The DaVinci Code!!!

[Yujike]

"Hell is other people's religion."

[Joshue]

Originally Posted by Suki

Hellhector said:

THAT IS WHY WE NEED THE DIVISION OF RELIGION AND STATE.
WE NEED TO ABOLISH RELIGION. THEN EVIL WILL DISAPPEAR.

YUJIKE, I AGREE RELIGION = EVIL.

SUKI I WANT TO KNOW YOU OPINION ABOUT THIS. IT IS INTERESTING TO SEE HOW RELIGION IS USED TO OPPRESSED WOMEN.

Many power structures in society including the state and religious institutions oppress people. That is not new at all of course.

I have some supposedly 'controversial' views on 'abortion'. I don't believe an adult consenting woman should abort if she becomes pregnant and doesn't want the baby. Especially when there is Plan B available, condoms, and birth control available for low costs.

I say, consenting adults should practice safe sex and birth control and if she gets pregnant because she failed to do it through negligence, "I was not thinking" and etc. Sorry, she should have the child. If she still doesn't want the baby then she should give the baby for relatives to raise. Some feminists don't like me because they say I don't allow CHOICE. That is not true. The woman if not raped, or impregnated by incest or molestation as a teen, HAS CHOICE of birth control before the sex act. If she FORGOT to, or is irresponsible, the fetus should not pay the price of her lack of responsibility. PUNTO. Sorry, feminists but women are NOT men. They can't walk away from a baby like these idiot men do. They have to throw up, go through pain and labor to bring forth that incredible fully formed human life and become extremely serious about who they decide to get pregnant by in the future. No time for superficiality and stupid choices.

Controversial point of view. My view which is in frequency with Hell-hectors [which is evidence that the end is near] come from the fact that I am a men, I am not a women. My firm belief is that ABORTION AND WAR should not be approached with the black and white mentality. I HATE BOTH, but is not as easy at it sound. These are gray subjects, since we all come from a women, I have to respect the women right over her own body, is her choice.

Women are women. They have the burden and the joy of that as a gender, and that is the physical and emotional responsibilities of bringing forth a new life. If they don't want to get pregnant. Take norplan, take pills, condoms, whatever they need to do including Plan-B morning after pills. Do what they got to do. But, if they fail to do that. They can't back out with cheap excuses of 'I don't want to do this anymore. Let me flush the baby out.' That is immature and it is no longer an option. You had the responsibility of having safe, intelligent and protected sex that doesn't result in a pregnancy. You failed to do that. The male partner might be a loser and an idiot, but ultimately WOMEN are left holding the baby literally and if she also caves in to such immature and irresponsible idiocy, the entire society pays the price. Women are the last bastion of responsibility for new life on earth. If she loses that sense of responsibility then the society really goes down the tubes. That is my opinion.

I believe that neither women or men should be carring any burden at all just because of a gender, this Put men on an advantage position. I have serious respect for your opinion, because you are a women, If you were a men I been flicking you as a booger. Why? Men have a good freaking deal, Is easy for any men to say that abortion is bad, but when they have to experience labor pain, or raise a couple of children on minimum wage, or have to deal with raising a child I mean the way women do with the child, Then I be glad what they have to say about abortion.

I am sure there are women who had abortions and feel justified in that. If they did everything possible to not get pregnant and still got pregnant and the male partner was a bad choice from the gitgo. I still think it is her ultimate responsibility. She said yes to the fool. She should have said 'go home fool' you aint getting what you thought you were going to get tonight, because you aren't really committed to any responsibilities beyond the moment. If she really thought hard about it, most men women have irresponsible sex with are not worth a minute of her time, much less her body. But people do have sex that is unprotected for the dumbest reasons and children are the result. But, I think women have to be the stronger in the responsibility department Hector. They got to be smarter. Because afterall, it is not Hector, Jose, Juan or Papo that is going to have that baby inside of them for nine months and causing all kinds of chaos with their hormones and making their lives miserable. You know what I mean?

That is exactly What I mean and why this is such a deep and extremely controversial subject. You are right women should think first, but life sadly does not give a lot of second chances. Just as you said Hector, Jose, Juan or Papo are not going to have the baby, in fact they could abandon her [ I am sorry but I am going to be realistic here based on observation] The majority of young men in the island are just falling in the irresponsible maleante paradigm, which reward irresponsible behavior. Not that different from the mainland.

