, it is not completely black and white issue. There are some very strong arguments on the anti-circumcision side, but it is not a totally one-sided argument;

I've already posted to a (hilarious) pro-circumcision site... however on average, per annum, exactly how many babies die from penile cancer or get HIV or other STD's or suffer from allegedly painful 'first time sexual experiences' or all the other pro-circumcision 'facts' that get brought up?

For a member of Cluesforum to say that this is not a 'black & white' issue is... troubling to me.

We're not a bunch of limp-wristed, weak willed, dithering academics here... we're meant to be the 'creme de la creme' of skeptical thought.

Are you seriously saying the unconsented mutilation of babies (or children in general) due to the paranormal 'religion' or 'culture' of one's parents is not a 'black & white' issue?

I ask again, what if you were a child born of Jewish (or Muslim or British Aristocratic) parents who doesn't want to be circumcised?
What legal protection does our wonderful 'modern society' provide these people?
Are babies really people... or just objects?



I, for one, will say it is a 'Black & white' issue...

Black... I own you & I'm cutting off your dick skin because I 'love' you.
White... your body is your own. Do with it as you wish.

I suppose one could also ask... should 'foreskin reconstruction' surgeries be offered for free?
Last edited by Critical Mass on October 6th, 2015, 11:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Critical Mass
Member
 
Posts: 544
Joined: July 8th, 2014, 11:33 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Selene on October 6th, 2015, 10:44 pm

Thanks Seneca for correcting me of the jumpiness, apparently I projected my own... :unsure:

Ok, so you knew already what Sand was talking about. I didn't. It was new for me to see a decent and to a naked eye honest intellectual speaking so freely.

It's the base for both parties; both the Zionists and the "racial"-Jewish conspiracy (where jumpy jumped away from in his definition) proponents.

Genealogical research between 2000 and 0/Exodus time/any other moment that may or may not have been faked in the history books is impossible.

DNA (if it exists) reseach doesn't seem to show a "Jewish people".

Is the whole thing not becoming a bit silly...? :huh:

PS: big thumbs up for Critical Mass's rant against child mutilation and fight for self-ownership!
Selene
Member
 
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Seneca on October 6th, 2015, 11:21 pm

omaxsteve wrote:You are right, Seneca, I stand corrected. The practice of of suctioning the blood by mouth to genital contact was one that I had never heard before yesterday. I stand by my statement that I do not (personally) know anyone that would , or should, tolerate such behavior. The "misinformation" I attempted to address was to prevent a person happening upon that to be led to believe that this is common practice in the modern area throughout the entire Jewish population, which is incorrect.

A video does not have to be proven to be "faked' for it to be labelled misleading.

As concerns the post that references HIV, it is my understanding that while the origin of the disease is one of the major "hoaxes' that are discusssed here, I am unaware of any controversy about the devastation and the importance of trying to quell the spread. That being said the article mentioned other benefits of circumcision besides it's apparent effectiveness in curtailing the spread of HIV.

regards,

Steve O.

Thanks for you reply. I see now that you were also not misinforming. I somehow misinterpreted what you meant by "tolerating". Sorry about that.

The topic about AIDS is here: viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1455, I gather you haven't seen it.
I see some analogy between the circumcision debate and the vaccines debate, especially in the arguments of the proponents. As I mentioned, I think vaccines are a hoax and I regret giving them to my son. But it still isn't easy to argue with one of the professional promoters.
I find it interesting that you didn't mention circumcision when you were talking about religious practices secular jews were observing. Is this because you consider it a medical practice?
A lot of religious practices from Christianity were also "secularized" and continued as "medical" or other "scientific" practices, although I can't come up with an example.
Seneca
Member
 
Posts: 446
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Seneca on October 6th, 2015, 11:50 pm

Critical Mass wrote:I, for one, will say it is a 'Black & white' issue...

Black... I own you & I'm cutting off your dick skin because I 'love' you.
White... your body is your own. Do with it as you wish.

I think you are ignoring the amount of pressure that is probably used to convince parents that circumcision is good for the child. If you are convinced of that then consent doesn't play a role at that age.

It is not because we are skeptical and we have so much experience with manipulations that we become immune to every manipulation. At least I don't think I never will be.

It's more like
Black... Cut it off! It's good for him! Do it now! Or else you will regret it! We did it too and we are OK!
White... What's the rush? I should study the evidence critically and see what is really best.
Seneca
Member
 
Posts: 446
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby simonshack on October 7th, 2015, 12:00 am

omaxsteve wrote:A lot of misinformation (disinformation?) being spread here.


