Faith School Menace?

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]Are you even aware about the status of the pig among muslims? They'll much rather put animal feces in their bodies to survive than a pig organ.ghoklebutter

It doesn't matter what its status is; if it's a matter of life and death, it's okay to use pig organs.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

The countless billions of healthy people that have and do eat pork are enough for me to to think what you say is complete rubbish (about pork, that is). In the UK, we've had a greater threat of disease from cows and sheep (via BSE and foot and mouth disease).

SpinoRaptor24

Billions of healthy people? You mean the overwhelming number of obese people in the western world where eating Pork is a norm. Fact: America, Australia and the UK are some of the most overweight countries in the world. Obesity is a severe problem here in Australia. Again, the way you slaughter cows and sheep is different to the way Muslims slaughter them (you don't drain the blood from the meat. Blood is a toxin and prime area for bacterial formation, so it's reasonable to see why your meat would be more diseased)

Pigs are not the reason people are fat - consumption of all sorts of halal stuff is responisble for that too. Obesity has nothing to do with pork - not all pork-eathers (especially the the Chinese) are not necessarily fat, so your argument is quite invalid. Your admission that in reality billions do eat pork and suffer no ill effects is at odds with these strange ideas you have.

Halal meat production is similar to western (i.e. UK) methods, except halal meat does not require animals to be stunned first. Blood does get drained from slaughtered animals - please do more research! The difference is the prayer, rather than any compassion for the animal being killed. Also, please elaborate on blood being a "toxin" and a "prime area" (over others I presume) for "bacterial formation".

It is unreasonable to say "our" meat (whoever's meat that is!) is more diseased than "your" (?) meat. Conversely; research suggests that, since halal bears little regard to modern health and safety protocols: The meat is more at risk of cross-contamination and bad hygene practices.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

I can't see why you try and justify outmoded thinking about food standards, disease, safety and hygene while dressing them up in some sort of theological mystique. It's far better to really understand the nature of nutrition and disease, rather than blind yourself to the obvious safety of pork, based on your particular 1600 year-old writings.

SpinoRaptor24

I've already provided proof as to why Pork is unhygienic. See my previous article I posted.

It's not unhygenic - billions eat it without fear or harm. Be sensible please! The only thing you've proven to me so far is that your mis-guidedness and adherence to doctrine is clouding your rationality.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Aren't you being a hypocrite, having a dirty pig organ inside you? Wouldn't you fear the same infection as from eating pig? After all it would be uncooked!

SpinoRaptor24

If it's necessary for my survival, then yes I would eat pork and use Pig organs for transplant. Islam most definitely allows it. The Prophet (peace be upon him) advised people not to burden themselves with Religion.

But it's not the case here. You eat pork for your own pleasure, not for your survival. There are plenty of other types of meat for you to consume. It's not like Pork is the only meat in the world.

Why burden me with your religion then? So it is ok to eat pork , and get those "infested" pig organs inside you? Would you take pigs blood too? This mixed message shows the hypocracy of your religion, as rules have to supercede other rules to avoid the failings of the original rules.

I don't eat much pork - though choice (but I do like crispy bacon). We all eat for survival, so your are wrong to suggest that we pick on pigs vindictively to betray your God. It's just that they have proven to be a reliable source of food through the ages. They are more suited to temperate regions, from what I believe, so that may have something to do with the original porkism of the quran. The Hindus would tell us not to eat cows. We don't even need to eat meat at all, so why don't you become a vegetarian, just to be on the safe side and ensure you get no pleasure from your food?

I can't see why we're not allowed pleasure, anyway. It's not as if pork is sacred to you, but just you think it unreasonably "dirty", due to food hygene standards of yester-eon! Would you rather eat lions or monkeys or cats or dogs?

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]Are you even aware about the status of the pig among muslims? They'll much rather put animal feces in their bodies to survive than a pig organ.ghoklebutter

It doesn't matter what its status is; if it's a matter of life and death, it's okay to use pig organs.

But what if they are dirty - the reason for you not getting on with pork in the first place?

If you accept that they will save your life, why not also accept they are not dirty?

