• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Abide by God's Law so you can live long


  • Please log in to reply
121 replies to this topic

#1 william7

  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 25 July 2007 - 11:30 AM


Italy tries to curb murderous driving habits
By Stephen Brown
Mon Jul 23, 6:02 PM ET

ROME (Reuters) - A gruesome spate of deadly road accidents this summer may finally destroy the Italians' belief that their agility at the wheel compensates for a cavalier attitude to safety and their reactions are not dulled by drink.

In the country with world's second highest density of car ownership, traffic accidents are depressingly common on roads clogged with irascible drivers who disdain traffic rules, park anarchically and treat pedestrians like moving targets.

But reports of toddlers and teenagers mown down by drunk drivers -- and not least the president's wife who was knocked over on a pedestrian crossing outside the palace -- have prompted Italian politicians to react.

Prime Minister Romano Prodi, unusual for preferring bicycles even though the red Ferrari is the ultimate Italian status symbol, called for a "major moral and civic shake-up" regarding Italy's diabolical driving habits.

The influential Catholic Church decries "collective madness" on the roads and Pope Benedict has issued "10 Commandments" for motorists, saying cars "tend to bring out the 'primitive' side of human beings."

That certainly seems to be the case in Rome, where the heirs to the cradle of European civilization turn surprisingly aggressive behind the wheels of their pint-sized city cars, or mounted on the buzzing mopeds that swarm the streets.

"If you scratch my paintwork, I'll kill you," a burly truck driver shouts at a mother trying to maneuver a pushchair round his vehicle, which is occupying the width of the pavement.

On the busy Via Salaria, a blind woman trying to negotiate a pedestrian crossing blocked by cars parked three abreast vents her frustration by beating them with her white stick.

Pavements provide scant refuge, with cars parking on them and zooming mopeds using them as short-cuts. Zebra crossings at traffic lights serve as starting grids for impatiently revving scooters and motorbikes.

"In nearly 60 years of life I've never seen a driver fined for not respecting the lines," wrote Il Manifesto newspaper's Marco d'Eramo in a column. "Once, hit by a car on a crossing, I was told off by a policeman who said 'you should be more careful'."

D'Eramo said the Italian capital boasts 2.4 million cars for 2.5 million inhabitants -- and 8.47 pedestrians killed or hurt per 1,000 people versus 0.85 in London or 0.4 in Paris.

THE LAWLESS ROADS

Applying make-up or talking by mobile phone while driving is routine. An 82-year-old Sicilian distracted by a call drove onto a beach last month, hurting children and a pregnant woman.

Lobby groups like "Safe Children" lament that only one in five Italians wears a seat belt, while children often sit in the back or front with no belt, let alone a car seat, and sometimes on the lap of an adult at the wheel.

This adds up to 8,000 deaths a year in road accidents plus 170,000 people put in hospital and 600,000 needing first aid, according to health ministry estimates. Comparing Italy's record with the European Union is hampered by poor data but the EU has demanded member nations halve the number of accidents by 2010.

That will be difficult in a place where the death-defying disdain for things like speed limits prompts Rome police to keep two Lamborghini Gallardo "supercars" for high-speed chases.

But faced with public outcry, and incidents like attempts to lynch a Mercedes driver who knocked over a couple on a moped in Rome, killing one of them, ministers are vying with each other to propose draconian additions to a draft law on road safety.

Suggestions include raising the charge for drunk drivers who kill to murder from manslaughter, confiscating their vehicles, banning alcohol at motorway cafes and warning against the dangers of drink-driving on the labels of liquor bottles.

"This is a national emergency," said Transport Minister Alessandro Bianchi, demanding "more severe punishments and obligatory arrest."

"MURDEROUS CITY"

The bill awaiting Senate approval will ban under-fives from riding pillion on mopeds, now a common sight, reduce the speed limit for young drivers and crack down on those using phones, doing U-turns on motorways or ignoring one-way signs.

But experts doubt new paperwork in itself will help unless laws are applied more rigorously by more visible police patrols.

