Quote Originally Posted by bmolsson
Posted by Pindar
Mental states are not legally controlled.

Sure they are. The definition of an adult is based on mental state. There is a big portion of the legal system as well as health care system pointing out peoples mental state and health in a legal point of view. I am very suprised that you of all can't see this.....
Actually in the U.S., Japan and other nations, whose legal systems I have some experience with, Adult status is determined by age. Legal judgments on mental status have to do with culpability. Neither of these positions attempt to control the metal state of the subject. Indeed no one argues the law can control mental states.




Posted by Pindar
Proud of being something they don't believe at all? This is a non sequitur.

It's called reality. It's not always as we want it to be, hence a lot of fanatic muslims trying to bomb the majority in to your way of thinking.
You are saying that stating that belief is a fundamental component of religious status is a terrorist notion and terrorists are killing people who don't agree?



I failed to be objective ?
Yes. You seem to define a number of things according to criteria that is peripheral to the subject at hand.

You claim that Aristotle lived and created a more secular sceintific approach. You prove this point based on writings and documentation, which you discredit me from using to make my points. Prove to me with natural science that Aristotle lived and have a secular theory predated the old testamente. I am all ears......
You are referring to the other thread. You did not understand my post in the other thread it appears. I did not claim any proof about Aristotle. I did state that historical data is suggestive. Suggestive is not definitive. There is no 'proof' that Aristotle or Jesus lived. There are historical records noting these people lived. I stated that such historical data (the more the better) means it is not unreasonable to assume they did, in fact, live. Now a statement about Jesus does not equal a proof of His Divinity. It may indicate the writer believed this was the case, but belief is not a proof. I took this same stance with your references to Biblical texts: that someone wrote down a creation account may mean the writer believed what he wrote: God created the temporal realim, but this does not equal a proof. That is the point.



Posted by Pindar
Religious is an adjective. It is a reflection of a subject's mental state. It is not subject to legal judgment.


bmolsson, I disagree. A reality check will show you something else.

Pindar: You disagree that religious is an adjective? Check a dictionary.
You disagree that religious applies to mental states? You disagree that religiosity is not bound by legal dicta? See the green analogy. The law can no more force one to believe a thing than it can force one accept a favorite color. Your position rests on an absurdity.

We are talking about religion here. The substantive. Being religious has nothing to do with being a member of a religion. A child can't legally be consent until after a certain age, meaning that children can't be religious, which is incorrect in more or less all religions.
Don't turn this in to a English language discussion, that is just so low. You know exactly what I mean.
You stated you 'disagree' I don't know if this is to the whole prior post or a part. I responded with replies to each possible disagreement as I understood it. I do have to guess what you mean sometimes.

I agree that being religious may not mean being a part of a formal religion, but I also believe that being part of a formal religion does mean one is involved in some degree of religiosity and that religiosity has a belief component. Thus the one is a subset of the other.

Consent prior to formal membership is a fundamental component of major tracts of Protestantism. Consent is also the defining stance regarding sin in Catholic and Orthodox traditions (though Catholic teaching also has the notion of Original sin). Jewish teaching also ties sin to consent: meaning a willful act. In short: I would agree babies aren't religious.