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]Are you even aware about the status of the pig among muslims? They'll much rather put animal feces in their bodies to survive than a pig organ.Gambler_3

It doesn't matter what its status is; if it's a matter of life and death, it's okay to use pig organs.

Just because one can use it in some circumstances does not mean it should have a higher status. And just so you know, Muslims don't hate pigs; they just consider them unclean and unfit for eating. That's all.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]Are you even aware about the status of the pig among muslims? They'll much rather put animal feces in their bodies to survive than a pig organ.RationalAtheist

It doesn't matter what its status is; if it's a matter of life and death, it's okay to use pig organs.

But what if they are dirty - the reason for you not getting on with pork in the first place?

If you accept that they will save your life, why not also accept they are not dirty?

Like I said before: It's okay to use pig organs if it's a matter of life and death, whether they are dirty or not.

And just because they can save my life, doesn't mean that I accept that they're not dirty.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]Are you even aware about the status of the pig among muslims? They'll much rather put animal feces in their bodies to survive than a pig organ.ghoklebutter

It doesn't matter what its status is; if it's a matter of life and death, it's okay to use pig organs.

But what if they are dirty - the reason for you not getting on with pork in the first place?

If you accept that they will save your life, why not also accept they are not dirty?

Like I said before: It's okay to use pig organs if it's a matter of life and death, whether they are dirty or not.

And just because they can save my life, doesn't mean that I accept that they're not dirty.

Think this through carefully please. How could pig organs be used for transplant if pigs were dirty? If dirty pigs can save your life, why not eat them too?

Think this through carefully please. How could pig organs be used for transplant if pigs were dirty? If dirty pigs can save your life, why not eat them too?

 

RationalAtheist

Think of it this way: Pork is forbidden to eat in almost all circumstances, as are pig organs for organ transplanting in almost all circumstances. If you can eat pork out when you're starving (given that it's the only thing you can eat), then surely it's permissible to use pig organs for organ transplanting (given that it's a matter of life and death), even though it's unclean. 

Let me know if I'm sounding silly. :P

Think of it this way: Pork is forbidden to eat in almost all circumstances, as are pig organs for organ transplanting in almost all circumstances. If you can eat pork out when you're starving (given that it's the only thing you can eat), then surely it's permissible to use pig organs for organ transplanting (given that it's a matter of life and death), even though it's unclean.

Let me know if I'm sounding silly. :P

ghoklebutter

Of course it sounds silly! Do you think I doin't understand the way things are? I'm questioning the way things are, since they are that way for no good reason, aside from a dictat from an ancient book. For people not coming across that book or choosing not to believe it (for good reasons - this being one of them), pork eating is a good way to sustain yourself.

The silliness especially comes from the thought of unclean organs being fit for transplant - from a medical perspective.

Of course it sounds silly! Do you think I doin't understand the way things are? I'm questioning the way things are, since they are that way for no good reason, aside from a dictat from an ancient book. For people not coming across that book or choosing not to believe it (for good reasons - this being one of them), pork eating is a good way to sustain yourself.

The silliness especially comes from the thought of unclean organs being fit for transplant - from a medical perspective.

RationalAtheist

I guess I can't explain it well. All I can say for sure is that in some cases, Islamic laws such as the prohibition of pork and alcoholic beverages can be broken. 

I guess I can't explain it well. All I can say for sure is that in some cases, Islamic laws such as the prohibition of pork and alcoholic beverages can be broken. ghoklebutter

You can spell out the laws very clearly - you've been taught them well. I'm sure you can follow them with dedication too. But to understand the reasoning behind those laws and their relelvance today would need a departure from doctrine and a journey into reality - where vast amounts of pork have been eaten throughout history.

I thought the Muslim alcohol rule was rigorously adhered too and have not heard of any Islamic tolerence for alcohol at all until you mentioned it. I'm surprised to hear you say its allowed, since unlike pig meat, or pig transplant organs, alcohol has no life-depending properties at all (unless you're already a heavy alcoholic, where sudden abstinance would cause death). Once again, a reality check tells us about the harmful effects of alcolhol on people (unlike pork).

Could this be yet another area (like pork transplants, or any organ transplants) where there is significant division in the faith over the interpretation of its doctrine?