They also fear interest may flag after the annual season for carnage in summer, when holidaying inebriated teenagers leaving nightclubs become victims and perpetrators.

"Road safety is not a summer problem nor just about the Saturday night carnage," said the Italian Automobile Club (ACI). "People driving on Italian roads must have the certainty that if they break the rules, they will be stopped and punished."

While praising a police campaign to double the number of alcohol tests on drivers to a million in 2007, ACI said Italy will remain woefully behind France which carried out 8 million such tests on its roads last year.

Meanwhile, wilting bunches of flowers continue to appear on street corners hit by tragedy, sometimes accompanied by a note like the one in southern Rome which read: "Thank you, Rome, for the murderous city you have become."

http://news.yahoo.co...taly_driving_dc

While I have to agree that driving can bring out the worst aggressive impulses in humans, I have to firmly disagree with the pope's 10 Commandments for motorists as the solution. Here the Catholic church is again issuing laws without God's authorization that are in direct contravention to God's duly promulgated laws that outright prohibit driving under existing conditions. Driving is prohibited because it violates the second commandment to love your neighbor as yourself and it violates the statute in Leviticus that prohibits doing anything that endangers the life of your neighbor. See Matthew 22:36-40; Leviticus 19:16. These laws are plain and unambiguous and are to be construed under the mercy standard mentioned in Matthew 9:13; 12:7; 23:23.

Pollution and global warming are also a concern since God intends to destroy all those who destroy the earth so He can establish His kingdom where the inhabitants neither harm nor destroy that He promised in Isaiah 11:9. See Revelation 11:18. Wise immortalists will avoid the use of motor vehicles at all costs. Bicycles and foot power are a sufficient means of transportation.

#2 Aegist

  • Guest Shane
  • 1,416 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 25 July 2007 - 12:07 PM

[airquote] [huh] [/airquote]

#3 basho

  • Guest
  • 774 posts
  • 1
  • Location:oʎʞoʇ

Posted 25 July 2007 - 01:02 PM

Posted Image

uh oh...

Posted Image

uh oh!

Posted Image

UH OH!!!

Posted Image

OH CRAP!!!!

Posted Image

You, sir, are going to HELL!!!

Posted Image

#4 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 25 July 2007 - 01:40 PM

Lol. You guys are crazy.

After the last post by basho, I have the overwhelming urge to post this:

(Caution: Bad language)

#5 lucid

  • Guest
  • 1,195 posts
  • 65
  • Location:Austin, Tx

Posted 25 July 2007 - 02:04 PM

God's duly promulgated laws that outright prohibit driving under existing conditions. Driving is prohibited because it violates the second commandment to love your neighbor as yourself and it violates the statute in Leviticus that prohibits doing anything that endangers the life of your neighbor. See Matthew 22:36-40; Leviticus 19:16. These laws are plain and unambiguous and are to be construed under the mercy standard mentioned in Matthew 9:13; 12:7; 23:23.


So it is a sin to drive because you might kill someone. By the same logic, it would be a sin to defend yourself with a gun against an armed assailant where as there might be some friendly fire and you might kill an innocent.

If you think driving is additionally sinful because it damages the world then it would also be a sin to pay for goods which have been shipped which basically means you have to grow your own food or purchase it via a bike from local farmers. (You basically have to live in a hippy commune.) Additionally by the same logic you couldn't raze cows (even if you don't eat them) where as they produce ungodly amounts of methane.

Uggg... religion...

#6 william7

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 25 July 2007 - 02:09 PM

I guess I forgot how blinded by science and technology you guys really are. We're talking about a major life threatening disease here and you guys are making these insincere posts. What's really going on here?

There's an article on the Live Earth website that asks What would Jesus Drive? The obvious answer is nothing. He would walk or ride a donkey.

#7 Aegist

  • Guest Shane
  • 1,416 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 25 July 2007 - 02:11 PM

Cars were invented to solve the growing problem of pollution created by horse and donkey faeces.

