Cyprus-Forum.com

[GreekIslandGirl]

Neither is compulsory.

You’re obliged to live by the state Oracle and any practicing anarchists get incarcerated and live by the state by force!

You're presuming that any 'anarchist' would immediately break laws (legal) which would call for incarceration. Before religion or governments, individuals would also have dealt appropriately with such unacceptable behavior from others. But because we are 'social creatures', Man is a beast which can live by his own moral and civil codes, since these have been selected by evolution as the best traits for survival. Ergo, one can live without either religion or governments (both serving similar roles, by different names).

[Filitsa]

Now you simply call your faith 'democracy'. What you say about the 'state' reflects your 'belief' in the 'state' - much like a religious believer could say about their faith in a god. In other words, you call yourself a 'citizen' [sic] instead of a 'believer'. You mention you have 'certain freedoms' as a 'citizen' - yet a believer is also told he has 'free will' :- these are similar concepts, the giving of some 'responsibility'.

As I said, 'religion' and the 'state' are the same things by different names. We are merely faithful followers of one or other (or both - or neither?).

So if I commit an infraction against the state, for example I get caught running a red light, does this mean I'm no longer a faithful follower, or must I commit a felony instead?

I see every tomdickharry is pitching a shot with offerings, unable to entertain broader concepts. Let's just say, would you give up all your trust in the State just because you have to pay a penalty? Similarly, would you give up on all your faith if asked to pray for forgiveness for a sin?

Geez, is this the reception one gets for entertaining your broader concepts? I'm thinking you want us to be faithful followers of you too.

Fiddlesticks, Filitsa, your flattery is face-saving flanneling.

Phooey, oh fabled forum phoenix, Filitsa is forthright!

Anyway, the extent of their commonality is their objective to subdue chaos, one with a moral code, the other with a legal code. In terms of goals, those of the former are loftier.

[supporttheunderdog]

Neither is compulsory.

You’re obliged to live by the state Oracle and any practicing anarchists get incarcerated and live by the state by force!

You're presuming that any 'anarchist' would immediately break laws (legal) which would call for incarceration. Before religion or governments, individuals would also have dealt appropriately with such unacceptable behavior from others. But because we are 'social creatures', Man is a beast which can live by his own moral and civil codes, since these have been selected by evolution as the best traits for survival. Ergo, one can live without either religion or governments (both serving similar roles, by different names).

But who before governments or religiosn would have defined the rules as to what is or is not accpetable?

As soon as one has a system with agreed rules imposed by others which define acceptable behaviour, and an ability to impose penalties for non-conformance, one must have a Government (of sorts). Many mammals actualy live in heirarchical societies with pack or tribe or pride leaders who keep them in order of some sort, mostly pecking or bonking order and respect for the leader so even they can be said to have a government.

[GreekIslandGirl]

Neither is compulsory.

You’re obliged to live by the state Oracle and any practicing anarchists get incarcerated and live by the state by force!

You're presuming that any 'anarchist' would immediately break laws (legal) which would call for incarceration. Before religion or governments, individuals would also have dealt appropriately with such unacceptable behavior from others. But because we are 'social creatures', Man is a beast which can live by his own moral and civil codes, since these have been selected by evolution as the best traits for survival. Ergo, one can live without either religion or governments (both serving similar roles, by different names).

But who before governments or religiosn would have defined the rules as to what is or is not accpetable?

As soon as one has a system with agreed rules imposed by others which define acceptable behaviour, and an ability to impose penalties for non-conformance, one must have a Government (of sorts). Many mammals actualy live in heirarchical societies with pack or tribe or pride leaders who keep them in order of some sort, mostly pecking or bonking order and respect for the leader so even they can be said to have a government.

Now you're getting warmer. But you need to look at Kin Selection Theory to see how 'co-operation' produced a selective advantage - which is exploited(?) by religion/government.

[Atheist]

The interviewer for the census came a few days ago to my home. To the relevant question he selected himself "Orthodox Christian" while asking "Orthodox Christian, right?" to which I answered that I was atheist. He then went on to select the option "Other" from the religion list.

Apparently there is no "Atheist" or "None" option, so atheists and non-religious people are all counted as being believers in some "other" religion, which is of course incorrect.

My conclusions from my personal experience as well as the experiences of relatives and other people who contacted me:

1. The interviewers made assumptions and filled several of the questions themselves. This will result in the census showing a greater number of "Orthodox Christian" than the real number since the " Orthodox Christian" option was often assumed when interviewing Greek Cypriots.

2. There was no option in the census for Atheists and non-religious people. I will wait and see if in the results of this census they will publish numbers for Atheists and non-religious people.

[GreekIslandGirl]

I don't believe there is a "God". I don't believe there needs to be a "God". I don't believe there is any evidence, science based or other, which can logically, morally or other show the work of a "God".

But .... I would always put myself down as Christian Orthodox!

It's the greatest cultural background to bestow on anyone .... since the Big Bang!

[Get Real!]

I don't believe there is a "God". I don't believe there needs to be a "God". I don't believe there is any evidence, science based or other, which can logically, morally or other show the work of a "God".

Not even after meeting me?

[GreekIslandGirl]

I don't believe there is a "God". I don't believe there needs to be a "God". I don't believe there is any evidence, science based or other, which can logically, morally or other show the work of a "God".

Not even after meeting me?

After seeing you, I believed you were Adonis' Cypriot cousin, resurrected. But then you convinced me Adonis was just another Hellenic Myth. So now I'm back to believing you are Beelzebub incarnate

[bill cobbett]

The interviewer for the census came a few days ago to my home. To the relevant question he selected himself "Orthodox Christian" while asking "Orthodox Christian, right?" to which I answered that I was atheist. He then went on to select the option "Other" from the religion list.

Apparently there is no "Atheist" or "None" option, so atheists and non-religious people are all counted as being believers in some "other" religion, which is of course incorrect.

My conclusions from my personal experience as well as the experiences of relatives and other people who contacted me:

1. The interviewers made assumptions and filled several of the questions themselves. This will result in the census showing a greater number of "Orthodox Christian" than the real number since the " Orthodox Christian" option was often assumed when interviewing Greek Cypriots.

2. There was no option in the census for Atheists and non-religious people. I will wait and see if in the results of this census they will publish numbers for Atheists and non-religious people.

Well really ... !!!! Frequently get forms from gov, local gov departments, schools etc here in GB which have a section asking for info on such things as religious affiliations, ethnicity, the colour of your skin etc... have always declined to fill in these cos it ain't any business of government and the like to poke their spying noses in to the private lives and beliefs or non-beliefs of the citizenry.

[Get Real!]

I don't believe there is a "God". I don't believe there needs to be a "God". I don't believe there is any evidence, science based or other, which can logically, morally or other show the work of a "God".

Not even after meeting me?

After seeing you, I believed you were Adonis' Cypriot cousin, resurrected. But then you convinced me Adonis was just another Hellenic Myth. So now I'm back to believing you are Beelzebub incarnate

A zouzouni gori?