If you still believe in god, you should get yourself some kidney stones.

[Evoman]

IF you can get a stone, and still believe in a good, benign god, your stone wasn't big enough.

That is all.

[greyl]

1. Aren't you a little young for those? nt

[Evoman]

5. Fuck yeah, way too young.

I've also had some other health problems, which is weird because most of my life I was as healthy and strong as an ox. I've gotten some testing done, and the docs can't find anything, although a friend of mine (a doc) had a hunch that I might have a mild form of celiac (which I looked up and yeah...I have a lot of the symptoms).

On that hunch, I quit eating gluten and I'm feeling fucking terrific. Which is good, but also sucks because everything has freakin gluten in it. I'm going to have myself tested for celiac soon...although I hate to think I'm going to have to eat wheat again to get it diagnosed.

Yeah, I'm hating my body right now...

p.s. do you think I should pray to Jeebus?

On edit: Oh yeah, and Celiac can cause the formation of calcium oxalate stones, since your not absorbing calcium properly, and it goes to your kidneys. Then it combines with oxalate and causes the worst fucking pain in the world.

[greyl]

11. I'd suggest drinking more cranberry juice, not praying to Jeebus. ;)

By the way, your OP sort of leaves open the possibility of a malevolent God, doesn't it?

[Evoman]

12. Nah..not even an evil god would give you kidney stones.

Even infinite evil can't be THAT evil.

Yeah...and I've been drinking cranberry juice...and a lot more water. It was a small stone, and the CT said that I don't have any more so I should be okay for awhile.

[Cant trust em]

2. I had a friend who is a devout Catholic. Her dad died of cancer.

Can someone reconcile this for me?

[Slagathor]

4. That one is easy

God doesn't exist. Your friend is deluded and quite possibly mentally ill. Her parent died of cancer because of some innate genetic predisposition or poor lifestyle choice or both.

[Cant trust em]

8. She may believe something that I don't, but she's still my friend.

So I'd appreciate you not talking about people like that. This is one of the things I hate about DU. I told someone that I have relatives who've voted Republican occasionally. This person then responded that those family members were idiots. If someone said something like that to my face instead of in anonymous internetland, I'd punch them.

[Evoman]

10. Amen...my favorite Aunt is religious (mostly since the death of my cousin, after which she was

traumitized).

If anyone said something like that about her in front of me, they would sure as hell regret it.

[Slagathor]

18. So... you'd defend some fictional religion with violence?

that's not cool.

[Evoman]

22. Hell no.

I've argued with my aunt about the religion thing. I just am not particularly fond of assholes who like to put down my family member. Chances are I wouldn't get violent ...but I'm sure I could make you piss your fucking pants anyways.

That would be funny.

[Slagathor]

25. ooo an internet tough guy

I'm not afraid of anything or anyone. CCW permit.

[Evoman]

29. Not even gonnorhea?

Everyobe is afraid of something.

I, for example, am afraid of kidney stones. They hurt like a bitch.

I'm also afraid of water chestnuts, thought that fear has gradually turned into just a severe dislike.

And yeah, I'm still pretty damn sure I could make you piss your pants. And I still think it would be funny.

[Slagathor]

31. Drink more milk

My entire family is plagued by calcium oxalate kidney stones which, bizarrely enough, seem to be more common the less calcium is consumed and less common the more calcium is consumed. It's almost like the body hoards calcium if it's in short supply and forms these stupid stones.

I've had them twice. My brother's had them once and ended up with a stent in his john thomas for a week to drain out the pieces. I passed a stone the size of a pea. It was the worst and then suddenly best experience of my life.

You have my sympathy. God, though, had nothing to do with it (on account of his failure to exist).

[Evoman]

35. Drinking more calcium doesn't make things worse.

I've read that. The bugger is the oxalate...and if your not absorbing calcium properly (which, if I have Celiacs, I may very well not be).

[Slagathor]

38. Is there a link between Celiac Disease and calcium oxalate kidney stone formation?

that would certainly clear up a baffling mystery in my life.

[Evoman]

41. Hell yeah.

Celiacs destroys your intestinal lining, making calcium less absorbable (which is why there is a strong link between celiac and osteoporosis as well). Your not absorbing the calcium, where do you think it's going. Yep, the kidneys. Excess calcium in the kidneys combines with oxalate, and the next thing you know, your giving birth to 5mm of hell.

[dmallind]

77. Brutal threadjacking but never understood this often displayed set of priorities

And not picking on you personally as far from alone. I see dozens of people, in a site heavily populated by those who are hardly on the side of brutal punishments of criminals, wars of choice and other uses of violence, who seriously threaten physical retribution for verbal insults.