#8 william7

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 25 July 2007 - 02:17 PM

Cars were invented to solve the growing problem of pollution created by horse and donkey faeces.

False! They were created to travel faster and farther more comfortably. And human life and the environment has been paying big time ever since.

#9 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 25 July 2007 - 02:32 PM

Wise immortalists will avoid the use of motor vehicles at all costs. Bicycles and foot power are a sufficient means of transportation.

For short distances, perhaps. For making a commute to my office (which is many miles away) or to the airport (do you also object to flying in planes?) or going to visit my family/friends who are far away, or any of many different things, it would be impractical to use a bicycle or foot power, as the distances are too great to travel them in a timely manner.

#10 william7

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 25 July 2007 - 02:32 PM

So it is a sin to drive because you might kill someone. By the same logic, it would be a sin to defend yourself with a gun against an armed assailant where as there might be some friendly fire and you might kill an innocent.

Real Christians don't carry guns for protection. And they stay out of areas where a gun is a necessity.

You basically have to live in a hippy commune.

Now your talking sense. But, instead of a hippy commune, how about a Christian commune?

Additionally by the same logic you couldn't raze cows (even if you don't eat them) where as they produce ungodly amounts of methane.

Vegetarianism is another solution. Have you ever took a serious look at all the problems caused by meat eating

#11 basho

  • Guest
  • 774 posts
  • 1
  • Location:oʎʞoʇ

Posted 25 July 2007 - 09:29 PM

Cars were invented to solve the growing problem of pollution created by horse and donkey faeces.

False! They were created to travel faster and farther more comfortably. And human life and the environment has been paying big time ever since.

Incorrect! Heard of typhoid and cholera? Horses were a serious environmental problem in the 19th century, and the massive amounts of manure caused disease epidemics that killed many people. Can you imagine wading through a quagmire of liquid manure and breathing in powered faeces?

From: The Horse & the Urban Environment

The following is an extended excerpt from "The Centrality of the Horse to the Nineteenth-Century American City," an article by Joel Tarr and Clay McShane explaining the serious environmental hazards horses presented when used in large numbers and how that related to the emergence of the automobile.
...
While the nineteenth century American city faced many forms of environmental pollution, none was as all encompassing as that produced by the horse. The most severe problem was that caused by horses defecating and urinating in the streets, but dead animals and noise pollution also produced serious annoyances and even health problems. The normal city horse produced between fifteen and thirty-five pounds of manure a day and about a quart of urine.
...
Manure piles also produced huge numbers of flies, in reality a much more serious vector for infectious diseases such as typhoid fever than odors.
...
Because of the manure on the streets, especially when rain created a quagmire, "crossing sweepers" (like those in London), appeared, to help ladies and gentlemen wade through the liquid manure. Citizens frequently complained about the "pulverized horse dung" which blew into their faces and houses and which covered the outside displays of merchants. The paving of streets accelerated the problem, as wheels and hoofs ground the manure against the hard surfaces and amplified the dust. Writing in Appleton's Magazine in 1908, Harold Bolce argued that most of the modern city's sanitary and economic problems were caused by the horse. Bolce charged that each year 20,000 New Yorkers died from "maladies that fly in the dust, created mainly by horse manure."
...
The crisis of the 1890s and early twentieth century, involving public health fears about pollution, traffic jams, and rising prices for both hay, oats, and urban land, made municipal governments and urban residents much more ready to switch to autos.



#12 william7

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 26 July 2007 - 01:01 AM

Wise immortalists will avoid the use of motor vehicles at all costs. Bicycles and foot power are a sufficient means of transportation.

For short distances, perhaps. For making a commute to my office (which is many miles away) or to the airport (do you also object to flying in planes?) or going to visit my family/friends who are far away, or any of many different things, it would be impractical to use a bicycle or foot power, as the distances are too great to travel them in a timely manner.

Yea, airplanes are the same thing. We got to learn to live in a way that's less destructive to ourselves and our environment.

