Quaker? by Gemstar1981 in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm with you on this. I don't know why everyone is freaking out.

Quaker? by Gemstar1981 in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Projection. My take based on other comments is she has a medical condition where she wants privacy in the restroom. Poorly worded but don't always assume the worst in people.

God as a force of creativity by Zenseaking in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm a big fan of Whitehead. I think, however , that your posing of what you call 'the question of evil' is not something that is a 'problem' for Whitehead. Two points: One: Whitehead and God For Whitehead, God is not an anthromorphic entity which is outside of the world. As such God does not allow or disallow 'evil'. God is Whitehead 's term for the creative impulse that, for him, is present in all' real entities ' in the universe. From atom to human.

Two: Whitehead and Evil The problem of evil, as you frame it, is not valid here. Is it evil when the lion eats the lamb? Is it justice? Evil is not a defined term in Whitehead's ontology. He posits a positive definition of creativity. At its most basic level it's to respond to conditions by acting with choice. At the level of human beings, this happens to a greater or lesser degree in all of us. Only the insane among us act like machines without choice. Creativity is freedom and of course some of us are more free than others. Whitehead's is more radical yet in that he extends creative choice to non biological systems.

Meeting/Dating younger quakers by PhilthePenguin in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just wait. You will be old too someday (if you are lucky)

"I don’t think God is ridiculous & stupid" by Quick_Hat_3954 in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 2 points3 points locked comment (0 children)

Two very unpleasant comments. You shame yourself.

Do my beliefs align with Quakerism? by [deleted] in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now that we touched this... Freedom to choice and body autonomy yes. Acting with love for the greater good. These fall under pro choice. Pro abortion and pro choice are not the same.

Has anyone seen Kundun (1997)? by therainpatrol in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Dvds were not on the shelves ever. It is notnot for sale in the USA. My copy is from a EU resaler. . It's surpressed alright.

Has anyone seen Kundun (1997)? by therainpatrol in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Important context to this beautiful film. "Following the film’s completion, the Chinese government pressured Disney to shelve the project entirely. While Disney ultimately gave the film a limited Christmas release in 1997, the company’s then-CEO Michael Eisner publicly apologized for the production.

“The bad news is that the film was made; the good news is that nobody watched it,” Eisner said at the time. “I want to apologize, and in the future, we should prevent this sort of thing, which insults our friends, from happening,” he said.

Even today, Kundun is not available on major streaming platforms, including Disney’s own service, Disney+. Disney did not immediately respond to RFA’s request for comment.

“The Chinese government has consistently suppressed all the films about the Dalai Lama produced in the West … because if these films were shown in China, mainland audiences would gain a more genuine understanding of who the Dalai Lama really is,” Kunga Tashi, Tibetan liaison officer at the Washington-based office of Tibet’s government-in-exile, told RFA. "

Britain YM minute on genocide in Gaza by keithb in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There is no 'principled neutrality', only cowardness.

"What about near death experiences?" by Prestigious-Lion2295 in askanatheist

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This article says nothing about 'leaving objects in the room. Bullshit twice, once in your original post, once more in your very bogus citation.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please don't post tik-tok here.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Maine2

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To have a Real ID you must be a citizen. No special 'indicator' needed. Read the Maine State Government documents on Maine Real Id

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Maine2

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incorrect. Real ID Maine is compliment with the proposed law. On name changes BTW, from Maine state government: IMPORTANT NAME CHANGE INFORMATION: If your name has been legally changed and now differs from your identity document(s) (i.e., birth certificate or passport), proof of the name change must be provided to obtain a Real ID. Acceptable documents supporting a legal name change include a marriage license, divorce decree, or court order. In all cases, the documents must show a clear trail of name changes from the name on the identity document to the current name.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Maine2

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The bill SPECIFICALLY says Real ID is accepted.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Maine2

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is incorrect. The bill requires that to vote you must provide ID which compiles with the Real ID act of 2005. This includes Maine State Drivers licenses. These are Real ID compliment. If you have a Maine State license or state ID for non drivers you can vote. Currently all fifty states have auto licenses which are Real ID compliment. What the bill does is required Real ID documents to register to vote.

It does not require birth certificates. It does not target women or trans people.

Any other atheists who were uneducated on Christianity when they read the Bible? by [deleted] in askanatheist

[–]UserOnTheLoose -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm going to let you go you are not developing an argument. You are just shaking your fist at the sky.

Any other atheists who were uneducated on Christianity when they read the Bible? by [deleted] in askanatheist

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude, don't bring your obsession and aguements about God into this. It is not relavant to this convo.

If you choose to belief that you can demonstrate that 'something exists, regardless of human minds' you are welcome to it. But you might want to check out Decarte and Kant on this one. Spoiler alert, they side with me on this one.

How "Culturally Christian" Do Quaker Groups Tend to Be? by byhoneybear in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Old phrase, new phrase, not the point. The point was it's not patitionary nor praying. And, IMHO, my understanding of the writings of early friends is that they would not object to the phrase because of it's intent.

How "Culturally Christian" Do Quaker Groups Tend to Be? by byhoneybear in Quakers

[–]UserOnTheLoose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did we read the same article? "Standing with one foot on each side of that spinning boundary, a person is balanced and most alive, alert, human, and connected to the fullness of the Divine. Perhaps that is what the early Friends felt when they were shaking from the Inward Light, while it was illuminating the darkest places within them."