It's kind of strange because I'm far from the most pacifistic of DUers either personally or politically, with a good part of my younger years spent bouncing and all that, but it would just never occur to me to consider responding to ANY insult, no matter how vile or no matter the target, by assaulting somebody. I'd respond with probably at least equal invective, and certainly be ready to defend myself if they chose the assult route, but calling my wife a string of four letter words says more about the speaker than her, so why should I care beyond telling them so?

[Evoman]

80. Meh, I'm just bluffing.

I wouldn't actually hit anyone...haven't in a long time, I have really good control of emotion. I'm so anti-punishment, you wouldn't believe it.

If I can intimidate someone who is being a fucktard, I'll sometimes do it if it's necessary, but I seldom do even that. I don't know what I would do if someone called my bluff...hehe...good thing not many people do.

[Slagathor]

14. Your Republican voting relatives *are* worthy of ridicule

and if you punched me, you'd get arrested for assault.

PS I don't care how much you like your friends. If they believe in something that is manifestly false and continue to believe in it despite every single advance in logic and reason over the last few thousand years, they are delusional.

[Cant trust em]

15. I'll take my chances with that arrest.

I'm not a violent guy but personal insults to people I care about will push me over the edge.

[Slagathor]

16. Then I'll say it again

if your relatives vote Republican, they are worthy of anything anyone wants to say of them. If you don't like it, tough shit. Perhaps you should stay off the internet.

[Evoman]

19. Holy shit.. .I think of have some competition for the biggest asshole in R/T.

[Cant trust em]

21. Real tough. Talking shit on the internet.

I live in San Francisco. Give me a call when you're in town.

[Slagathor]

26. You're the one threatening violence, not me

I'm merely pointing out that you need to adjust your priorities if you think that proudly defending your republican voting relatives on a PROGRESSIVE forum is anything other than misguided and asking, nay begging, for ridicule.

[Evoman]

30. You called his friend mentally ill.

That's not fucking cool man.

[Slagathor]

33. That's true, I called the friend deluded

believing in something that is demonstrably untrue is called being deluded. There are two options: a) the person is lying about their belief in order to fit in with everyone around them; or b) they are clinically delusional as in mentally ill. Am I missing something?

Do you have a different word I can use? One that means exactly the same thing and carries the same connotation?

[Evoman]

36. My advice...keep it to yourself.

I have nothing to against using the world delusion, per se, but calling someones friend mentally ill crosses a line. You make it personal.

[Slagathor]

39. If people don't want to see their friends get criticized and mocked

they shouldn't post readily mockable details to the interwebs.

[Random_Australian]

43. Too true. In fact, no-one should ever post anything about themselves either.

Because discussion is for losers. Yelling "you suck" at everything you can is what real men do on the internet.

Who needs to talk about things? If they wanted a discussion, they should have gone to a discussion board.

[Slagathor]

45. 45 posts says this is a discussion

no one is typing in all caps. People are exchanging opinion. It's fair enough.

[Random_Australian]

47. True. There are zero posts in an argument, after all.

For instance, if someone said something ridiculously insulting that added nothing to the discussion, and got into a large argument about it, I do believe the total would be zero posts.

Ah well, my point still stands - people are here to discuss things. Your statement "people should not post things that can be easily mocked on the internet" is still antithetic to having any discussion at all.

Or perhaps I'm wrong! Well, it's happened before. If, in fact, you have some reason for thinking that you are creating something more akin to a discussion than a flame-fest (and looking at the amount of discussion of religion/theology in this thread, I find it a little hard to believe), please go ahead and post your reasons for thinking so.

Until that time, or until some evidence to the contrary comes up, I will continue to believe that you are just basically here to assert that you are right. About everything.

[Slagathor]

50. You realize that you stumbled into a three quarters sarcastic discussion of

whether or not god wants you to have kidney stones?

does living in the antipodes make the blood drain suddenly from your brain or something?

[Random_Australian]

52. Of course. I only say things because I am a big dummy-head.

How could I miss the sarcasm and humour dripping from this delightful interchange between two friends?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=166419&mesg_id=166451

;)

My point stands. Try again.

[TZ]

55. good lord. It must be a full moon or something

I'm really pissed off because someone in the lounge attempted to define what is funny and what is not and that unfunny people should STFU (I'm unfunny apparantly). Seems some people can't handle a discussion board where people actually have different feelings and beliefs and that ignorne and hide thread are just too fucking hard to use.:banghead:

[Silent3]

75. I hate to break it to you, but your sense of humor...

...only rates about 4.6. I'm sorry. Then again, it really might not be all that bad, because I have no idea what scale that's on. :)

[Cant trust em]

62. My point is that cowards suddenly get pretty brave

when talking to an anonymous poster 3,000 miles away. You can say things that in normal society would warrant a much different reaction.