HALAL NEWS! By the way, this happened two weeks ago in England, but the overwhelmingly negative reaction to it caused this to happen as a result last week.

There is no tolerance for alcohol in Islam and no muslim school of thought disputes it as a haram item.

I think what ghokle prolly meant was that you can drink alcohol if you were dying of thirst and had no other liquid available. Excepting the extreme most circumstances, alcohol is pretty strictly forbidden.

There is no tolerance for alcohol in Islam and no muslim school of thought disputes it as a haram item.

I think what ghokle prolly meant was that you can drink alcohol if you were dying of thirst and had no other liquid available. Excepting the extreme most circumstances, alcohol is pretty strictly forbidden.

Gambler_3

That's exactly what i meant. Also one could only drink as much alcohol as one would need in a situation like that. In other words, one shouldn't drink to the point of intoxication.

It sounds pretty non-confusing to me. Pork is forbidden, but under special circumstances, it has to be eaten. Such as when one is starving and the only available food available is pork. Also, pig organs shouldn't ideally be used as organs, either, but if they have to be used to prolong someone's life, then so be it. The ideal, however, is to not have to do that. That which is bad for one thing can be acceptable in another way, in any case. I wouldn't inhale spray deodorant, but it keeps me smelling clean when used in a different way.Android339

Would you be able to explain the reasoning for this, rather than repeat the rule? Why is it ideal not to have organ transplants or to eat pork (with all we now know about food hygene and surgery)?

If you inhaled spray deodourant, the effects would be damaging to you. This idea could be tested and proved, as has the safe eating of pork. And why wouldn't pig organs make "ideal" transplant organs for humans?

As for why Blood is harmful to eat and drink, In addition to transporting nutrients and oxygen, our blood removes the waste products generated from metabolism so that they can be properly excreted. Eating it would damage the body.

As to your questions about whether I would eat Pork or take Pig organ transplants, if it was necessary for my survival and abstaining from it would kill me, then yes, I would eat/take it. Otherwise, I'd stay away from it. Plus I don't think taking transplants from another species is good for you.

Because Pork is unclean and prone to various diseases. Whether the harmful effects are instantly apparent or not makes no difference. It's still harmful. Millions of people smoke and don't get lung cancer; that doesn't mean smoking is harmless.

As for why Blood is harmful to eat and drink, In addition to transporting nutrients and oxygen, our blood removes the waste products generated from metabolism so that they can be properly excreted. Eating it would damage the body.

As to your questions about whether I would eat Pork or take Pig organ transplants, if it was necessary for my survival and abstaining from it would kill me, then yes, I would eat/take it. Otherwise, I'd stay away from it. Plus I don't think taking transplants from another species is good for you.

SpinoRaptor24

More repetition without any explanation is a sure-fire sign of a non-existent argument.

Other meat is prone to disease in the same way. There is greater risk from beef in western society right now, as I stated earlier. People suffer and die from the ill effects of smoking, aside from cancer, you know. I thought respiratory failure though emphasema was the most common cause of death for smokers. There is no similar such medical effects for those (like most Chinese) that do eat pork all the time and have done for thousands of years as a culture. Please do continue to stick your head in the sand over this, as I'm finding it extremely amusing maintaining my pro-pork outlook.

Have you tried "black pudding"? Do you know about the human digestion system? What about all those others that do eat and drink blood as part of their cultural heritage without ill-effects? Your lack of knowledge about food hygene and harmful food does you a disservice.

How would you survive with a dirty porky organ inside you? If pork is as diseased and harmful as you say it is, how could it do you any good, being connected to your other organs directly (rather than be digested and broken down by stomach acids and bile. If eating pork is bad for you, how can raw pork right inside you be good for you too? (this assumes that you think your life being saved is "good).

