Happy Hanukkah N_Jay

[Zeitgeist]

Do we need to revisit some of the other "religious" edicts in Leviticus? They were all "traditions" at some point in time, though thankfully most were dropped 'cause they make no bloody sense in the light of logic and reason. These food laws make about as much sense in the modern era as the Third Amendment

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by Zeitgeist

Do we need to revisit some of the other "religious" edicts in Leviticus? They were all "traditions" at some point in time, though thankfully most were dropped 'cause they make no bloody sense in the light of logic and reason. These food laws make about as much sense in the modern era as the Third Amendment

Both religious tenets and the decision to maintain traditions are personal decisions.

In this regard, your deciding what another should believe or do make no more sense than a religious person trying to proselytize you.

[alchemy]

so some of you think it's fine to unknowingly eat a dog labeled as steak?

[Zeitgeist]

I'm not deciding anything, since I'm agnostic. I'm merely asking if that decision is tolerated within those respective religions. If you're ok with wearing poly-blended clothing or failing to stone women with familiar spirits, then why not have a slice of yummy bacon?

[alchemy]

Originally Posted by Cancer_Researcher

When I stated eating strictly Halal and the imposed these rules upon myself, it was hard as hell. I still crave a Whopper with cheese.

for me it was extremely easy but that was before US food went pork crazy. We don't call it halal or kosher. Maybe some say "dietary laws." I just name what I will or won't if the discussion comes up.

[alchemy]

Originally Posted by Zeitgeist

I'm not deciding anything, since I'm agnostic. I'm merely asking if that decision is tolerated within those respective religions. If you're ok with wearing poly-blended clothing or failing to stone women with familiar spirits, then why not have a slice of yummy bacon?

that's actually a main basis of christian law vs lawless debates

I believe you try and do what you can. All in that debate agree no one can keep all of the law. From there I say it's a journey, direction, not an absolute ground that man can stand on here but it is a demonstration as to what ground you would like to stand on. If there is a God, similar to what people believe, why would that God be just in putting people where they did not want to be for eternity. I don't believe in hell btw.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by alchemy

so some of you think it's fine to unknowingly eat a dog labeled as steak?

Sure.

Did it say "Beef"?

[alchemy]

Originally Posted by Zeitgeist

I'm not deciding anything, since I'm agnostic. I'm merely asking if that decision is tolerated within those respective religions. If you're ok with wearing poly-blended clothing or failing to stone women with familiar spirits, then why not have a slice of yummy bacon?

btw, the point I make about stoning and such is that this is not our government and those are government laws. I say it would be like having Nero implement executions.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by Zeitgeist

I'm not deciding anything, since I'm agnostic. I'm merely asking if that decision is tolerated within those respective religions. If you're ok with wearing poly-blended clothing or failing to stone women with familiar spirits, then why not have a slice of yummy bacon?

I am ok with YOU doing (Or not doing) any of those things.

[alchemy]

Originally Posted by N_Jay

I am ok with YOU doing (Or not doing) any of those things.

me too, and I will add that I honestly truly do not believe any of that makes one better than another for our eyes. He probably keeps laws in ways that I don't even know about yet. We all have our faults and we always will and I cannot judge which is worse or better. oh wait, dietary laws are insignificant compared to many of the laws.