We're done here.

[Slagathor]

63. And there you are wrong

there is no doctrine of fighting words. There is nothing that anyone could say that would warrant a physical response. We live in a civilized society. We are not brute, ignorant beasts.

[Cant trust em]

65. You define the ignore button.

I am so tempted to continue with this totally worthless discussion, but my better judgment prevails.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

54. That Jesus freaks take umbrage...

when ridiculed is most easily understood when viewed in the context
of their belief "in something that is manifestly false."
Only when their kind is culled from the herd by evolution
can there be any reason to hope for humanity.

[Slagathor]

66. I realize that you're being snarkcastic, but your point is a good one (nt)

[crawfish]

61. and if I was on the jury, I'd acquit him

When you choose to judge people because of some label or choice, that makes you no better than the close-minded Republicans or Christians. No more intelligent, either.

[Slagathor]

67. That's just plain dunderheadedness

some people choose to be racists
some people choose to be misogynists
some people choose to be prejudiced towards the poor
some people choose to vote Republican
some people choose to be religious

all worthy of ridicule

[crawfish]

60. The cancer shut his body down and he died?

Seems fairly easy to reconcile to me.

[JerseygirlCT]

69. No amount of faith promises anyone an easy life or a long life

It's not about a trade-off - "you behave and do what I say, and I'll go easy on you".

Rotten stuff happens. That's this flawed world. Hopefully her faith will be a comfort to her in a time that's got to be very, very hard.

[raccoon]

76. Being devoutly religious doesn't guarantee that bad things won't happen to you. nt

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. Who would cast the first stone?

[panader0]

6. I believe that if you drink enough beer, the stones can't materialize

[Evoman]

7. I don't drink at all and hate beer.

About the only thing I like with alchy is coffee (Monte Cristo, Spanish coffee and Coffee with Baily's).

[SidDithers]

70. Bad news, Evoman, Bailey's isn't Gluten-free...

http://www.baileys.com/en-row/footer/faq.htm#answer3

I was going to suggest this too http://www.lesbieresnouvellefrance.com/biere.php?id=4&lg=en but then I saw you weren't a beer drinker.

My 10 year old daughter has Celiac Disease, and we eat mostly gluten free in our house now (well, she's completely gf) The diet's not too bad once you get used to it. Finding decent bread is the worst part.

Good luck if it is Celiac. There's a few DU'ers with CD, or with family members with CD. Maybe we should start a group :)

Sid

[Evoman]

71. Almost every alchohol I can stand has gluten.

It's not a big deal for me...I don't mind not being able to drink Baileys. What I hate is that I can't eat BLT's with good whole wheat bread.

I love BLTs.

Love.

Seriously. I would marry a BLT if I could.

[Fovea]

9. Good, bad

the divine is the one with the lightning bolt.

[Beregond2]

13. God

Sigh. I never cease to be amazed by the puerile mentality of the atheists on this board. There are good arguements for atheism, but they sure don't appear here.

A phenomenal world is, by necessity, built on oppositions: good/bad, painful/pleasant, etc. All qualities can only be know by contrast with their opposites. To say there can be no god because there are unpleasant things in the world is illogical and childish. You might as well say that electricity should exist with only one pole.

[Evoman]

17. What's wrong with wanting my hands free of bacteria?

The Purel mentality has kept me from getting sick, my friend.

(and if you hadn't noticed, the OP was tongue in cheek. Let me explain it to you, since your lacking the Purel mentality and the bacteria have eaten away at your sense of humour. I had a kidney stone. I wanted to bring it up, and tied it loosely to god to make things more interesting. I like and respect a lot of the people in this forum, and I thought that maybe somebody else would like to share their thoughts on kidney stones, like Greyl did. You, of course, thought that I was trying to prove that god didn't exist...).

On edit: Oh yeah...and I didn't say there couldn't be a god. I just said BENIGN god.

Have you ever tried to pass a pineapple through a straw?

[Spinzonner]

23. I don't think that most atheists assert there is no God

Just not the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful and, particularly, all-loving one that is postulated by the typical terrestial theist.

Personally, I'm willing to concede the theoretical possibility of an indifferent, uncaring, uninvolved, perhaps arbitrary and whimsical one.