Look what the United States Supreme Court said about motor vehicle accidents caused by drunk driving in MICHIGAN DEPT. OF STATE POLICE v. SITZ, 496 U.S. 444 (1990). The Court said:

No one can seriously dispute the magnitude of the drunken driving problem or the States' interest in eradicating it. Media reports of alcohol-related death and mutilation on the Nation's roads are legion. The anecdotal is confirmed by the statistical. "Drunk drivers cause an annual death toll of over 25,000[ * ] and in the same time span cause nearly one million personal injuries and more than five billion dollars in property damage." 4 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment 10.8(d), p. 71 (2d ed. 1987). For decades, this Court has "repeatedly lamented the tragedy." South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553, 558 (1983); see Breithaupt v. Abram, 352 U.S. 432, 439 (1957) ("The increasing slaughter on our highways . . . now reaches the astounding figures only heard of on the battlefield").

http://caselaw.lp.fi...l=496&invol=444

They equated the problem with warfare.

And you being a cryonics supporter should be especially concerned. How long you think it'll take medical science to figure out how to put you back together again if your little compact car gets hit by a semi? They might not even bother to thaw you out.

#13 william7

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 26 July 2007 - 01:35 AM

Incorrect! Heard of typhoid and cholera? Horses were a serious environmental problem in the 19th century, and the massive amounts of manure caused disease epidemics that killed many people. Can you imagine wading through a quagmire of liquid manure and breathing in powered faeces?

The article you posted says:

The following is an extended excerpt from "The Centrality of the Horse to the Nineteenth-Century American City," an article by Joel Tarr and Clay McShane explaining the serious environmental hazards horses presented when used in large numbers and how that related to the emergence of the automobile.

This is not the cause or reason motor vehicles were invented. It was, however, a major influence in causing the masses to switch over from horses to the motor vehicles once they became available.

#14 Aegist

  • Guest Shane
  • 1,416 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 26 July 2007 - 01:36 AM

So it is a sin to drive because you might kill someone. By the same logic, it would be a sin to defend yourself with a gun against an armed assailant where as there might be some friendly fire and you might kill an innocent.

Real Christians don't carry guns for protection. And they stay out of areas where a gun is a necessity.

What would Jesus carry? The answer is obvious, a sword.
"I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword"

Luke 22:35-38
"But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."

Wise immortalists will avoid the use of motor vehicles at all costs. Bicycles and foot power are a sufficient means of transportation.

For short distances, perhaps. For making a commute to my office (which is many miles away) or to the airport (do you also object to flying in planes?) or going to visit my family/friends who are far away, or any of many different things, it would be impractical to use a bicycle or foot power, as the distances are too great to travel them in a timely manner.

Yea, airplanes are the same thing. We got to learn to live in a way that's less destructive to ourselves and our environment.

We must stop farming immediately. Do you understand the environmental costs of growing food in the destructive method of farming? In order to grow crops entire ecosystems are destroyed.

I call of of humanity to immediately give up eating farmed foods, we have to only eat foods dropped by natural plants and in no way harm their natural cycle!
</sarcasm>

Look what the United States Supreme Court said about motor vehicle accidents caused by drunk driving in MICHIGAN DEPT. OF STATE POLICE v. SITZ, 496 U.S. 444 (1990). The Court said:
http://caselaw.lp.fi...l=496&invol=444
They equated the problem with warfare.
And you being a cryonics supporter should be especially concerned. How long you think it'll take medical science to figure out how to put you back together again if your little compact car gets hit by a semi? They might not even bother to thaw you out.

Hell, why bother living at all? An asteroid could fall on me at any moment. I should cryogenesize myself immediately to avoid all risk of damaging my perfect little body...

#15 Aegist

  • Guest Shane
  • 1,416 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 26 July 2007 - 01:38 AM

Incorrect! Heard of typhoid and cholera? Horses were a serious environmental problem in the 19th century, and the massive amounts of manure caused disease epidemics that killed many people. Can you imagine wading through a quagmire of liquid manure and breathing in powered faeces?

