Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I really don't care what the bible says about dietary requirements. What I laugh at are secular humanist fundamentalists who try to start a thread crapping on people that don't share their beliefs by claiming some irrelevant phrase in the bible is wrong when that phrase is not actually wrong if one understands the biology of rabbits and the nature of translated works.

And you still have not answered my question: do you eat rabbit or not?

If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist)

My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)
And you still have not answered my question: do you eat rabbit or not?
Never have any reason to since it is specialty product that stores do not normally stock. Edited by TimG
Posted

Never have any reason to since it is specialty product that stores do not normally stock.

Why would one need to have a reason for something like this?

Do you eat cow or pig or chicken or lamb or fish? Do you need a reason to eat that?

Are you not adventurous? Never gone to restaurant and saw rabbit on the menu and thought "hey, I'll try that since I can cook myself a steak at home anytime?"

Never been to a farmers' market where someone was selling Thumper?

If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist)

My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx

Posted
Why would one need to have a reason for something like this?
One needs an opportunity to have a reason. Rabbit is rarely available in my experience. I have seen ostrich more often than I see rabbit on the menu.
Posted

So, have you tried ostrich?

If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist)

My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx

Posted (edited)

Never mind the bollocks, you boys were caught here. No need to be cute now. Suggest you learn from the experience, and go away quietly. If in future you should need more advice consult one of the heavyweights, like betsy.

Edited by Manny
Posted

Never mind the bollocks, you boys were caught here. No need to be cute now. Suggest you learn from the experience, and go away quietly. If in future you should need more advice consult one of the heavyweights, like betsy.

For me it doesn't come down to the technical term of cud or whatever.

It comes down to: what's the big deal?

Why is it so wrong, in 2013, to eat rabbit?

For that matter, why is it so wrong, in the age of red tide warnings and scientific understanding of such things, to eat oysters? (Contra Leviticus 11:11) Trust me, they taste great and, when raw, are less filling.

That, among many other reasons, is why I agree with The_Squid that the Bible is a foolish book written by ignorant tribes people that happens to get a few things right on occasion (much like a stopped clock) and otherwise offers silly opinions on people's eating habits.

I mean, I will never eat chicken feet but that's my own hang up. I'm not about to put it in a book and call it an abomination or anything.

If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist)

My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx

Posted

A few thoughts:

First, it seems pretty clear that the reasons for dietary restrictions in the bible and other holy books are because the meats are considered "unclean". Not as in morally unclean, but unclean in terms of health and safety. Now, ancient conceptions of what is healthy and safe to eat are often wrong, but it seems pretty clear that such passages are meant as advice on what not to eat so you don't because it was thought to be dirty and unsanitary, not because it is a moral offense. And today now that we know more about what is actually healthy and safe to eat and what is not, those suggestions are easy to ignore, since we now have much better founded guidelines. The real problem is with people that misinterpret such passages to imply something about morality and "purity", rather than simply dietary advice.

To illustrate this, consider these other passages:

Of all the animals that walk on all fours, those that walk on their paws are unclean for you; whoever touches their carcasses will be unclean till evening. 28 Anyone who picks up their carcasses must wash their clothes, and they will be unclean till evening. These animals are unclean for you.
‘If an animal that you are allowed to eat dies, anyone who touches its carcass will be unclean till evening. 40 Anyone who eats some of its carcass must wash their clothes, and they will be unclean till evening. Anyone who picks up the carcass must wash their clothes, and they will be unclean till evening.

Look at the directives to wash your clothes. Seems pretty clear. Advice on how to stay physically clean from animals considered dirty. Nothing about morality here. Leviticus goes on to talk about skin diseases and how to treat people with such diseases, molds, "bodily discharges", etc, and how one should wash their clothes, their hands, etc. It's just like today we have signs everywhere that say "wash your hands after using the bathroom" or whatever.

Those who know me on these forums know that I am often the first to mock religion, but the food restrictions in these holy books really are just primitive health and safety regulations, no big deal about em.

On the other hand, of all the passages in Leviticus, these are hardly the most offensive or worthy of ridicule. How about:

If a man sleeps with a female slave who is promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment.[a] Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed. 21 The man, however, must bring a ram to the entrance to the tent of meeting for a guilt offering to the Lord. 22 With the ram of the guilt offering the priest is to make atonement for him before the Lord for the sin he has committed, and his sin will be forgiven.
10 “‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death
.13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
18 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a woman during her monthly period, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them are to be cut off from their people.
9 “‘If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she disgraces her father; she must be burned in the fire.
13 Then the Lord said to Moses: 14 “Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. 15 Say to the Israelites: ‘Anyone who curses their God will be held responsible; 16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them.
44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life,
But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, 15 and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands and so violate my covenant, 16 then I will do this to you: I will bring on you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and sap your strength. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. 17 I will set my face against you so that you will be defeated by your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you.
‘If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue to be hostile toward me, 28 then in my anger I will be hostile toward you, and I myself will punish you for your sins seven times over. 29 You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters. 30 I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars and pile your dead bodies[b] on the lifeless forms of your idols,

Yeah, I think those are all a bit more worth criticism than some food restrictions.

Posted

rolleyes.gif

Read the article again. Your reply indicate you haven't really understood the article.

Okay... gotta tune you out for now. Manny's just praised me for my patience - don't want to disappoint him. Bye-the-bye.

I read the part you emphasized and trust me I understand it a hell of a lot better than you.

Posted

I've got an idea. Lets pretend metaphysics provides real world answers to explain things, then get indignant when we find out its not.

Posted (edited)

Why is it so wrong, in 2013, to eat rabbit?

rolleyes.gif

First, what's 2013 got to do with this? That's like saying, murder was wrong in ancient times....it shouldn't be sooooo wrong in 2013! laugh.png

Anyway, for the life of me....who sez it's wrong to eat rabbit in 2013? blink.png

What's so obvious is that you've decided the Bible said so - and although you've already been told, and it's been explained that it's already okay to eat rabbit (or any other animals for that matter), you still insist on your wrong idea about the Christian faith.

You've decided on the conclusion - but the truth doesn't match it. So you try to shove and fit it anyway! laugh.png Just like evolutionists to <ahem> evolution.

Edited by betsy
Posted

Then ignore stuff we learned, like rabbits eat their poop. The green ones are still ok, apparently.

No ones forcing you to stop eating it. It's a free society. I'd ask, are you ignoring something, just because it is in the bible that you learned it? Because, that would be hypocritical in a way.

Posted

Then ignore stuff we learned, like rabbits eat their poop. The green ones are still ok, apparently.

Can you write at at least a Grade 7 level?
  • Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone."
  • Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds.
  • Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location?
  • The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).

Posted

The wild stuff is quite a bit more "gamey", I understand. Wouldnt know, I dont eat rodentia.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,015
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    agackibal
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...