Jehovah witness annoying & "against prejudice".
 

Today I got jehovah witness on my door, again, two men, and this time inviting to a biblical events that would have worldwide date.

This time I was even more patient and more gentle than past times, far more than what they deserve, and I listened their bull s... talking about Bible, as they always do, as they think all other people have to agree with their little book.

A pamphlet he gave me was quite funny since it said that was about love and against prejudice. Against prejudice??? It's almost if nazism party said to be against anti-semitism.

The funny thing is that while I listened to the first man talking, a neer old man very calm with "old man glasses", and he speaking about biblical reference in the event for love and against prejudice, the second man wasn't even looking at me, but prefered look to the ground or to the sides, with a not so friendly face.
I told you in this forum I use long hair, but not gay neither trans, so I supose the religious man who was avoint make any facial contact with me probably believed long male hair it's "against God", against masculinity, despite the panflet mention be against prejudice and despite Moses and other biblical figures ilustrations had long hair.

Funny... Evangelic saying who don't believe in Christ will burn in hell, and Jehovah witnesses who believe that christians will burn in hell for accepth a fake messiah...
And I think if Christ (if existed) would be lynched today, acused of comunism, acused of be gay, drug user, trans or a bum.

And psychology thinks religions it's normal, and religion freaks like that can even become licensed professionals in this field. A lot of stupidity it's saw as normal if it'sa inside a religious context, but outside that they would say it's a mental illness.

I keep asking myself what type of prejudice these ignorant people was refering to in the pamphlet... Prejudice against religions, I bet. If someone is against their nonsense and against their prejudices, they will probable label the person of discrimination, acuse of prejudice against their faith.

I would like to invite a lot of them, catholic christians, evangelics, Jehova witness, mórmons, Jews, and islamics, to a party where they would preach one to each other.
Man... that would be funny... maybe even dangerous. :D

What the freaking laws would do if I door in the house of religious people and said they should accept science and archaeology and genetic proofs that turn down their bull s... ?
There are laws against religious discrimination. The law can even sue, at least in my freak retard country, if someone kick a religious statue in a video in his own house.

Where is the law to protect atheists?

Well, you could have asked those questions rather than assume they were prejudiced against your hair.

I always talk to them as long as they want to talk, and I pay them the same respect they pay me by learning their names. It might be annoying, but at least they intend good. After all, there's nothing in it for them (unless there's some sort of quota for being among the 200k going to heaven).

I don't know about laws in Brazil, but in the US they apply evenly to theists and atheists.

I have a lot of respect for agnostics, but I never could understand atheists. Where does the motivation to convince people in nothing come from? Why antagonize people that believe in something? The dumbest argument in the world is that "nothing matters" and that's the "most important thing".

Redpoint, it's 144k, not 200k (no I'm not JH, just poking fun.)

For what it's worth, nowhere in the bible are Moses or Jesus described as having long hair, that's a recent invention, and I'm not too sure where it came from or why. The only biblical man that is noted to have had long hair is actually Samson, as part of his Nazarite vow, but that is a unique situation.

As far as your hair, I'm in the camp of do what you want, as long as it doesn't hurt me. If you want to follow scripture, great, if not, I'm not going to try to stop you.

It sounds like you are against long hair but thinks it's my right to use. Did I got right ?

I bet people very against long hair are afraid to have or feel sexual desire for other men. As revenge they acuse others of be gay.

Follow scriptures... Is nothing wrong in following that? Are you sure? If we would follow the scriptures we would have to kill a lot of people, and yes, I must be against such thing, and any reasonable people must be agaisnt such insanity.

So much different cultures in the world and religion people trying to make their own as a absolute. If nazism was a religion people would ask for respect it.

We must be against the deny of proof, deny of true very proven scientific fates.
Intented good??? really?? Don't be so sure...

The hell it's full of good intentions...