The article you posted says:

The following is an extended excerpt from "The Centrality of the Horse to the Nineteenth-Century American City," an article by Joel Tarr and Clay McShane explaining the serious environmental hazards horses presented when used in large numbers and how that related to the emergence of the automobile.

This is not the cause or reason motor vehicles were invented. It was, however, a major influence in causing the masses to switch over from horses to the motor vehicles once they became available.

Necessity...the mother of invention?

#16 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 26 July 2007 - 08:28 AM

Wise immortalists will avoid the use of motor vehicles at all costs. Bicycles and foot power are a sufficient means of transportation.

For short distances, perhaps. For making a commute to my office (which is many miles away) or to the airport (do you also object to flying in planes?) or going to visit my family/friends who are far away, or any of many different things, it would be impractical to use a bicycle or foot power, as the distances are too great to travel them in a timely manner.

Yea, airplanes are the same thing. We got to learn to live in a way that's less destructive to ourselves and our environment.

Look what the United States Supreme Court said about motor vehicle accidents caused by drunk driving in MICHIGAN DEPT. OF STATE POLICE v. SITZ, 496 U.S. 444 (1990). The Court said:


Well, as far as the pollution goes, if someone invents an electric or a hydrogen powered car (or fusion, or antimatter, or anything else) that doesn't pollute, and can travel at speeds comparable to gas powered ones for distances comparable to gas powered ones between fill ups and at a reasonable cost, then I will be the first one to buy it.

As far as the accident rate goes, once we get computer controlled cars out there (like they are in the early stages of developing at the Darpa Urban Challenge, whose predecessor was the Darpa Grand Challenge a few years ago) on the roads for everyone, then the accident rate should essentially drop to zero. (or at least very, very low; and much safer than using foot power)

Until then, as I stated, I have no choice because my work, and visiting friends and family preclude me from being able to avoid automobiles and airplanes.

#17 Aegist

  • Guest Shane
  • 1,416 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 26 July 2007 - 08:42 AM

Besides, you can't refer to the italian road death and accident rate as evidence for your claim about how dangerous cars are. They aren't real drivers like us, you ahve to judge the dangers of driving off of our driving rates.

(By "our" I mean all of us people who don't have accidents)

you know, sort of like how all of those false christians give the real christians a bad name

(by real christians I mean the ones who do exactly what you think is right)

#18 basho

  • Guest
  • 774 posts
  • 1
  • Location:oʎʞoʇ

Posted 26 July 2007 - 10:12 AM

Yea, airplanes are the same thing. We got to learn to live in a way that's less destructive to ourselves and our environment.

Restricting transport and severely curtailing travel seems like a backwards step in terms of progress.

A better solution will naturally arise when we achieve substrate independence, and can then simply communicate our neural structure over vast distances and instantiate a physical presence at the point of destination.

#19 JohnDoe1234

  • Guest
  • 1,097 posts
  • 154
  • Location:US

Posted 26 July 2007 - 05:10 PM

Real Christians don't carry guns for protection. And they stay out of areas where a gun is a necessity.

Well, not all christians can stay out of shopping malls, convenience stores, and schools.

Vegetarianism is another solution. Have you ever took a serious look at all the problems caused by meat eating

Elijah, humans have cravings for meat for a reason! It's usually packed full of proteins and is a great source of nutrition, you just have to make sure you eat the right stuff, and stay away from the wrong stuff (e.g. lamb)

Pollution and global warming are also a concern since God intends to destroy all those who destroy the earth so He can establish His kingdom where the inhabitants neither harm nor destroy that He promised in Isaiah 11:9. See Revelation 11:18. Wise immortalists will avoid the use of motor vehicles at all costs. Bicycles and foot power are a sufficient means of transportation.


Elijah, Do you take baths or showers? Did you know that each time you do, you're killing hundreds of thousands of god's little children? Yes, you have millions of tiny creatures ranging from benign microbes to microscopic mites living all over your skin! So stop destroying god's creations!