[Slagathor]

28. WTF! Yes. We do. Allllllllllllllll atheists assert there are no gods whatsoever

that's what a-theism means.

[Spinzonner]

32. What's a god ?

You can't define an absence of it until you define what it is.

When you say that you don't believe in God or gods you can only, therefore, be asserting the absence of one described and asserted by the theists.

[Evoman]

34. Nuh uh.

There is a difference between saying there are no gods and saying you have no belief in god. Different atheists go to different extremes.

[Slagathor]

37. Nonsense

if you can find me an atheist willing to disbelieve in one god but remain open to the possibility of some other type of deity, I'll show you an agnostic. A-theism = no belief in any type of deity.

If people are trying to nuance it, they're not being essentially rational about it. The whole hard/soft/strong/positive/weak atheism debate is essentially bizarre and intellectually unnecessary. People should shit or get off the pot.

[Evoman]

40. You freakin agree with me, even if your to stubborn to see it.

NO BELIEF IN GOD is NOT the same as saying THERE IS NO GOD. Think about it. It's not irrational...to some of the people on this board, especially scientists, it's a very important distinction. It's all about probabilities...and to most of the atheists on this board, the chances of there being a god are practically zero. Absolute 100% certainty, however, which THERE IS NO GOD conveys, is anathemic to many who find it too similar to the mindset of the irrational believer.

Rationally, THERE IS NO GOD, is much less rational than NO BELIEF IN GOD.

[Random_Australian]

42. Of course.

No one could ever see a difference between saying "I see no evidence for any God, and as such will lack belief in such things until there is no evidence" and "I am certain that it is impossible for God to exist; God certainly does not exist".

............... or maybe they can. Well, I can.

And both of those statements are consistent with "atheism: no belief in any type of deity", so people who say either are indeed atheists.

:) Try again. There's as much "nuance" there as there is between red and green. (What you say? Both are colours, so they are the same and any debate is essentially bizzarre and intellectually unnecessary?)

[Slagathor]

46. You cannot define "green" as comprising "light green," "dark green" and "red"

well, you can try, but it doesn't make sense.

[Random_Australian]

48. Oh noes! You can change the analagy so it doesn't work!

I heard that makes it untrue. Magically.

Thankyou for addressing the first three paragraphs. By rewriting an analagy, I think you've made a really comprehensive argument against the main bulk of the points in the rest of the points.

[Slagathor]

49. I'm not the one who came up with a fractured bit of logic

you're the one arbitrarily redefining terms to suit your argument

[Random_Australian]

53. Oooh! You can call my logic fractured, and claim I'm redefining things.

For an encore, would you provide some kind of support for your statements?

Ooooh, and for this one too, as it is what I was addressing:

"The whole hard/soft/strong/positive/weak atheism debate is essentially bizarre and intellectually unnecessary. People should shit or get off the pot."

[dmallind]

79. Not true at all

To say there is no god possible is irrational. It would take universal knowledge to argue such a claim. The only things anyone with ANY feeling for logic at all will attempt to prove as universal negatives are concepts which are internally inconsistent. I will say there is no such thing as a married bachelor because the definition of those words, as used today, have contradictory and incompatible meanings. There are no even prime numbers over 2. But are there no unicorns? Buggered if I know. I don't know of any, and I would not accept claims of one existing without a thorough investigation presenting proof, but nothing but duress would make me say "there are no unicorns". There may be unicorns deep in the Amazon jungle. There may be unicorns on the first moon of Squarnshellous Zeta (with the mattresses IIRC).

I think about gods EXACTLY the same way I think about unicorns or fairies. All the evidence points to them being made up. There is no positive evidence that any exist, but it's possible in a universe that is only infinitesimally explored or even studied that such things exist.

And I'm an atheist. I lack god belief. Lacking belief (saying "no" to "do you believe there is a god?") is absolutely different from claiming there is no god. One is withholding belief. The other is believing in the absence of. One is logically supportable. The other is probably a good bet, but can't be proven or even inductively argued. Atheism is either of them and the latter - so called "strong atheists" - are a tiny tiny fraction of atheists.

Agnosticism refers to rejecting the idea of certainty via revelation and has absolutely nothing to do except in sloppy misuse in the common vernacular to do with a nonexistent "middle option" between belief and not belief. You either believe or you don't/ You are either a theist or an atheist. It's like symmetrical and asymmetrical. It's an either/or binary condition.

[varkam]

73. You should familiarize yourself with the differences between...

strong atheism, weak atheism, agnosticism, and gnosticism (as it applies to epistemology).