The problem with religion is that they are dictating policy to people without a sense of practicality. To think religion is just going to disappear from the human mind is not realistic. Religion is present everywhere. The religious institutions deal with common human needs and problem in impractical ways. The RC church for examples, stand on birth control is antiquated and dated. People are not going to have 14 kids or 21 kids in modern capitalism. And in the third world the low quality of life and high infant mortality rates makes a mockery out of the church's dedication to human life. If they want poor people with no resources to have 20 kids because they don't believe any couple should use birth control then I suggest the RC church sell off all those gold rings, diamonds and property and take the money and build hospitals, schools and homes for the MILLIONS of kids dying of lack of basics. They won't? Then change their doctrine. The church is an institution that continues to exist even though it is 'passe' because people BELIEVE in the church. How does one eliminate belief? It is like asking how does one eliminate alcoholism? Opiates? Drugs? Fantasies? Faith? Or do people have to do it for themselves? It is tough.

I agree, you put it the right way, I believe this is why we have a lot of hell hectors outhere the number keep coming up, because of the inconsistencies, impracticality and idiotic ways some belief systems have.


BTW, FELIZ NAVIDAD. SE LES QUIERE DE GRATIS MI GENTE.

[Eddier1]

Josh, I don't see what the movie the Da Vinci Code has to do with the issue of women's choice to have an abortion.

First, the DVC was entirely fictional, a product of the mind of an author that was into religious topics in order to make money. Rule one on this was violated in that greed is considered sinful by all religions. And Jesus made that clear when he told the young rich man that if he wanted to be perfect he must give up his desire for wealth, and distribute all riches that he had to the poor, and then come and lead the Christian life that Jesus taught.

Second, Jesus was a bona fide Rabbi, the Bible has words wherein Jesus was recognised by the Jews as a Rabbi and addressed him as such. Of course, he wasn't a Pharisee as a rabbi, but belonged to the Essene sect, also called Zadokites, in that he held that all authority in the Jewish religion must trace their credibility back to Zadok -- the very first Rabbi of the Jewish religion.

Third, and this goes to marriage, a big topic of the DVC. Jesus could not marry because he was an Essene Monk and they took vows of chastity and poverty. So the book upon which the movie was based was contrived and convoluted land not merely ahistorical.

Now as to the issue of abortion, Suki spoke her mind to that and she is against abortion, under all circumstances since she did not even take into consideration while lambasting the RC Church that the Church holds that abortion is permitted and not sinful if the mother's life is endangered by giving birth to her baby.

The RC church is now 21 centuries old, and although I agree that religion can affect some peoples's lives in a bad way, still in all, the burden of the errors mainly rest on the people who have shown to be not only superstitious and ignorant but desperately in need of education and bracketing their superstitions.

Education is the answer to the ignorance, and I opine that Suki would not be against educating all, including women. However, it is you and Hellhector that labor under the dream that religion can be done away with. And I agree with Suki that people need religion even when superstition is contained. People want to believe, to have faith in something, and as long as they do, religion will be with us till the end of the world.

My disclaimer is that I am an atheist, but I recognize that theists often are in need of religion as a personal comfort in their lives. Above all as a scientific socialist I go one step beyond that and aver the people MUST have their personal comforts, and religion is a personal matter even if dogmatic religionists think otherwise and attempt to convert even us commies.

It will never happen to us because religion is beyond the limitations of human understanding to us non-believers, and therefore though the many may need it as personal comfort, as I said, above, we commies don't need it, and will keep it under strict boundaries if and when we achieve a communist world.

That is all I have to say honestly about this most difficult issue of the place of religion in the world until the end of the world.

[Joshue]

Originally Posted by Eddier1

Josh, I don't see what the movie the Da Vinci Code has to do with the issue of women's choice to have an abortion.

First, the DVC was entirely fictional, a product of the mind of an author that was into religious topics in order to make money. Rule one on this was violated in that greed is considered sinful by all religions. And Jesus made that clear when he told the young rich man that if he wanted to be perfect he must give up his desire for wealth, and distribute all riches that he had to the poor, and then come and lead the Christian life that Jesus taught.

Second, Jesus was a bona fide Rabbi, the Bible has words wherein Jesus was recognised by the Jews as a Rabbi and addressed him as such. Of course, he wasn't a Pharisee as a rabbi, but belonged to the Essene sect, also called Zadokites, in that he held that all authority in the Jewish religion must trace their credibility back to Zadok -- the very first Rabbi of the Jewish religion.

Third, and this goes to marriage, a big topic of the DVC. Jesus could not marry because he was an Essene Monk and they took vows of chastity and poverty. So the book upon which the movie was based was contrived and convoluted land not merely ahistorical.

