wanderer

The International Astronomical Union (IAU) defined in August 2006 that, in the Solar System, a planet is a celestial body that:

1. is in orbit around the Sun,
2. has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
3. has “cleared the neighbourhood” around its orbit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAU_definition_of_planet

The Phoenicians founded a new city in North Africa and called it ‘New City’ (Qart Hadasht), we now call it Carthage. The Carthaginians founded a new city in Spain and called it ‘New City’ (Qart Hadasht). The Romans conquered both of these cities, and found that having cities with the same confusing so called the second one ‘New New City’ (Carthago Nova).

It is obviously intentionally done to mimic the ritual sacrifice of the two goats on Yom Kippur, the day of atonement. Two goats were presented to the high priest, one was chosen by casting lots to be sacrificed on the altar and the other was cast into the wilderness, purifying the people of Israel of their sins. In the story, Jesus plays the role of both goats.

The English Defence League are a far-right, Islamophobic organisation in England.

So, they should be worried about the far right.

The new deaths bring the total reported so far by various countries to 577, according to an AFP tally.

The do cite their source.

At least 60 Jordanians also died, the diplomats said, up from an official tally of 41 given earlier on Tuesday by the Jordanian government.

Do you think it’s impossible that 41 people could die, reported on, and then more people die?

I suspect that they knew it they would have to correct it, but did it anyway because the lie would be spread more than the correction.

Onan’s crime was greed not lust. He did not want to provide for Tamar or her potential children.

Yes, from a superficial viewpoint they are similar. And from a superficial viewpoint shooting a practice target is similar to shooting a person dead. It would be rather stupid to refer to target practice as murder.

It’s onanism in English. And it’s rather stupid to call it that because Onan didn’t masturbate, he used the pull out method to avoid getting his sister-in-law pregnant with his brother’s kid. (yes, I know that sounds weird but that’s the story)

Apparently I have to say this again. Those are MY opinions. The goal of me sharing my opinions point out a position that I suspected would not be accepted by the scouts, at least your in interpretation of their rules. Your response was that atheists that did not believe the same as me could be accepted, which was irrelevant to the point. And here you insult me. Congratulations, you have confirmed my suspicions.

The UU MOU demonstrates that they still discriminate. Any Christian denomination is automatically acceptable, for atheists they have to pick and choose saying “you’re one of the good ones”.

If a scout wishes to define god as thermodynamics, BSA accepts it.

OK, that’s irrelevant. Those were clearly MY opinions, a demonstration of how I refuse to label things with the term ‘god’, followed by the rationale for me doing so.

You are using a completely different, contradictory definition.

I am not using any definition of ‘god’, I am just saying that it has a definition, not any specific one just some definition, otherwise the term would be meaningless. And if I were to label anything ‘god’ it would be because that thing fulfilled the requirements for this unspecified definition. If I were to label something as ‘red’ it would be because it fulfills the requirements to be called ‘red’. If it did not fit the definition of ‘red’ I would not apply the label ‘red’. In the same way, I would not label something as ‘god’ unless I thought the label fit. If I were to label something as ‘god’ it would imply that there was something different about it when compared to something that I would refuse to apply the term ‘god’ to. And there is nothing that I would be willing to label ‘god’.

The UU memorandum of understanding is irrelevant. I am not a member, and I think most atheists are not either. People should not be required to join a church or a religion to join the scouts.

I don’t believe in any gods, and would never say that something was a god if I did not think it was a god. Consciousness is not a god, nature is not a god, the laws of thermodynamics are not gods. Labeling these things gods only serves to imply some sort of mystery thing about it when there is none, I would consider it lying to do so. Do you think they would accept me? I don’t.

If the religious aspects were truly left to the scouts and their families, outright atheists would simply be accepted, and there would not need to be a memorandum of understanding so that a specific organization could participate, because they would have simply been accept beforehand.

You are suggesting that it is acceptable to for scouts that do not believe in any god to lie and say that they do. Dishonesty goes against the scout principles.

Treating the oath as something that can be worked around using wordplay does nothing but make a complete mockery of the oath. We had this debate a over century ago when trial witnesses were required to swear an oath to god and atheists were prevented from being witnesses. The solution wasn’t to allow atheists to use god as a metaphor for reality, but to remove the requirement for a belief in a god.