The whole opinion about transplants (let alone pig organ transplants) for Islamics differs between Muslim regions, since confusion reigns over the interpretation of your religion and the self-endulgance vs adherence of its members.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

[QUOTE="Android339"]It sounds pretty non-confusing to me. Pork is forbidden, but under special circumstances, it has to be eaten. Such as when one is starving and the only available food available is pork. Also, pig organs shouldn't ideally be used as organs, either, but if they have to be used to prolong someone's life, then so be it. The ideal, however, is to not have to do that. That which is bad for one thing can be acceptable in another way, in any case. I wouldn't inhale spray deodorant, but it keeps me smelling clean when used in a different way.Android339

Would you be able to explain the reasoning for this, rather than repeat the rule? Why is it ideal not to have organ transplants or to eat pork (with all we now know about food hygene and surgery)?

If you inhaled spray deodourant, the effects would be damaging to you. This idea could be tested and proved, as has the safe eating of pork. And why wouldn't pig organs make "ideal" transplant organs for humans?

I'm not a Muslim. I don't care either way about the hygiene of pork, or whatever. I was not trying to explain that away. I'm saying that the concept of not being able to eat something, but being able to use it for other things, is non-contradictory.

So its not really that the idea is "non-confusing" for you since you don't "care" about the reasons. Its more about you being willing to accept the concept of not being able to do things for no good reason. Is that right?

Don't you see the contradiction in not being able to eat something cooked because of "uncleanliness", but being able to use a raw "unclean" organ for transplant?

Faith School Menace part 1 is up on Youtube until 17-09-10

And the TV just told me Sainsburys are doing a 2 for 1 offer on pork cubes next week.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

There is no tolerance for alcohol in Islam and no muslim school of thought disputes it as a haram item.

I think what ghokle prolly meant was that you can drink alcohol if you were dying of thirst and had no other liquid available. Excepting the extreme most circumstances, alcohol is pretty strictly forbidden.

ghoklebutter

That's exactly what i meant. Also one could only drink as much alcohol as one would need in a situation like that. In other words, one shouldn't drink to the point of intoxication.

From what the survivalists and scientists say on TV; alcohol de-hydrates you. It should not be considered while dying of thirst, unless you want to end it all faster in a drunken blur. That would surely make this situaltion haram. Are there any other extreme circumstances for valid alcohol consumption, or is it completey illegal to drink in most Islamic countries?

The concept (the one I actually stated, not the concept of not being able to do things for no good reason) is non-confusing, despite whether or not I care about a specific instance. I'm saying, and do not assume I'm saying more than what I am when I'm saying this, that the concept of a certain thing being unclean for one use, but being acceptable for use in a different way, is non-contradictory. I said nothing as to how this applies to the Muslim ban on pork, as either ban may or may not be reasonable given the facts. The concept itself (free from the trappings of a particular example), however, applied in an abstract and logical context, is sound. Don't pretend to know what I'm implying when I haven't said it directly. Making straw men is a nasty habit.

Android339

So something which is unclean to eat is clean to insert into ones body then - You see no contradiction there. Ok. I can accept that, even if I don't believe it. I was befudled by what you were trying to get across. After all, (if you'll forgive me) who cares what you think about concepts if they have nothing to do with the debate at hand? How would that be at all relevant? Or should I just read it as you being divisive? I make no pretences. I was asking questions, so calling straw man is a laughable evasion.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Don't you see the contradiction in not being able to eat something cooked because of "uncleanliness", but being able to use a raw "unclean" organ for transplant?

Android339

Perhaps, but I would like you to explain exactly why you see this as a contradiction. I realize that the reasoning must be obvious to you, but you similarly ask me things that should be obvious as well.

I'd love to!

If pork is unclean and diseased to eat, even after cooking, it follows that the same uncleanliness and disease would be even more associated with a raw organ from the animal transplanted into a human. It more follows that pork is quite clean and safe for humans. The evidence that pigs are used in transplant surgery itself seems only to confirm this. Aside from that, there are all the pig farms near me, butchers shops selling pork, I have several boxes (approximately 80) of pigs ears in my cupboards right now, the Chinese for "meat" translating as "pork", the smell of bacon. PIGS ARE SAFE!

If we can understand how to suppress infection in pig organs during transplants, don't you think we've also begun to understand the nature of disease in animals? Have we not mitigated it with modern farming production methods? If pork were really dangerous to health, why don't Muslims live longer than Chinese people and why doesn't pork have health warnings?

