The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum (Archive Board)
July 12, 2020, 09:15:20 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This is our Read Only Archive Board (closed to posting July 2011). Join our new vBulletin board!
 
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 12, 2020, 09:15:20 pm

Login with username, password and session length
Donate!
The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.
TC Staff
Important Information about this Archive Board
This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: What rule would you change?  (Read 11227 times)
HeartShadow - Cutethulhu
Assistant Board Coordinator
Senior Staff
Grand Adept Member
****
Last Login:April 15, 2013, 06:53:07 pm
United States United States

Religion: FlameKeeper
TCN ID: GenevieveWood
Posts: 8627


I am the Pirate Teddybear!

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Topic Start: April 21, 2011, 03:27:14 pm »

You're ruler of the world for ONE decision.  What would you outlaw/make mandatory?  Why?  What do you think would come of it?

Personally, I'd make "scientific creationism" illegal to teach.  It doesn't work, it's not science, and it doesn't make any damn sense when you actually get into it.  (Drowning fish anyone)?  All it does is confuse the hell out of kids that don't know how to assess sources.

As far as what it would change - I don't know.  Hopefully there would be at least a slightly better education for people and less confusion - and less cherry-picking of which scientific theories apply when.
Logged




FlameKeeping website: http://www.flamekeeping.org

Welcome, Guest!
You will need to register and/or login to participate in our discussions.

Read our Rules and Policies and the Quoting Guidelines.

Help Fund Our Server? Donate to Lyricfox's Cancer Fund?

Ellen M.
Adept Member
*****
*
Last Login:February 17, 2013, 08:34:24 pm
United States United States

Religion: ADF - UU - eclectic Wiccan - devotee of Brighid
Posts: 2479

Go, then - there are other worlds than these.

Blog entries (0)

Ellen MacInnis lellenator
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1: April 21, 2011, 05:25:01 pm »


If I could enforce it? No abuse. It's the broadest command I can think of beyond "Don't be a douchebag."
Logged

Sage and Starshine: My new Pagan blog about Druidry, witchcraft, Brighid, and everything in between. -- 14th post 6/1/11
Melamphoros
Staff
Grand Adept Member
***
Last Login:March 28, 2015, 11:01:26 pm
United States United States

Religion: Informed Eclectic with Hellenic Overtones
TCN ID: Melamphoros
Posts: 13621


Kiss My Scythe

Blog entries (0)


« Reply #2: April 21, 2011, 06:26:03 pm »

You're ruler of the world for ONE decision.  What would you outlaw/make mandatory?  Why?  What do you think would come of it?

Personally, I'd make "scientific creationism" illegal to teach.  It doesn't work, it's not science, and it doesn't make any damn sense when you actually get into it.  (Drowning fish anyone)?  All it does is confuse the hell out of kids that don't know how to assess sources.

As far as what it would change - I don't know.  Hopefully there would be at least a slightly better education for people and less confusion - and less cherry-picking of which scientific theories apply when.

In all honesty, it would be to make it so no marriages are recognized by any government.  This would only be to teach the heteros who just don't get it a lesson in how not having that legal recognition can completely fuck up one's life.  After a few years, I may relent if everyone agrees to make all marriages legally recognized or none at all.

Yeah, I'm spiteful like that.
Logged



Jesus saves, Allah forgives, Cthulhu thinks you will make a great sandwich.
My Spiritual Blog
Sperran
Reserve Staff
Staff
High Adept Member
***
Last Login:October 18, 2014, 02:07:12 am
United States United States

Religion: Judaism
Posts: 2945


Adonai Echad

Blog entries (8)


« Reply #3: April 21, 2011, 08:59:42 pm »

In all honesty, it would be to make it so no marriages are recognized by any government.  This would only be to teach the heteros who just don't get it a lesson in how not having that legal recognition can completely fuck up one's life.  After a few years, I may relent if everyone agrees to make all marriages legally recognized or none at all.

Yeah, I'm spiteful like that.

So everyone should have to suffer because some people are assholes?  How is that better than the current system?
Logged
Melamphoros
Staff
Grand Adept Member
***
Last Login:March 28, 2015, 11:01:26 pm
United States United States

Religion: Informed Eclectic with Hellenic Overtones
TCN ID: Melamphoros
Posts: 13621


Kiss My Scythe

Blog entries (0)


« Reply #4: April 21, 2011, 09:08:17 pm »

So everyone should have to suffer because some people are assholes?  How is that better than the current system?

