Rickdog

Since when, is it the responsability of the church and the Pope to be worried on over population ? Their concern is in matters of their faith. It doesn`t have anything to do to have more followers. Maybe next time you could say that "Global warming" is also the church`s fault ().

For the record : The Catholic church, has not banned the use of condoms against the spreading of AIDS. The catholic church bans the use of Condoms, cause according to them it encourages promiscuous sex and also because it is against all non-natural forms of birth control.

What if you were a Celiac ?, Wheat flour, would kill you. Most of the inactive ingredients in any drug you use to take, are formulations made in order to not produce adverse reactions, when given the drug. Sometimes the drug you need alone, has a horrible taste, or needs to reach a certain part of your digestive system, where absortion must take place or else it would inactivate the drug you are taking. Some of those inactive ingrededients, are just a part of the outer structure of the pill or capsule, usually with artificial flavors or coloring. The diference among diferent products of the same drug, of diferent laboratories, usually is in the mixture of diferent inactive ingredients, some of which can have diferent reactions according to diferent patients (whew, what a big mix-up of "shit", , even for me, making the explanation it is dificult to understand, but whatever).

I`d say that religion offers confidence that you are never alone, you will always have your beloved ones with you, therefore it gives you a sensation of security. It also gives you hope in things to come, that everything in life has a purpose and after terrenal life comes another form of life, so you really never reach the final point of the parragraph of your life. (very hard to believe, in my case, btw ).

What`s the size of its larvae ? Do they form part of the surface`s zooplankton ?

Being from a mostly Catholic country, I can`t confirm that the use of condoms is discouraged. I believe that the main reason of why it is not used is due, more to ignorance and poverty, together with maybe the shame that it produces to the individual among the society, the actual adquisition of them in a store. If you buy condoms, it is because you plan to use them, and therefore there is a sensation of guilt, use them probably with a friend (out of marriage) or probably with a prostitute, which are forbidden issues, but very regular, at least here in my country. Even in married couples you see this kind of guilt, which is totally insane, but it still happens. In relation to the arrival of children, to almost everybody it is considered a blessing, even though it can be a pain. The main reason why the church sends their preachers to Africa, is because the majority of them don`t believe in the Catholic church or because they aren`t strong muslim believers and therefore you could still convince them to change their actual beliefs. You can`t blame the church as being the one to guilt for the killing of people, the church doesn`t force no one to believe in her. Poverty, is the one you should blame as being guilty. The availability of condoms in poor countries, where starvation and health issues are far more important, is scarce. If any health organization is willing to help them, it is not going to fill a truck, with condoms, when other more vital needs are needed, such as medicins, clean water and food. Moreover when roads are bad and it is expensive to send a truck to where you have difficulties to reach the ones who are in need.

Probably true, but as Mr Skeptic said, "there is no evidence of that". Do you know how to talk in Dog ?, horse ?, or, pig ?. You don`t, so their language isn`t so simple after all, isn`t it ?. Anyhow, if my Chilean dog, goes to any part of the world, he has the abbility to comunicate himself perfectly and clear with any other dog from anywhere, including your dog for example. Do we (humans) have the same abbility ?. No, we can`t, probably we will be able to communicate some ideas, but we can also uderstand everything exactly as the opposite. So animals , do have a complex language skill after all. Actually you don`t really know what an animal thinks, so you can`t affirm it with absolute certainty. As your dog, hears the sound of the door, maybe he thinks "here comes my slave, to feed me as ussual", " he is my slave, because he has to work his "guts off" to feed me, meanwhile I simply have to wait for him sleeping in my couch, in MY house". One point in your favor.

About this issue, I`m just going to say this and nothing more, since I don`t want to give the impression as if I want rules to be changed, around here. The reason why I posted my opinions about the exclussion rules, its`that those issues with restrictions, will always be interesting and highly attractive, and I think that for everyone who has come in here (SFN), has liked them also, since we get the priviledge to see how things are treated in them, full of respect even if opinions are diferent in them without fighting, it is highly attractive, but it also gives you the temptation to add your own opinions, and with the exclussion rules, of course you can`t, which is highly annoying and frustrating. I think that probably for the purpose of it, you can put in it all the restrictions that you wish, but don`t make them available to be read by whom can`t participate in them. Kind of like the moderators forum, which is not available for all. By this, you avoid the existence of that frustration, and therefore all the complaints that arise from time to time. This is like grabbing a piece of meat and passing it under the nose of a dog and not letting him eat it. Highly frustrating for the mutt. No wonder that after you do this after a while, the dog simply attacks and bites you afterwards, not even being interested in the meat at all. :-)