[Slagathor]

27. argument only has one "e"

that's actually kind of amusing. Please lecture us atheists more about your imaginary deity. Be sure to load your post with fractured logic and plenty of spelling errors. Comedy gold!

[Random_Australian]

44. Hmmm, how sharp is your subtext detector?

Because mine is dull as ground rock and still picked up on what Evoman was saying.

[trotsky]

56. Is a requirement for belief in god that you have no sense of humor?

Sheesh. :eyes:

[dmallind]

78. Well I think there is some sarcasm in the OP but in honesty

The argument from evil has long been established as indeed a very difficult test for apologetics, and is in fact a very GOOD argument for the absence of a god as posited by mainstream Christianity. Since atheism is lack of ANY personal god belief this is in effect only a very small argument for atheism per se, but it does present an intractable problem for those who like to imagine a "triple omni" big G God. It's pretty much a given that most Christians outside bleeding edge theology professors when asked will inlcude words like "God is all loving" and "God is all powerful".

But the bugger is he can't be both. Because the only even proximal answer to an all loving god who inflicts horrible circumstances on his creation when he obviously could have set it up differently boils down to ineffability - we can't know why the big guy has set it up that there is so much needless suffering, pointless pain, and built in self destruct systems for what was made in his own image. But ineffability is a very short sighted and self defeating argument for the apologitical types, because it suggests a god whom we cannot even contemplate understanding, and whom we therefore cannot define, cannot know how to please and cannot know how to avoid displeasing, which makes the whole point of salvational faith or a personal god moot.

So either the big G God is either malevolent, or incapable of removing or limiting unnecessary pain and evil, or we can have no damn clue what he wants and what he will either reward or punish.

[DCKit]

20. I bought some magic beans that LOOK like kidney stones.

Does that count?

[Evoman]

24. Heck yeah.

If I ever have to piss another stone (Jeebus forbid), I'm gonna do it on the ground. Then I'm gonna climb that bean stalk and steal the gold laying chicken. And sleep with the Giant's fine wife. I dig gigantic women.

[Submariner]

51. 16mm x 9mm calcium oxalate stone

I just had a lithotripsy that pulverized a huge calcium oxalate stone. Three days later I passed the first slug of 20 stones all lined up behind each other as they exited Mr. Happy. If you heard a loud scream come out of nowhere up and down the Eastern seaboard last October 18th, that was me.

[More Than A Feeling]

57. You motivated me to look up "methods of prevention of kidney stones"

on wikipedia, and as a result, I'm going to drink more water. I'd cut down on my sodium intake, but I have neither the time, the skills, nor the money to cook myself a low sodium diet.

Thanks for the heads-up. Kidney stones seem like one of those things that you don't think about until they happen to you or someone you know.

[Meshuga]

58. You see? Blasphemy doesn't pay

I hope you know that I am kidding and I hope you get well soon!

[TZ]

59. I just realized something

My Uncle who also had kidney stones is an atheist. Doesn't that tell ya something Evoman! Its because you all are evul atheists and God is punishing you!:sarcasm: (just in case)
Glad you are better though.:hi:

[lips]

64. LOL @ fictional religion

[JerseygirlCT]

68. Sorry to hear that.

I've heard they're nearly as bad as labor. So you have my condolences. Of course, I got kids at the end of it, so I think I ended up ahead.

How are you feeling now?

[Evoman]

72. Good. Reall good. Better than I have in some time since I cut out gluten.

It's weird....I feel physically well, but I for a while I just felt mentally drained. It was an awful experience because I couldn't pass the damn thing, and I kept having to go to the hospital.

Factor in the fact that I'm emetophobic and I was puking because of the morphine, and it adds up to a week of hell.

Now I'm half happy and half bummed that not eating gluten is making me feel awesome.

[JerseygirlCT]

74. Do you have Celiac?

Is the gluten thing new?

Damn. I'd have a tough time with that one, I think.

And I'm like you - I never throw up. If I do, I'm REALLY, REALLY sick. And the morphine can really do a number on you.

Glad you're on the mend!

[Evoman]

81. I don't know...but there are certain medical signs that I may be.

The problem is that to get tested, I gotta get back on the gluten. And I'm feeling so much better that I don't want to. Refraining from gluten really hasn't been as bad as I thought....I'm eating a whole lot more vegetables and fruit and lean meat, and a lot less salt and crap. Might also be a reason I feel better. Who knows.

[JerseygirlCT]

82. Well, if it's working and you can do it, sounds like a good thing

(Says the woman who happily ate pizza for dinner for the second time this week. But it's really just a cheese delivery system anyway, right?)