Although in general terms I can understand a degree of "exception handling" in rules, there must be a rather particular reasoning behind each case. In this case, the life or death decision over eating pork or having a pork organ in you (!), the human ego will win over unfounded doctrine most of the time. Although in many Islamic countries, the prospect of any sort of organ transplant is haram, I think.

I was only wondering how those who went against their doctrines rationalised their own self-preservation and how far this rule-bending went.

Again, not what I said. I was merely explaining that the concept itself is sound. This is a starting point. I have not yet applied it to anything related to eating or inserting anything into one's body, as in this forum, one has to go very slowly when trying to discuss things. Already, while trying to lay out this simple concept, I have been told I am saying things I am not. How much worse would it be if I just jumped right out with the entirety of my observations? You assumed I was saying something I wasn't, while also trying to point out the ridiculousness of it. Can you tell me exactly how saying that the concept I was relaying was the concept of "not being able to do things for no good reason" was not an intentional misconstruing of what I said? In what sense was I trying to "evade" anything, anyway? I have nothing to evade, as I was not saying things you assumed I was.

The concept is relevant because it is the groundwork upon which the Muslim users are basing their arguments concerning this particular situation.

Android339

I think you talking about concepts is back-tracking. I wasn't making assumptions - I was positing a position, then asking you if it was your postiion. I think the stuff you say about "simple concepts" is ridiculous, since you have not yet eluded to this concept that is so simple yet.

Unless you are meddling with the concepts of cleanliness and acceptability. Who knows.

If my attempts at understanding something that is entirely (by your own definition) tangential to the actual converstaion in the thread are not right, then surely there is an issue somewhere about the transferring of understanding over this concept that seems more important to you than the real discussion, all of a sudden. I think it's your responsibility to make clear statements about your concepts, rather than have me guess. Please do clarify and lay out this concept for me.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

I'd love to!

If pork is unclean and diseased to eat, even after cooking, it follows that the same uncleanliness and disease would be even more associated with a raw organ from the animal transplanted into a human. It more follows that pork is quite clean and safe for humans. The evidence that pigs are used in transplant surgery itself seems only to confirm this. Aside from that, there are all the pig farms near me, butchers shops selling pork, I have several boxes (approximately 80) of pigs ears in my cupboards right now, the Chinese for "meat" translating as "pork", the smell of bacon. PIGS ARE SAFE!

If we can understand how to suppress infection in pig organs during transplants, don't you think we've also begun to understand the nature of disease in animals? Have we not mitigated it with modern farming production methods? If pork were really dangerous to health, why don't Muslims live longer than Chinese people and why doesn't pork have health warnings?

Although in general terms I can understand a degree of "exception handling" in rules, there must be a rather particular reasoning behind each case. In this case, the life or death decision over eating pork or having a pork organ in you (!), the human ego will win over unfounded doctrine most of the time. Although in many Islamic countries, the prospect of any sort of organ transplant is haram, I think.

I was only wondering how those who went against their doctrines rationalised their own self-preservation and how far this rule-bending went.

Android339

Understandable.

Do you like pork? A little conceptual refresh:

I'm saying that the concept of not being able to eat something, but being able to use it for other things, is non-contradictory.Android339

Are you saying that something which is clean for one use is unclean for another use? Would you prefer to stick something dirty in your mouth or inside an incision in your chest? How's that for a concept?

Again, I've stated before that under harsh circumstances Islam allows you to perform actions which are otherwise forbidden. As stated in the Quran: "But if one is forced by necessity without willful disobedience nor transgressing due limits, then there is no sin on him. Truly, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful" (Noble Quran 2:173)

You keep making this baseless assumption that I've eaten Pork and had pig organs transplanted inside of me. Well I haven't and I doubt I ever will. Ingesting something isn't similar to injecting it directly into the body. Snake venom is highly poisonous when injected directly into the bloodstream, yet generally harmless when eaten or drank due to our stomach acids breaking it down.