There are atheistic religions. Just look at the North Koreans. The problem never was with "religion", as that's basically a way of thinking of core values. In that regard, everyone is religious, as they have a hierarchy of value. Doesn't really matter to me if you call your hierarchy of value by a particular name, or insist it be nameless. What matters is what those values are, and how behavior will affect others in adhering to those values.

So to your point, I guess it depends on which scriptures you're referring to. There's lots of them, and they all have a rich history in which the context applies.

Long-haired men are associated with a tendency towards being a primadonna. I've got nothing against long hair on a man, but primadonna's are tough to get along with. Probably why people didn't tolerate Jesus.

You are pushing from definitions instead of stay in the factual ways.

Comunism was very "religious", the key point is that they just forbade the usual religions and impose their own "religion" their god", the dictator. The dictator it's a God on Earth, making whatever he wishes against whoever he wishes.

I like when you said what matter are the quality of the values. But if values are just passed without a very critical thinking of why be that way, the value can lost power, became easily contested. The way of find out the reason of a value it's the important thing.
If you took values just because people say yes, or "because yes", or because "God" said, it's not much different than people who get a bad values just because a "god" say because yes.

But about the people in this city I live... Trust me... I know hw mediocre, blind, stupid incoherent they are. Even people with study...

I'm not pushing the definition really at all. Here's one of the definitions:

"a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance"
or
"a particular system of faith and worship"

Worship is deep respect and devotion to something.

What I'm saying is that religion isn't something some people have, and others don't. It's absolutely fundamental to all of humanity. Heck, our secular culture is full of ritual. Why do we clap after a song is performed? Why do we shake hands when greeting people?

It would be funny if atheists went door to door preaching the importance of not believing in anything in particular. I'd still let them in for a discussion.

It's the ape instint to follow the alpha male. Or even the wolf instint to follow the leader wolf. For me this need it's a bunch of monkey business.
That's why all God have power and destroy... they need be respevted by that, since humans are quite talking apes who respect fear.

Religions in general put a begin and a silly end on everything. That's believe in alm ost nothing, since the universe scale is vastly superior in time and dimention. It put the stupid human civilization above of all.

Atheims it's not a bunch of values (atheist get values from other things) but by definition just the deny of supernatural holly figures. Good atheist (there are horrible ones too) can believe in a lot of things. Sorry but you sounded very arrogant stating atheists believe in nothing, like if everthing besides religion/holly figures was worth of believe.

If it sounds like I'm saying atheism is the weakest position, then you have interpreted my comments correctly. I'd say agnostic is perhaps the strongest (it falls in the middle of the extremes of atheism and theism).

I don't think religion puts a beginning and end on things; it's merely an observable phenomena of the universe, that things begin and then they end. Religion then has a hierarchy of value keeping in mind that things have a beginning and end, and based on those values, meaning and purpose is derived. Even the atheists act as though there is good and bad (heaven and hell), purpose, and meaning.

I understand why some people would not believe in deity(s). What isn't clear is why that non-belief needs to be emphasized. I don't believe in the Easter bunny, but it's not important to me to identify as an "atheaster", or to belittle those who do believe in the Easter bunny.

I don't believe "organic (whatever that means)" and local farming is more efficient and healthy than big commercial farming. There's plenty of people that do though, and I've got no problem with that, as long as those people aren't telling me to eat organic or die. I'm happy to hear evidence or the origins of why they believe organic is better.

I don't find Jehovah's Witnesses any more annoying or ridiculous than vegans, but I like them just the same.

Calm down, Hannibal! :)

I do not care how long a man's hair is, but I never understand "man buns."

I feel that I have met atheists more fervent about their beliefs than any religious person that I have met, but I have not personally known anyone that launched a crusade, killed anyone (and\or themselves) over beliefs, etc.

I feel their platform is more "I am a genius and you are an idiot" than "This is true and that is untrue."

Either Doublas or Scott Adams (both were atheists) said that people ask "Don't you feel you should make a superficial effort just in case you are wrong?"
"I would not respect any god that respected that."