ydoaPs, my friend. Before saying anything else, I must say a few things about myself (off-topic). I`m from Chile, which is a country where Catholicism is the main kind of religion existent, so even if we don`t accept it completely (my case), we have to get used to it, since it`s everywhere around. I was baptized by my parents as a methodist, by then I was a baby,so I couldn`t complain against their decision, but after my 15 th birthday, I had a mind of my own, and my agnosthism, if you can call it as that, started developing in me till now. Getting back to the issue here, those Idols that you say, aren`t such, they are images that represents saints and holy people refered in the bible, and through them they worship God, the only God, and its teachings. They don`t worship those figures, by what they are, but what they represent, that is, God, the holy ghost, its creation and the faith, and everything that he represents. Catholics are monotheists, and believe in only one god. (oh yes, I also believe in God, I simply decided not to follow him blinfolded. I`m like the apostole, who said that "if I don`t see it with my own eyes and put my fingers in his wounds, I will not believe").

You could argue, that if the zygote is taken out of the natural mother and implanted in another one (substitute mother), but a new born baby sure doesn`t need its natural mom, it can be nourished by a substitute one (eg. in the bible : Moses), or even nourished by a diferent specie as in the case of Romulus and Remo, who were nourished by a wolf. In the case of the zygote, considering that among diferent species, the forms of implantation (hormone mediated) and development of the placenta are diferent one from another, I don`t think that this is possible (I`m not certain though, with the actual technology).

Bull`s eye,

Actually, I recently was allowed to post in Religion after I asked for permission through a PM to and administrator, to whom, I will also say thanks in this post, to do so, but I sympathize with your observation Leader Bee, since I also think that the requirement of 100 posts is really to big if it is for the reasons expressed by the tree, my friends Imho (very humble, btw), if you want to be sure if any given member could be someone reliable, I minimum of 20 posts (on probation), can give you an idea of how the person is going to behave and if he doesn`t, well then you can give him a 100 or more, post requirement.

Actually 11 commandments, if you consider , the new commandment brought to us by Jesus "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another". (John 13:34) Anyhow, which of those two, are not followed by Christians ?

The feeling of love, giving of love and being loved too, is also pleasurable. And its also gods will. Is that wrong too ?

Among the practice and study of medicin, there has always been diferent approaches of what is right or wrong among it. Any study that involves human beings or experimentation with humans is always seen as not being correct, specially by relligious groups, who not having a good argument, ussually express themselves as it being against gods will. In the past, some of Medicins most huge advancements has been banned by those conservative groups, as what happened during the 16 th century, when Mr. Andreas Vesalius, decided to do dissectations of human dead corpses, for his book "De Humanis Corpore Fabrica", where he made the first complete Atlas of the human Anatomy, which nowdays is considered as the keystone of all Anatomic studies and Surgery, but by then was considered a sacrilege and even resulted in his condemnation by the Inquisition, to die in fire, being afterwards absolved by Charles V, to whom he dedicated his work. Imho, stem cells research must go on. Fortunatelly imo, some countries aren`t against it, so their research in the area now still continues. Whenever they achieve practical results, the gap among their knowledge and westerns knowledge will also achieve, that occident will be surpassed in the area and therefore the restrain done by relligious fanatics, will pobably allow medicines knowledge to make bigger advancements in the treatment of some diseases.

toastywombel my friend, don`t get me wrong, I also find no reason why should recreational sex be wrong at all, but in reference that it is found throughout nature, I must say that for most species they have sex only for procreation purposes, being the human being as with some other primates, the few exceptions, where sex is practiced for pleasure or domminance reasons. Of course most of the males are always eager for it, but females have procreation cycles or mating seasons, in which only for a few moments they will accept to have sex, mediated by hormonal activity. Mostly true mooeypoo my friend, but there always exists during sex a psychological factor. For instance, in the matter treated in the other topic in ethics, Rape, is in fact sex, but since it is done by force it will not necessarily produce any pleasure at all, where the psychi of the attacked woman, will block any hormonal activity that can help to produce pleasure. It is not necessarily Gods will, to be opposed to sex, but for most of his followers, sex for pleasure, is associated with the original sin, commited by Adam and Eve in the Paradise, where they ate the forbidden fruit, even though that God told them not to, reason why they were expelled from there.

In relation to the OP, if you think and you have been educated in your society, that any kind of abuse on a weaker person is OK and well accepted, than it wouldn`t be inmoral. If you think otherwise and the society in which you have developed yourself considers it as an act of abuse and not accepted, than you`ve committed an inmorality (this is how I `ve been taught and what I believe, btw). Good or bad morals and/or ethics, are defined by what one thinks about any actions or by what the society that you live in, thinks about it, so they differ widely from one place to another, and you can`t standarize what is good or bad for the whole human society. It always depends on what part of the human society you are in. Anyhow, for most of the civilized world any kind of abuse is considered wrong. Let me rephrase the OP exagerating a lot : if you can destroy a whole culture, by killing every member in it without leaving no trace that can bond the destruction to you, and you think it is correct. - Would it be inmoral ? The German National Socialists (Nazzi), during WW2, thought it wasn`t inmoral, so they tried to execute their "Final Solution".