Not a very nice way to start a post on this forum, Omaxsteve. We are NOT into disinformation here - quite the contrary, you see? And in this particular thread, many of us are mostly just asking questions - whereas all INFO (presented as such) being posted here, if erroneous, can immediately be challenged / or corrected by the next poster (unlike the 'INFO' being hurled by the mainstream 'news' media everyday straight into our living rooms - on unresponsive TV screens).

However, thanks for your comforting information that only a restrict, extremist section (stuck in the stone age, I presume? ) of the Jewish community features old rabbis sucking infants' penises after mutilating the same. Talking about the stone age, I think there might possibly have been a rationale for circumcision back then - when personal hygiene wasn't a big part of their "way of life", as you call it. But today? Do not most folks have access to soap and water - in our day and age?

As for the article (or extract thereof) that you posted 'in favor of circumcision' authored by New York Times columnist Hanna Rosin, I can see why you chose to omit the very introduction of the same:

Hanna Rosin - the New York Times, Oct 18, 2009
"Anyone with a heart would agree that the Jewish bris is a barbaric event. Grown-ups sit chatting politely, wiping the cream cheese off their lips, while some religious guy with minimal medical training prepares to slice up a newborn’s penis. The helpless thing wakes up from a womb-slumber howling with pain. I felt near hysterical at both of my sons’ brisses. Pumped up with new-mother hormones, I dug my nails into my palms to keep from clawing the rabbi. I am Jewish enough that I never considered not circumcising my sons."


Oh, ok - so the bris is a barbaric event, says Hanna. And the religious guy has minimal medical training. Wow - well, that can't be much of a concern, eh? After all, who needs a penis? Mother Hanna then basically says that she's been thinking it all over - and now thinks it's all perfectly o-ok and that she'd do it all over again - happily (huh?). Yup, all of Hanna's baby-boys will go through the barbaric ritual / ordeal. Gosh - is the woman a monster? :blink:

Hanna then goes on about how "scientific studies have proven that circumcision reduces the chances for contracting AIDS /HIV". Aha - so Hanna's no monster after all, she actually IS concerned about the health of her boys' health & penises! But wait: AIDS /HIV? Isn't that the most controversial disease of all times? Some even say it was an evil scheme / or hoax. Where can we possibly turn to - in order to learn the truth about AIDS/HIV? Of course, we should listen to BOTH sides. So hey, I have an idea: let's interview the world's two leading AIDS/HIV experts:

Robert Gallo______________________Peter Duesberg
the man who 'discovered' AIDS___ the man who 'debunked' AIDS

ImageImage
https://shadowmasterminds.wordpress.com ... ictitious/

Oh wait, we can't do that - or we might be tagged / and lumped in with those pesky 'Jew haters', won't we? Surely, if we dare suspect Gallo and Duesberg to have been staging an umpteenth dog-and-pony show - some folks will complain that we're painting the entire population of Jews as deceivers and crooks !

omaxsteve wrote:"It is also equally wrong, in my opinion, to paint the entoire population of Jews with the actions of the handful of rich and powerful that control the media and participate in the hoaxes and psyops that are regularly exposed here."

Good grief. I say ENOUGH - yes, ENOUGH with that worn-out, stereotyped lament. How many fecking times are we supposed to reiterate that NO ONE here is painting the entire population of Jews with the actions of the handful of rich and powerful ? Stop it - in the name of [*insert deity of your choice*] !!!

omaxsteve wrote:"I must say I am disappointed (not offended) that amongst so many otherwise intelligent people here do not see the fallacy and danger in stereotyping an entire group of people based on the religion they were born into."

See, there you go again - ffs! It's a friggin' broken record !

******************************

Omaxsteve on Muslims :

omaxsteve wrote:"Lets assume for a moment that there are was an actual cell of real terrorists, all of them from one identifiable group such as Muslims, that were actually found guilty of a horrific act of terror in which they killed thousands of innocent civilians; Would it be acceptable to label all Muslims as terrorists? Would it be okay to call it a "Muslim" conspiracy? True, in this hypothetical scenario all the terrorists were Muslims but what they have in common is that they are all terrorists. Their actions should, at least among open-minded people, NOT reflect on the majority of the Muslims who were not involved in any way shape or form with the terrorist activity."


Well, omaxsteve, I seem to remember a "news event" aired on TV back in 2001 (actually, a Hollywood movie I think it was) which featured precisely such a scenario: as the story went, "19 young muslims drove airplanes into American targets and killed 3000 people". Don't know if you've seen that particular blockbuster - but I can tell you that, since then (and for some unfathomable reason), the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THIS WORLD has been bombarded by the mainstream news media - on a daily basis and 24/7 - with the bizarre notion that the ENTIRE MUSLIM WORLD hates us all and is coming to get us!