If someone is the best person they can be, I do not see what difference it makes what they believe, as long as they do not bring harm to others, or encourage others to harm.

Since when do we discuss politics? :)

LOL

"I like vegans, they taste the same as Jehovah's Witnesses". "Enjoy them with organic fava beans and a local chianti."

Cannibalism is environmentally friendly!

Wait, are these free-range people?!

I thought you didn't care about organic food...
Now I understand why you didn't opose lab grown human meat I teferred in other topic.

Anyway I will help you. On Brazil there is a dish which sauce it's made with the blood of chicken, so you can adapt it to a human dish.

https://s2.glbimg.com/mN592FJ6UrFRWD...olho_pardo.jpg

https://images.gawker.com/180yam5sbx...q_80,w_800.jpg

By the way, vegan's blood it's also red, I can assure you.
I heard about millenials vegans have tender muscle, but I didn't have confirmation from a trustable source yet.

Atheism today it's different, since feminism (demand free unlimited abortion right) and left wings took the world. There are mass produced atheit people in universities and also on youtube.

I don't preach atheism, but I don't stay in silence when religious stupidy came to anoy me. In the end of the incident today I finished saying |(kindly and calmly) to the Jehovah witness that the religions failed to reach any God or reason, since they all start from some point, diverge, split and fight. I even used the example of Catholic, protestant and mormons, and the example of judaism, christianism and isalmism, which started with Abrahan.

I could had being less kind and talk about estatitics of domestic violence among religious people, as well as divorce rates, adultery etc... Or even the rapes commited by religious authorities, or the connection of religions and the hate groups or how religious ideas feed such groups ideology.

They are not harmless. They raise their kids with the seed of prejudice and ignorance, raise girls to be inferior as "a step before man".

If you know me and my posts, you know I'm not the left wing type, or the type who see as ok all this sexual manipulation and hedonism preached by media today, and how I'm agaisnt drugs.

The "american way" :

https://nationalpost.com/news/scientist-find

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FluidPastB...restricted.gif

There's plenty of deserved criticism of many ideologies and examples of people representing any number of religions, and I don't think confronting theists with hard questions is being unkind. What would be unkind is to let someone continue on without contending with the problems with their philosophy/religion.

The point of developing a philosophy isn't to insulate oneself from competing ideas, but to contend with them to further refine the philosophy. Truth is the aim, not adherence to ideology.

I'm not familiar with the religions that teach that women are inferior or of less value as men. I get that impression from Islam, but I've not read the Koran, so I'm speaking out of ignorance there.

Most people here (Brazil and many countries) have a different and very less nobble perception of kindness. Here if you don't listen or don't fake to agree somehow they saw as lack of respect. Anyway I told both that I have no religion and don't trust on religion.
They often confuse respect someone with respect somone's ideas. And confuse respect ideas with tolerate a idea.

In old days there was religious freak anoying people that wasn't conservative moralist as their views and beliefs. Today you also have left wing modern hippies or hedonist people anoying who don't follow libertine hedonist style.
No surprise teens are getting made, since they are opressed in both sides today. No win situation...

It's natural to want to "win", and it seems that those who cannot win an intellectual discussion dismiss reason and either place it as less valuable than their emotion, or simply delude themselves into believing some twisted incoherent version of reason. Perhaps that is more noticeable in Brazil, but it's certainly something increasingly observed in the US.

I'm not one to let someone being wrong get in the way of being friends with them. At the same time, I'm also not one to be manipulated into agreeing with someone merely to be liked. People should like me for seeking truth, not for being agreeable.

To that end, I probably annoy one of the people staying with us that is looking for job. She's very driven by emotion and given to liberal ideology (though not the most extreme). I enjoy discussions with her, but she probably gets a bit frustrated sometimes (I'm nearly dead center politically with a tiny nudge towards liberty). At least she acknowledges the many friends she has that abuse social welfare.

In the US, the biggest poverty is meaning. We don't physically starve to death, we emotionally starve to death.

I think many religious people need to fear smething or need reward to be good, and can't stand that there is people who are good without need menace or bribe.

Extreme political views can be like a religion, and also some standartizations of behavior among society life style. Some people think that if they need drug or sexual extravagança, everyone else need. If they are irresponsible they want everyone to be just to don't blame themselves.

Humans are very irrational in groups. The groups make people feel power and with power they don't give proper value to reflection and winsdow.

That's why drug comsume keeps rising despite information about hazzards and efforts of government and campagnes.

USA's God it's the dollar.

No, you didn't get it right and the poster went away instead of calling you out as would have been merited. So I skipped a lot of the vagaries in between.
That's not what it says on the dollar.

I haven't had someone knock on my door to proselytize since the 1970s. It was a young [fairly hot] blonde woman. I sat in the rocking chair and she was in an easy chair, not on the florescent orange couch under an American [veteran's burial*] flag.

She made the pitch and when she asked if I wanted to know more, I said she was welcome back (anytime!) but if it was two earnest young men in narrow black ties they'd be wasting their time. They never showed. I've never forgot. I still think it was a front for an intelligence agency probe.

*Wedding present from a biker named Renegade. I still fly it on the Fourth.

Murderers always sing, "don't fence me in".

I must rephrase. USA's God is the sex, and dollar is the coin to direct or indirect buy it. After all women are trainned for seek wealth.
And the dollar only mentioned God after the cold war and the american witch hunter for comunist enemies started.

Your story made me remamber about a atheist ans researcher telling a similar thing. Two incredible beautiful and attractive religious girls noc on his door, and he told how difficult was for hin to say no.

Even religious people use sex to sell... Like I said, USA's God is sex (& money). Maybe the blue eyes Jesus figure (painting and prints), which model was the face of the son of a evil Pope, was probably used to attract women. By the way I know Jehova witness don't believe in Jesus.

They probably sellect the best looming girls to the "first door noc", the front in this "battlefield". And the other people who will visit you will be the old and uggly.

Maybe religion had dropped so much on USA because obesity had risen on USA and the limited supply of pretty girls got even more reduced and couldn't reach enough doors.
:D

Faith and Jesus can move a mountain... But can't make religious people get in shape...

At least the pretty girl respected human rights!!!
She could noc on you door, ask if you want to hear about God, and after you look her and say yes with enthusiasm, she could say : "Ok, I have more homes to visit, my friend Jezebel (a uggly old woman behind her) will help you. Bye bye..."

Never trust a pig farmer.
It's worse. I still remember when they added 'under God' to the Pledge of Allegiance. At the time I though that had been knocked out by the Founding Fathers, not some socialist minister in the 1800s. The Balsch version went "We give our heads and hearts to God and our country; one country, one language, one flag!" That's worryingly close to "One People, One Nation, One Leader". The difference is that the Pledge is to the flag, not the country or leader.

My new word for today (via Styxhexenhammer) is apatheist.

Is that one of the "if, & or but" statements to the words of Jesus:
Matthew 12:30
"Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters".

During brazilian militar dictatorship (1964 to 1985) it was called brazilian ufanism a expression like that, in support to the dictatorship :

"Brazil, love it or leave it." ("Brasil, Ame-o ou Deixei-o" -- in portuguese)

I remamber one thing a person from fitness center once said :

"Jesus is holly today because he do not lived long enough to make sh...t."

Should I be agnostic about Easter Bunny ?

Some agnostics are afraid of hell somehow, and prefer to d not deny gods directly. But they forgot that there are dozens of hells from dozen of different gods, and believe in one of them is deny the other and as result perish in the hell of the others (not believed) gods.

Anyway, believe in something for fear it's like believe in Hitler for fear of Gestapo. Hitler existed, but to believe in his ideas was just stupidity.

As I use to say, I don't expect rationality and reason from the vast majority of people.

Not many figures get a physical description in the Bible; you have to remember that it's a collection of stories from hundreds if not thousands of authors, most of them unknown, many of which were likely handed down as oral traditions long before anyone wrote them down. They aren't newspaper reports.

Depictions of biblical figures with long hair dates back several centuries. Michelangelo was the first Western artist to depict God; prior to his paintings on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, God was considered too sacred to illustrate in full, and he was usually represented by a hand emerging from a cloud if he was painted at all. One of the reasons Michelangelo is considered such a revolutionary artist is this:

http://www.italianrenaissance.org/wp...m-detail-1.jpg

God depicted as a human, with long, flowing hair. Of course, this has no bearing on how biblical characters actually wore their hair (if they existed at all), which would have been dictated by local culture at the time.

The bigger problem with representations of biblical figures is the fact that they are almost exclusively white. In the Renaissance, this was because artists like Michelangelo had no conception of cultural appropriation, and painted figures like the people he saw; indeed, it was common to model historical figures in art after specific living people, such as the sculpture of Moses with horns based on Pope Julius II, and Rembrandt's "Self Portrait as the Apostle Paul":

https://www.wga.hu/art/r/rembrand/27self/21sp1661.jpg

That's understandable for that time period and culture, but the fact that Christian churches still plaster their walls with pictures of white Jesus when we absolutely know better today is nothing short of deliberate whitewashing.

So, that's where Christmas holly came from!

OOPS... I should had said Holy instead of Holly.

https://static3.tcdn.com.br/img/img_...0611093910.jpg

Short male hair was a idea of roman empire, since they assciated male as warrior for Caesar, and the roman troops used short hair to avoid the enemy to pick the hair by back, pull and so making the victm's neck exposed, and then cut their throat.
Masculinity it's often associated with fight, and for army, troops, even rape was demanted fr omsoldiers, to traumatize the enemy (civilizan women). Masculinity (in the animal poin of view) was a tool of domain and war.

Many other people (civilizations) had male long hair, like american indians, Huns (whohelp end Roman Empire) .
Interesting how church likes so much short male hair, even this being a idea of the guys who killed their beloved J.C (Jesus).
Anyway I must remamber that Christianity only became fashion when Constantino thought it would be a good tool to control people. And Christ was just one of many supposed messiahs who suposed was crucified and supposed made miracles.
Constantino couldn't be more right at the time. Even today people pray while the world it's under domain of freaks.

And today even after all rock'n' roll bands from 60's ahead, people still have problems with long hair.

Back to Brazil's freakness, the movie The Last Temptatin of Christ (1988 / Martin Scorsese) got censorship on Brazil when it was released.

I associate short hair to lice infestations in the trenches in WWI.

How was Brazil with Jesus Christ Superstar?

I need to research about Brazil's reaction to the gay Jesus of Jesus Christ Superstar. Maybe since it was a very clear fun mockinbg (or blasphemy) or herigic, instead of a alteration of the golpel, maybe it was less censored.

The Last Temptaion of Christ it's way more strong to make christians listen and contest their religion than Jesus Christ Superstar, since the second will just revolt christians instead of make they think.

I liked The Last Temptation of Christ,and just just because it annoye christians. Indeed the movie makes more sense, even in a religious point of view, than the actual image and tales about Jesus, since the movie shows a normal man with a task, and not a pure "perfect" man holy in everyways. It's like Jesus is fighting to earn the holy mission that was gave to hin.

My Web Archeologic Research found that Christ was Harrison Ford by the modern concept of Christ image :

https://earthlymission.com/wp-conten...f-jesus-fb.jpg

https://secure.franklintheatre.com/i...-ark_image.jpg

https://earthlymission.com/the-real-face-of-jesus/

Jesus isn't depicted as gay in that show; the issue many Christians had is that he isn't really depicted as divine either. Same with Godspell.