Not really so, though. Probably their income will be lower, but what is more likely is that the insurance companies, will have to pay them through other means, since that`s what it is supposed so. What I get about the bill, is that the regular people will have to pay them more in order that they assume the costs of higher feas than normal. Specially in regards to catastrophic illness or disease, where actually as how things are now, can mean bankrupcy for a whole family with one of these patients among them. Of course when you are healthy, you never think that it can happen to you, so it is difficult to understand this. But nobody is inmune, and what is thought as never affecting you, can finally do, and when this happens, maybe you`ll think diferent about the whole issue.

Newbies_kid my friend, in regular plywood or normal plywood, the one you usually find in hardware stores, that`s what would most likely happen, and the reason why at first I was very esceptic about the whole idea, but I got into reading through the net, and found out that there is diverse types of plywood, made out of diferent types of wood and diferent types of glues, and to my astonishing there is a certain kind of Plywood called "Marine plywood", which is as a matter of fact, actually used in boat and ship construction. So Airbrush`s idea isn`t really so crazy after all (, no offense intended). Maybe the one thing about using this kind of plywood, that can ruin his project, it`s the fact that these Marine plywoods are highly expensive, so not on account for poor people or poor countries. Nevertheless, it is an idea about possibilities to save lives so I`ll encourage him to keep on at it. Maybe something can come out of all of this. (At least that`s what I think so).

In regards to the original OP. Your answer, can only be given to you directly from a Phisician, so go and see him. This place is not the place where you can get prescribed medication. Otherwise, it would be an irresponsability and I don`t think (imho) that anyone around here will fall in your attempt, to do so.

Personal Opinion or fact ? http://www.thefreedictionary.com/opinion To me, opinions are personal always. And one can`t be better or worse than the others. It depends on the owner of that opinion. You can like it or not, but that only depends on how you feel about it, nothing else....

My friends, although it seemed as I was going to retire myself of around here. Well, actually as what I posted, really that wasn`t my inttention, only that in not finding the correct words of how to express myself correctly that`s what it seemed like, and that preciselly is what I was pointing out. Sometimes when your language isn`t native english, although you manage it quite well, you make mistakes, as the one I just did unintentionally, btw.() In my last parragraph I was speaking in first person as part of a group of people with our "diferent" condition. Jackson33 and Phi for all, I appreciate your concern about it, but really I ask for your forgiveness for not being able to express my self correct, which lead you, to think otherwise, sorry and thanks. To not cause a wrong impression, I tell you : I will stay around alright, unless of course I`m asked explicitely on the contrary, which I`ll comply, since its not my intention to cause any troubles at all. I enjoy it, around here.

Specifically in politics, a wide range of issues is what makes our opinions develop in our minds and its not easy to explain in a few words comprehended, why do we ever feel or think as we do. Most of the time we don`t even know ourselves, why do we think as we do. So if you can`t really know the reasons why you think as you do, it is more difficult to express to others the exact reasons why you do. Anyhow, my opinion deserves all the respect since it was given in respect and freely. Lots of us are not really prepared for long speaches and reasons, full of semantics and philosophical reasons, so when we express our opinions, most of the time with maybe a small argument, when you get disproved when your words weren`t satisfactory, you could probably get a very big answer that only achieves that in the future, I will probably never participate again in any way, which is a sad issue, since you are unwillingly excluding those who think as I do, and who will ever give you an opinion in the future.

With this in mind I think, that once in the portal I`d start reading definetely the book number one, developing in the process a rapid and instant communication at distant range ability. Afterwards a would read book number three, about the Artificial Nourisher fruit, comunicating it by telepathy, to a friend with my newly acquired ability to comunicate at long distances instantly. Finally, I would grab book number two, and without reading it, I would pass through the portal back home......, where inmediately I`d build the fabulous machine, get on top of it, and fly away as furthest as posible, before the "Agent of Change" realizes of my strategy, and comes back to look for me, to punish me for outsmarting him........:D:D

Why should there be a declared winner in a debate as such ? Imho, a debate as this, helps everybody to see and learn for their own about two diferent positions of belief, which can teach us all, by enhancing our own conceptions of things. If done in a respectful manner, we all get the chance to nourish from it. Maybe even through the debate, new threads in other sections can arise with more involvement of every body else, not jeopardizing the original one on one debate, by getting it off topic with diverse opinions. Learning is not a matter of winners and losers. If we achieve knowledge through it, we all win.