Well it's not so much "better" than it's more to prove a point to said assholes and some people who may be on the fence.  But if no marriage was recognized than technically everyone would have the same rights as everyone else in that regard.




For a less serious thing that I would change:  Everyone must bathe regularly and wear deodorant.  That would be beneficial to everyone Grin
Logged



Jesus saves, Allah forgives, Cthulhu thinks you will make a great sandwich.
My Spiritual Blog
HeartShadow - Cutethulhu
Assistant Board Coordinator
Senior Staff
Grand Adept Member
****
Last Login:April 15, 2013, 06:53:07 pm
United States United States

Religion: FlameKeeper
TCN ID: GenevieveWood
Posts: 8627


I am the Pirate Teddybear!

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #5: April 22, 2011, 06:26:37 am »

If I could enforce it? No abuse. It's the broadest command I can think of beyond "Don't be a douchebag."

yeah, I have a hard time seeing that one as doable, so I went with something concrete.  If yours would WORK, though ..... *sigh* be a different world.
Logged




FlameKeeping website: http://www.flamekeeping.org
Utusitusi
Senior Apprentice
**
Last Login:August 04, 2011, 03:46:02 am
Belgium Belgium

Religion: Kemetic Orthodox Shemsu
Posts: 69


Blog entries (0)

Utusitusi
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #6: April 22, 2011, 06:27:29 am »

You're ruler of the world for ONE decision.  What would you outlaw/make mandatory?  Why?  What do you think would come of it?

I'd order a complete and utter removal of religion from politics. No prayers in public schools, no creationism, no prayers or public utterances of religious convictions by politicians, no religion-oriented political parties, no faith-based laws, etc
In the hope it'd make the world a bit more tolerant, logical and scientific
Logged

BGMarc
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:August 17, 2011, 09:57:32 pm
Australia Australia

Religion: Stoic (with declining druidic/wiccish hangovers and emergent Hellenic/Kemetic affiliations)
Posts: 1525


Blog entries (0)

Marc Larkin 6marc9
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #7: April 22, 2011, 06:44:24 am »

tolerant, logical and scientific

I'm not at all sure that those three are automatically companions in crime. It sounds to me like the triumph of secularism in a way that denies the spiritual a place in public life. Sounds like the tyrranic triumph of one belief system over all others. For me - very scary.
Logged

"If Michelangelo had been straight, the Sistine Chapel would have been wallpapered" Robin Tyler

It's the saddest thing in the world when you can only feel big by making others feel small. - UPG

Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime. The sentence is death. There is no appeal and sentence is carried out automatically and without pity. Lazarus Long.

BGMarc at the Pub
Utusitusi
Senior Apprentice
**
Last Login:August 04, 2011, 03:46:02 am
Belgium Belgium

Religion: Kemetic Orthodox Shemsu
Posts: 69


Blog entries (0)

Utusitusi
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8: April 22, 2011, 08:02:45 am »

I'm not at all sure that those three are automatically companions in crime. It sounds to me like the triumph of secularism in a way that denies the spiritual a place in public life. Sounds like the tyrranic triumph of one belief system over all others. For me - very scary.
No, I wouldn't deny the spiritual or religion a place in the public, I would just want to ban it out of politics. I have issues with the fact that in countries that should have a split between government and religion, a party like the christian-democrats is allowed to exist (Belgium). I don't agree with governments subsidising specific religious groups or passing laws which are inherently faith-based (abortion, gay marriage, etc).
I accept a politician going to church/temple/whatever as a private person, but they should not be allowed to use their public persona (as a politician) to speak out for their religious convictions.

Logged

HeartShadow - Cutethulhu
Assistant Board Coordinator
Senior Staff
Grand Adept Member
****
Last Login:April 15, 2013, 06:53:07 pm
United States United States

Religion: FlameKeeper
TCN ID: GenevieveWood
Posts: 8627


I am the Pirate Teddybear!

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #9: April 22, 2011, 08:39:49 am »

No, I wouldn't deny the spiritual or religion a place in the public, I would just want to ban it out of politics. I have issues with the fact that in countries that should have a split between government and religion, a party like the christian-democrats is allowed to exist (Belgium). I don't agree with governments subsidising specific religious groups or passing laws which are inherently faith-based (abortion, gay marriage, etc).
I accept a politician going to church/temple/whatever as a private person, but they should not be allowed to use their public persona (as a politician) to speak out for their religious convictions.