Now as to the issue of abortion, Suki spoke her mind to that and she is against abortion, under all circumstances since she did not even take into consideration while lambasting the RC Church that the Church holds that abortion is permitted and not sinful if the mother's life is endangered by giving birth to her baby.

The RC church is now 21 centuries old, and although I agree that religion can affect some peoples's lives in a bad way, still in all, the burden of the errors mainly rest on the people who have shown to be not only superstitious and ignorant but desperately in need of education and bracketing their superstitions.

Education is the answer to the ignorance, and I opine that Suki would not be against educating all, including women. However, it is you and Hellhector that labor under the dream that religion can be done away with. And I agree with Suki that people need religion even when superstition is contained. People want to believe, to have faith in something, and as long as they do, religion will be with us till the end of the world.

My disclaimer is that I am an atheist, but I recognize that theists often are in need of religion as a personal comfort in their lives. Above all as a scientific socialist I go one step beyond that and aver the people MUST have their personal comforts, and religion is a personal matter even if dogmatic religionists think otherwise and attempt to convert even us commies.

It will never happen to us because religion is beyond the limitations of human understanding to us non-believers, and therefore though the many may need it as personal comfort, as I said, above, we commies don't need it, and will keep it under strict boundaries if and when we achieve a communist world.

That is all I have to say honestly about this most difficult issue of the place of religion in the world until the end of the world.

it was Dan Brown fiction to a level I heard about the myth of the priory of Zion before and that the knight Templar were their military arm. Well this was presented to me as a medieval conspiracy theory about the reasons behind the first crusades.

Da vinci code is about portraying monotheism as sexist against women. the abortion discussion in this thread came as a side effect of women issues I think HH brought that up. Before Christ we live in a world of gods and goddesses, today is just one god and it is a men. I have a problem with fanaticism not religion. My father was a minister remember that. I know i sound very liberal sometimes to people that cannot accept multidimensional thinking.

[Marquis_DeLeon]

Originally Posted by Sal_De_Aqui

A lot of people are un easy when discussing the topic of Dan Brown's DaVinci Code. The story that puts Mary Magdalene a woman commonly seen as a prostitute in a much different light. Going against biblical text and saying Mary may have actually been the wife of Jesus. The church is in a up roar, Americans are split down the middle. It's heresy, it's slanderous. But is it really?

Dan Brown's novel is a clever depiction of real life events with totally false or up supported evidence. It simply presents something that is plausible the mistake of Dan Brown is that he presents it as fact. But think back in the time of Jesus, Jewish fathers were to find a wife for his son by the time he was 20. Jesus, was 30 years when he started his ministry. So there is definitely plausible evidence that he could've been married. And had a family, however like one author of the first popular Grail novel "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" is stated as saying. "Evidence is not proof".

I recently got in a debate with a few devought Catholics about the Movie and Novel. I simply asked, if evidence, hard evidence not an assumption, but something that presented fact that Jesus was in fact married to Mary Magdalene and in fact had children. Would that change your original faith you have in him as the savior of the world. Their answer was simply "No".

So why is the religious sect in such an up roar over the DaVinci code. Well, it's simple. To most religious people Jesus is only divine. He's God. He's a messiah. They forget that he was born in Humanity. He was a God walking amongst men, but he was also human. And a human that didn't began his ministry until he was 30 years old. Dying at the age of 33. One even joked, that he probably was married, and was actually supposed to die at the age of 50, but when he realized how hard married life was he said "Uhhh, Father, you think you can expedite this." And most after hearing certain things about Jewish customs and being reminded that Jesus wasn't the Jesus we see in the bible until he turned 30. Most would say, yes, it is plausible he may have had a wife. The only mistake Dan Brown makes in his Novel is he presents it as fact. It's a fact Jesus and Mary were married, and it's a fact that they had a daughter, and a fact that a secret society called the Priory of Scion was invented to protect that blood line. Ridicilous!!! A better book to read is Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Which basically, present the evidence and says he may have had a wife. Not he had a wife.

The point of this...Is to ask the question to all Christians the world over. Would Jesus having a wife undermine his message? The answer you should all give his "No", Jesus was in fact divine, but he was also born into humanity. We all seem to forget that, we remember the Jesus of age 30, preaching, praying, teaching, and forget the Jesus of the earlier years. Looking at things objectively isn't really heresy.

I loved this post. Typical SAL, he could debate with an Eskimo on how to make an igloo and get them to see his point. I guess that was all the debate classes he took while persuing his law degree. I definitely miss you man...We all do...