A better solution will naturally arise when we achieve substrate independence, and can then simply communicate our neural structure over vast distances and instantiate a physical presence at the point of destination.

BINGO!!! We have a winner! [tung]

#20 Zarrka

  • Guest
  • 226 posts
  • 0

Posted 27 July 2007 - 01:28 AM

wait joseph... are you saying that lamb is good or bad for you?

/loves lamb, never want to give it up...

#21 mike250

  • Guest
  • 981 posts
  • 9

Posted 27 July 2007 - 03:27 AM

despite all car accidents and deaths I don't want to switch over to a car that is driven by a robot at the drivers seat. I enjoy driving and the associated adrenalin rush with the speed craze.

#22 JohnDoe1234

  • Guest
  • 1,097 posts
  • 154
  • Location:US

Posted 27 July 2007 - 05:44 AM

Well catichka, I guess that it wasn't fair for me to call out lamb by itself, it's just about on par fat-wise with pork and such (but a little easier to trim the fat from)... I just don't consider pork/lamb to be that healthy, I have had it about 3 times in my life, and I also love it (as I do pork), but I try my best to stay away from it, I usually stick with chicken, and fish caught in local lakes where I know the mercury level's are safe.

So, yeah, I was saying it is bad for you, but only as bad as pork from what I understand... ;)

#23 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 27 July 2007 - 07:18 AM

despite all car accidents and deaths I don't want to switch over to a car that is driven by a robot at the drivers seat. I enjoy driving and the associated adrenalin rush with the speed craze.

I am sure there will always be tracks and offroading places and things like that (not to mention virtual worlds that are indistinguishable from real reality) to get your driving fix. ;))

#24 AdamSummerfield

  • Guest
  • 351 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Derbyshire, England

Posted 27 July 2007 - 07:45 AM

I was recently in Italy.
On my tour around Lake Garda, my tour guide mentioned that Italy has many Muslim children attending it's schools, these children and their families want the Italians to take the cross down from the walls of their schools.
She sounded as though she had strong feelings about it. Perhaps this article reflects on how Christianity believes that the Muslim religion is too violent, among many other things.
- Sezarus

#25 AdamSummerfield

  • Guest
  • 351 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Derbyshire, England

Posted 27 July 2007 - 07:50 AM

However it is also my belief that although Christianity preaches justice and peace, many Christianity-strong areas have crimes above the expected.
I also think this article hints on how the Christian leadership will fabricate the most absurd stories about how God affects the modern world, pollution for example, even when there is undeniable evidence to the contrary...
- Sezarus

#26 Zarrka

  • Guest
  • 226 posts
  • 0

Posted 27 July 2007 - 01:29 PM

i think the desire to keep the cross up has more to do with despise of muslims trying to inflitrate the strong christian culture of Itally.

#27 Luna

  • Guest, F@H
  • 2,528 posts
  • 66
  • Location:Israel

Posted 27 July 2007 - 01:43 PM

I am so tired of everything connected god somehow.
you can connect pretty much everything to anything.

Bet we can find some quotes in lord of the rings to explain the real world.

Not to mention the bible, true or not, was trying to represent the real world which makes it so much easier to be connected to anything..

#28 william7

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 28 July 2007 - 12:27 PM

What would Jesus carry? The answer is obvious, a sword.
"I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword"

Luke 22:35-38
"But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."

I brought this up with one of our church members who recently stopped in. We came to the conclusion that the buying of swords was only meant to fulfill prophecy. You must read the sword buying statement in context with other key verses to get the full meaning. Notice the verses below.

31"Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. 32But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."

33But he replied, "Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death."

34Jesus answered, "I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me."

35Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
      "Nothing," they answered.

36He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment."

38The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."
      "That is enough," he replied.
                                                      
                                                        ***

49When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should we strike with our swords?" 50And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.

51But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him.

52Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? 53Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour—when darkness reigns."

http://www.biblegate...53;&version=31;

50Jesus replied, "Friend, do what you came for."

   Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. 51With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.

52"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?"

55At that time Jesus said to the crowd, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me. 56But this has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled." Then all the disciples deserted him and fled.

http://www.biblegate...56;&version=31;

On the "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" part, I believe this to mean the sword of controversy. The same church member I consulted above said this could be prophetic of the violence done to Jesus and the early Christian Church many of whom were put to death by the sword and other means of execution. In other words, the sword symbolizes the death and destruction Jesus caused to be brought on Himself and the true Church of God because of His teachings and righteous example.

Jesus clearly taught a message of nonviolence. See, for example, Matthew 5:5,7,9,21-22,38-39. Old Testament prophecy indicates that man will live in peace and harmony during Christ's Millennial reign and the sword and battle will be abolished. See, for example, Hosea 2:18; Micah 4:3. Since motor vehicles are just as destructive as the sword and warfare as the United States Supreme Court has indicated, I'm sure they'll be abolished or subject to substantial modification in use and design.

Posted Image
"Let Us Beat Swords into Plowshares" statute in UN garden

We must stop farming immediately. Do you understand the environmental costs of growing food in the destructive method of farming? In order to grow crops entire ecosystems are destroyed.

I call of of humanity to immediately give up eating farmed foods, we have to only eat foods dropped by natural plants and in no way harm their natural cycle!
</sarcasm>

Why don't we just learn to grow our food wisely and practice vegetarianism instead? Look at all the wasted grain and destruction of the land that goes into meat production. See, for example, http://www.all-creat...gbenefits.htm#2 and http://www.all-creat...gbenefits.htm#4. Fasting and calorie restriction would also save on food so the poor and starving could be fed as well as making it so less work needs to be done growing larger quantities of food.

Hell, why bother living at all? An asteroid could fall on me at any moment. I should cryogenesize myself immediately to avoid all risk of damaging my perfect little body...

We're talking about unnecessary and unacceptable risks that are readily capable of modification in the interests of longevity. You're clearly being unreasonable here.

#29 william7

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,779 posts
  • 17
  • Location:US

Posted 28 July 2007 - 02:42 PM

Well, as far as the pollution goes, if someone invents an electric or a hydrogen powered car (or fusion, or antimatter, or anything else) that doesn't pollute, and can travel at speeds comparable to gas powered ones for distances comparable to gas powered ones between fill ups and at a reasonable cost, then I will be the first one to buy it.

The word "if" in your statement is a big word. I'm talking about how we should live today in the face of the serious destruction caused by motor vehicles - including airplanes and helicopters. It's a moral decision.

As far as the accident rate goes, once we get computer controlled cars out there (like they are in the early stages of developing at the Darpa Urban Challenge, whose predecessor was the Darpa Grand Challenge a few years ago) on the roads for everyone, then the accident rate should essentially drop to zero. (or at least very, very low; and much safer than using foot power)

How long and how many lives before this comes about?

Until then, as I stated, I have no choice because my work, and visiting friends and family preclude me from being able to avoid automobiles and airplanes.

You're saying here that modern society has determined your thinking and actions beyond your control. What you're actually faced with is the moral dilemma of allowing society to dictate your actions and placing you at an unacceptable risk of harm to self and others and the environment.

The best way to overcome your situation in my opinion would be to start studying the Scriptures and communal living. May be the right doors will open where you can make a major change if you're serious about it.

#30 Brainbox

  • Guest
  • 2,860 posts
  • 743
  • Location:Netherlands
  • NO

Posted 28 July 2007 - 05:57 PM

This discussion is very valid regarding the demographic influences and consequences of individual mobility. But lets not forget driving a car or bike can be fun and adventure as well. Banning is not an option, education and awakening awareness is.

Some pictures of the Passo dello Stelvio (Italian Swiss border) area I've been visiting during my short holiday this week. This experience of individual freedom must have had a life-lengthening effect. ;)

Posted Image

Posted Image

Edit: typo's (again)

Edited by brainbox, 28 July 2007 - 06:59 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users