That's .. difficult, though.

I mean, where do you draw the line?  EVERYTHING I do is informed by my religious views.  You can't say this part's religious and this part's political - it's integrated.

I agree that we shouldn't try to legislate morality, but I think that would be enough.  You can't tell someone to leave their religion at the door of the state house.  ... and in fact, I think that would be pretty damn scary if you could.
Logged




FlameKeeping website: http://www.flamekeeping.org
NyteShaed
Journeyman
***
Last Login:June 24, 2011, 10:55:38 am
United States United States

Religion: Wicca
Posts: 163

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #10: June 17, 2011, 02:28:45 pm »

You're ruler of the world for ONE decision.  What would you outlaw/make mandatory?  Why?  What do you think would come of it?

Personally, I'd make "scientific creationism" illegal to teach.  It doesn't work, it's not science, and it doesn't make any damn sense when you actually get into it.  (Drowning fish anyone)?  All it does is confuse the hell out of kids that don't know how to assess sources.

As far as what it would change - I don't know.  Hopefully there would be at least a slightly better education for people and less confusion - and less cherry-picking of which scientific theories apply when.

I'd sterilize 90% of the people, chosen randomly.
Logged
Ellen M.
Adept Member
*****
*
Last Login:February 17, 2013, 08:34:24 pm
United States United States

Religion: ADF - UU - eclectic Wiccan - devotee of Brighid
Posts: 2479

Go, then - there are other worlds than these.

Blog entries (0)

Ellen MacInnis lellenator
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #11: June 17, 2011, 02:29:47 pm »

I'd sterilize 90% of the people, chosen randomly.

Whooo because that doesn't infringe on reproduction and bodily rights at ALL!
Logged

Sage and Starshine: My new Pagan blog about Druidry, witchcraft, Brighid, and everything in between. -- 14th post 6/1/11
HeartShadow - Cutethulhu
Assistant Board Coordinator
Senior Staff
Grand Adept Member
****
Last Login:April 15, 2013, 06:53:07 pm
United States United States

Religion: FlameKeeper
TCN ID: GenevieveWood
Posts: 8627


I am the Pirate Teddybear!

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #12: June 17, 2011, 02:38:09 pm »

I'd sterilize 90% of the people, chosen randomly.

You realize that EITHER society would collapse OR that remaining ten percent would become *breeders*, right?
Logged




FlameKeeping website: http://www.flamekeeping.org
anaise
Apprentice
**
Last Login:June 17, 2011, 04:35:53 pm
United Kingdom United Kingdom

Religion: none
Posts: 21


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #13: June 17, 2011, 02:39:40 pm »

That's .. difficult, though.

I mean, where do you draw the line?  EVERYTHING I do is informed by my religious views.  You can't say this part's religious and this part's political - it's integrated.

I agree that we shouldn't try to legislate morality, but I think that would be enough.  You can't tell someone to leave their religion at the door of the state house.  ... and in fact, I think that would be pretty damn scary if you could.

Not as scary as people passing their religious convictions into law. 'Leaving your religion at the door' doesn't mean not having personal beliefs, it means not being able to inflict your beliefs on everyone else . That's what politics are about - forming the laws of a country and a country contains a lot of people who may have different beliefs. The alternative is a Theocracy where religious beliefs are enforced as laws.

Sorry, I have to go with the complete seperation of church and state.

cheers,
Anaise
Logged
anaise
Apprentice
**
Last Login:June 17, 2011, 04:35:53 pm
United Kingdom United Kingdom

Religion: none
Posts: 21


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #14: June 17, 2011, 02:45:14 pm »

You realize that EITHER society would collapse OR that remaining ten percent would become *breeders*, right?

Well , if chosen randomly, one might end up with the remaining 10 percent being only a single sex and that would take care of the breeding problem Grin

But yes, given the world as it stands now, deleting 90 percent of the reproductive population (spread evenly across the globe )would probably mean the end of human life on earth. I'm afraid most people's 'hunting and gathering' skills have slipped a couple of notches and the infrastructure of the globe  now is not designed for subsistance living.

Oh well, there goes the global-hood.

Anaise
Logged

Donor Ad: Become a Silver or Gold Donor to get your ad here.

Tags:
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

* Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


EU Cookie Notice: This site uses cookies. By using this site you consent to their use.


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.066 seconds with 49 queries.