But yes, I fully agree with you there. It's a silly notion. Even if that movie were true - to blame the entire Muslim world is totally stoopid.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6524
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Critical Mass on October 7th, 2015, 12:04 am

I will accept that your 'black & white' is a more accurate version than my own... but as I've never met a baby who's suffering from STD's I hope you grant my point still remains.

Humans try & use 'facts' to explain away their own selfish insanity... apparently, in Steve's case, even here on Cluesforum.
Last edited by Critical Mass on October 7th, 2015, 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Critical Mass
Member
 
Posts: 544
Joined: July 8th, 2014, 11:33 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Selene on October 7th, 2015, 12:06 am

Black, white? I see full colour... :unsure:

Religions/other "inspirational" groupthink traditions have been around across all peoples and times.

Every parent is responsible for his/her own offspring and yes, peer pressure may play a role, but cutting your boy in tears anno 2015..., may everyone please consider that immoral??

And if judging based on individual morality is not allowed (anymore), what separates us then from the psychos...? :(

Critical Mass wrote:
Selene wrote:And if judging based on individual morality is not allowed (anymore), what separates us then from the psychos...? :(

To answer your specific question.

Judging by an individuals morality is indeed allowed.

You will hopefully note that no-one in this thread has 'banned' morality.

Now, as I too have asked several specific questions, I would also like answers to them.


Very much so and I look forward to SteveO's answers. I wasn't implying that in the safe havens of skeptical thought silly banning would occur... I was dreaming away about the world outside, full of bullies and other inconfident power seekers...

Your questions are great.

EDIT: answered here to not push Critical Mass's great questions away.
Last edited by Selene on October 7th, 2015, 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Selene
Member
 
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Critical Mass on October 7th, 2015, 12:16 am

Selene wrote:And if judging based on individual morality is not allowed (anymore), what separates us then from the psychos...? :(

To answer your specific question.

Judging by an individuals morality is indeed allowed.

You will hopefully note that no-one in this thread has 'banned' morality.

Now, as I too have asked several specific questions, I would also like answers to them.
Critical Mass
Member
 
Posts: 544
Joined: July 8th, 2014, 11:33 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby omaxsteve on October 7th, 2015, 6:19 am

Critical Mass wrote:
omaxsteve wrote:Finally on the subject of circumcision, it is not completely black and white issue. There are some very strong arguments on the anti-circumcision side, but it is not a totally one-sided argument;

I've already posted to a (hilarious) pro-circumcision site... however on average, per annum, exactly how many babies die from penile cancer or get HIV or other STD's or suffer from allegedly painful 'first time sexual experiences' or all the other pro-circumcision 'facts' that get brought up?

For a member of Cluesforum to say that this is not a 'black & white' issue is... troubling to me.

We're not a bunch of limp-wristed, weak willed, dithering academics here... we're meant to be the 'creme de la creme' of skeptical thought.

Are you seriously saying the unconsented mutilation of babies (or children in general) due to the paranormal 'religion' or 'culture' of one's parents is not a 'black & white' issue?

I ask again, what if you were a child born of Jewish (or Muslim or British Aristocratic) parents who doesn't want to be circumcised?
What legal protection does our wonderful 'modern society' provide these people?
Are babies really people... or just objects?



I, for one, will say it is a 'Black & white' issue...

Black... I own you & I'm cutting off your dick skin because I 'love' you.
White... your body is your own. Do with it as you wish.

I suppose one could also ask... should 'foreskin reconstruction' surgeries be offered for free?

May I dare ask the creme de la creme of critical thinkers if legalized abortion is also a black and white issue?

I know hundreds of men who have lived happy lives without foreskin, myself included. Having recently researched BOTH sides of the argument , combined with first hand experience, I have come to the conclusion that it is a fairly minor procedure. At the same time I will admit that there is very little evidence that there is any significant benefit either.

There are few issues where there is only one side of the story. Does anyone really believe that the Jews are the only ones to perform ritual procedures to their offspring? Are any of the critical thinkers here equally concerned with the practice of ritual baptism?
It seems that there have been a number of cases of trauma and death to baby during the Orthodox baptism ritual. https://randomrantsandravings.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/religion-kills-priest-almost-drowns-baby-during-baptism-blames-family/

Conclusion? : All religions are somewhat messed up and probably cause more harm than good. The common theme is that people choose to let others make decisions about how they live their lives, instead of thinking for themselves.

When everyone is thinking the same, its likely that no one is thinking at all.

Regards ,

Steve O.
omaxsteve
Member
 
Posts: 192
Joined: March 29th, 2010, 1:44 am

PreviousNext

Return to THE LIVING ROOM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests