Originally posted by twhitehead
All managers and theists are criminals? Thats interesting.

How did you got this conclusion? I am not talking about "managers", "theists", "atheists", "priests", "whores" and "students". I am talking about the nature of the Human.

I have not an ideology; I overcome greedness with morality, rage with meditation, delusion with wisdom -this is the way I discover my own answers. My way and my answers are good to me, not necesarily to you😵

Originally posted by black beetle
No, I am not talking about the secular law as if it were some sort of universal law -not at all. The secular law is a human invention coda and it is used as a tool for cultivating a better social environment for the members of the society.

The societies must have rules, man-made rules, and the law-givers are obliged to bring up specific law paterns i ...[text shortened]... This rule is man-made and it derived from the necessity of the prime human societies to prosper.

As far as I know every country has laws. Are you talking about these or some subset that supposed all countries have, or only countries whose laws are not directly influenced by religion or what?
Many societies today do not have "a decent life for everybody" as a primary goal (despite what the politicians may tell you). It was even worse in the past. Nevertheless many such societies are successful.

But you seem to be going much further than ordinary country laws and are labeling delusion a criminal act (I don't think any current country has such a law), so which set of laws is that?

Originally posted by twhitehead
As far as I know every country has laws. Are you talking about these or some subset that supposed all countries have, or only countries whose laws are not directly influenced by religion or what?
Many societies today do not have "a decent life for everybody" as a primary goal (despite what the politicians may tell you). It was even worse in the past. Nev ...[text shortened]... riminal act (I don't think any current country has such a law), so which set of laws is that?

I think that you have missed some things at this thread; to cut a long story short, Kelly Jay stands for “religion” whilst I think that "religion" kills the Intelligence of the Human by means of creating "Hell" and causing Terror. On the contrary, I told him I believe that the Human has to act as s/he wants due to Her/ his free will according with her/ his evaluation, and that s/he is fully responsible for her/ his actions. And for sure I refuse to act against my Intelligence, therefore in case I think that a law/ theory/ concept is false I will oppose it until I get the change I want or till I become convinced that it is right/ accurate etc. All I want is consensus.

Kelly Jay believes that Christianity sees the world “as it is”, but I told him that I am not so sure about it because Christianity sees the Human as a "sinner" who has to be "saved"; I told him that I do not accept the solution that Christianity offers because it is just a package of ready theological "answers", all of them illogical and without the slightest philosophical value.
Then I told him that I need not “religion” in order to live decently. I need not religious laws based on the so called “word of god” -I just want man-made rules which they derive thanks to a major consensus. It seems to me that the secular law is enough: I see no sin in front of “god", I just see crimes against persons, against humanity, against animals, against Life, against the environment.
Then I told Kelly Jay that in my opinion the Human can achieve a better tomorrow once s/he works hard her/ his virtues based on the evaluation of the mind, and that s/he can do it by means of Philosophy and Science alone.

However the discussion was related to the elimination of ego too, and I was replying to Kelly Jay at that level also; once you read this thread from the beginning you will monitor clearly the conversation.

Regarding the post of yours to which I reply right now, I was talking about the necessity of establishing a secular law -and I think that every country must establish its own; I know that many countries’ secular law does not provide a decent life for everybody, and I consider that this is a plague.

Finally, you have misunderstood whatever I was saying about delusion -this opinion of mine was a reply to Kelly Jay and to knightmeister regarding the necessity of the “religion”.

I hope that now everything is clear😵

Originally posted by black beetle
I hope that now everything is clear😵

Its not entirely clear, but getting there. You still appear to be saying that your secular law 'must' be used, but give no good rational as to why other than that you personally want it.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Its not entirely clear, but getting there. You still appear to be saying that your secular law 'must' be used, but give no good rational as to why other than that you personally want it.

The secular law is just made by the Human, and the law-givers are not claiming that they gave the Human the Ultimate Truth. There must be always a major consensus within a society: then, when we estimate that a law is false or out of order or dated, we are free to prove it and to press in order to have it updated.

On the contrary, the laws who are supposed that they derived from the so called "word of god" they stand above any criticism, as you may see when you monitor a theocracy. This is the reason why I stand for the secular law instead of a religious concept like Shariah. In fact, the secular law is a product of the intelligence of the Human and not a product of a religious concept. I believe that the government and the religion must be kept separated.

What say you?

Originally posted by black beetle
The lion acts this way because this is its nature;

The Human becomes a criminal once he ignores how to avoid greedness, rage and delusion;

Yet throughout all time humans do lie, they do steal, they do kill,
they do act with greed so why is it that you give a lion a pass and not
people for how humans act? You don't think humans are acting on
their nature while they lie, steal, kill? Unless you are willing to tell
me that those acts are against their nature, you have nothing to stand
on in my opinion, it is what we do!
Kelly

Originally posted by black beetle
The secular law is just made by the Human, and the law-givers are not claiming that they gave the Human the Ultimate Truth. There must be always a major consensus within a society: then, when we estimate that a law is false or out of order or dated, we are free to prove it and to press in order to have it updated.

On the contrary, the laws who are su ...[text shortened]... cept. I believe that the government and the religion must be kept separated.

What say you?

Wow, wait a minute, what is with this absolute you have written?
"There must be always a major consensus within a society: ..."

We must replace God with 'major consensus' and why is that? Going
back to my lion example, lions require no consensus they act as they
act, you are attempting to say we don't need God, but you than go
on and replace God with 'major consensus' and why do you do that?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Yet throughout all time humans do lie, they do steal, they do kill,
they do act with greed so why is it that you give a lion a pass and not
people for how humans act? You don't think humans are acting on
their nature while they lie, steal, kill? Unless you are willing to tell
me that those acts are against their nature, you have nothing to stand
on in my opinion, it is what we do!
Kelly

The nature of the Human is related to the evaluation of the mind; and not everybody is a criminal. The criminals you described are acting the way they act simply because their evaluation of the mind urges them to act this way.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Wow, wait a minute, what is with this absolute you have written?
"There must be always a major consensus within a society: ..."

We must replace God with 'major consensus' and why is that? Going
back to my lion example, lions require no consensus they act as they
act, you are attempting to say we don't need God, but you than go
on and replace God with 'major consensus' and why do you do that?
Kelly

I simply say that I need not “religion” in order to live decently. I need not religious laws based on the so called “word of god” -I just want man-made rules which they derive thanks to a major consensus. It seems to me that the secular law is enough: I see no sin in front of “god", I just see crimes against persons, against humanity, against animals, against Life, against the environment. Therefore the secular law is enough.

All in all, I think that we have to keep the government and the religion separated However you are free to enjoy your religion and your spirituality, sure thing;

Originally posted by black beetle
The nature of the Human is related to the evaluation of the mind; and not everybody is a criminal. The criminals you described are acting the way they act simply because their evaluation of the mind urges them to act this way.

What is crime, it is what we say it is, but people do act and those
actions are being done throughout time by the human race. So my
question to you remains! If people always do those things throughout
time, why do you want to reject it as something people do with respect
to their nature?
Kelly

Originally posted by black beetle
I simply say that I need not “religion” in order to live decently. I need not religious laws based on the so called “word of god” -I just want man-made rules which they derive thanks to a major consensus. It seems to me that the secular law is enough: I see no sin in front of “god", I just see crimes against persons, against humanity, against animals, a ...[text shortened]... ligion separated However you are free to enjoy your religion and your spirituality, sure thing;

Not trying to be harsh, forgive me if my tone in this post is!

Who are you to tell me what decently is? Why should I care what you
think decently is? I don't care what you think I need, or where I need
to go to get it! My point is our nature not your views upon any subject,
be it God or the common good will cause us to behave the same way
we do throughout time. Now, if there is an issue with our actions, if
there is something broken that needs fixed, I'd say you are very close
to suggesting that human nature does have something that the word
'sin' could come into play in describing.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
What is crime, it is what we say it is, but people do act and those
actions are being done throughout time by the human race. So my
question to you remains! If people always do those things throughout
time, why do you want to reject it as something people do with respect
to their nature?
Kelly

Whatever someone does, he does it because this is what he wants to do according with the evaluation of his mind. The nature of the Human is related to the nature of his mind.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Not trying to be harsh, forgive me if my tone in this post is!

Who are you to tell me what decently is? Why should I care what you
think decently is? I don't care what you think I need, or where I need
to go to get it! My point is our nature not your views upon any subject,
be it God or the common good will cause us to behave the same way
we do throu ...[text shortened]... n nature does have something that the word
'sin' could come into play in describing.
Kelly

Once you want to live along with other people, you need to respect the same rules with those people, you have to fo your best for your family and you have to do your best for the society -this is consensus. Religion is needless.

But I stand for your right to have your own ideas and your own religion and your personal way of living as far as you are not becoming a criminal😵

Originally posted by KellyJay
Not trying to be harsh, forgive me if my tone in this post is!

Who are you to tell me what decently is? Why should I care what you
think decently is? I don't care what you think I need, or where I need
to go to get it! My point is our nature not your views upon any subject,
be it God or the common good will cause us to behave the same way
we do throu ...[text shortened]... n nature does have something that the word
'sin' could come into play in describing.
Kelly

Sin is a delusion; I recognize solely crimes against persons, against humanity, against animals, against Life, against the environment.

You are not harsh at all -you ask and I answer. This is not a war but a synthesis -we communicate😵

Originally posted by black beetle
The secular law is just made by the Human, and the law-givers are not claiming that they gave the Human the Ultimate Truth. There must be always a major consensus within a society:

So you believe in some amount of democracy then?

then, when we estimate that a law is false or out of order or dated, we are free to prove it and to press in order to have it updated.
How do you go about 'proving' it? Take a vote? Or is it mathematical? You claimed that the no murder law was more or less essential. Has that been proven yet? Where do I find the proof?

On the contrary, the laws who are supposed that they derived from the so called "word of god" they stand above any criticism,
You seemed to be implying earlier that the no murder law was beyond criticism.

In fact, the secular law is a product of the intelligence of the Human and not a product of a religious concept.
Isn't religion also a product of the intelligence? Is secular law free from bias? Does it have a more perfect way of coming about than religious methods?

What say you?
I also do not think much of laws based on religion, but then I am not so sure that there is a perfect secular law either. I am generally something of a supporter of decentralized democracy and some amount of socialism. Though the most efficient system in use today seems to be the benevolent dictator.