When you eat or drink something, it doesn't just go to your stomach and then out the other end. Your digestive tract breaks it down and then transports various minerals/nutrients/molecules around the entire body through the bloodstream. Drinking and eating blood often puts unwanted products in our blood stream. As previously mentioned in my article, eating Pork often leads to various diseases. The most serious danger of eating pork is that pork contains tapeworms which may grow to a length of 2-3 meters. The growth of the eggs of these worms in the human body may lead to insanity and hysteria if they grow in the area of the brain. If they grow in the region of the heart that may lead to high blood pressure and heart attacks. Another kind of worm that is to be found in pork is the trichinosis worm that cannot be killed under normal cooking temperatures, the growth of which in the body may lead to paralysis and skin rashes.

I still don't see why it is such a difficult concept to understand.

Are you saying that something which is clean for one use is unclean for another use?RationalAtheist

It's possible. I gave my example of snake venom above. Did you know the bacteria found in you feces that you excrete can be lethal if ingested? Yet it comes from our body so going by you logic, it should still be safe to ingest.

Right?

Again, I've stated before that under harsh circumstances Islam allows you to perform actions which are otherwise forbidden. As stated in the Quran: "But if one is forced by necessity without willful disobedience nor transgressing due limits, then there is no sin on him. Truly, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful" (Noble Quran 2:173)

SpinoRaptor24

I understand that you have a get out clause in your religion if you are being "forced by necessity". I hope that salves your concience if you do break any rules. However, it does not explain the rule, or explain fully the reaoning behing the relaxation in enforcement either, past a selfish human desire to keep living.

You keep making this baseless assumption that I've eaten Pork and had pig organs transplanted inside of me. Well I haven't and I doubt I ever will. Ingesting something isn't similar to injecting it directly into the body. Snake venom is highly poisonous when injected directly into the bloodstream, yet generally harmless when eaten or drank due to our stomach acids breaking it down.

SpinoRaptor24

No, I don't think you do eat pork and I don't think you have had pig organ transplants at all. Of course you would out of necessity though, wouldn't you? So its not really all that bad then is it? I like your thinking re snake venom and the strength of the human constitution.

When you eat or drink something, it doesn't just go to your stomach and then out the other end. Your digestive tract breaks it down and then transports various minerals/nutrients/molecules around the entire body through the bloodstream. Drinking and eating blood often puts unwanted products in our blood stream. As previously mentioned in my article, eating Pork often leads to various diseases. The most serious danger of eating pork is that pork contains tapeworms which may grow to a length of 2-3 meters. The growth of the eggs of these worms in the human body may lead to insanity and hysteria if they grow in the area of the brain. If they grow in the region of the heart that may lead to high blood pressure and heart attacks. Another kind of worm that is to be found in pork is the trichinosis worm that cannot be killed under normal cooking temperatures, the growth of which in the body may lead to paralysis and skin rashes.

I still don't see why it is such a difficult concept to understand.

SpinoRaptor24

Tapeworms are common in many animals and not peculiar to pigs. So are all animals that can get tapeworms haram, including sheep and goats? You can get tablets to prevent tapeworm, so science knows how to combat this parasite. Also, cooking food kills parasites and bacteria.

Trichinosis also affects many other species too. Are they also haram? If not, why not? Trichinosis can also be killed under normal cooking temperatures. There are also preventions and cures for this parasite, so don't worry.

I can understand the concept of unsafe food. But I don't see why you can't equate pork diseases with other animal diseases and form a balanced view over its safety. Nearly 100 million tons of Pork were consumed in 1996 - it is one of the widely eaten meats in the world - accounting for 38% of all global meat production. The pig is one of the oldest forms of livestock, having been domesticated around 5000 BC. from here.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Are you saying that something which is clean for one use is unclean for another use?SpinoRaptor24

It's possible. I gave my example of snake venom above. Did you know the bacteria found in you feces that you excrete can be lethal if ingested? Yet it comes from our body so going by you logic, it should still be safe to ingest.

Right?

You are getting there. Although the choice would hardly be pleasant:-

I would rather eat my own faeces than get it sewn into my chest cavity.

If something is too dirty to eat, how could it ever be clean enough to be used in surgery?

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

I think you talking about concepts is back-tracking. I wasn't making assumptions - I was positing a position, then asking you if it was your postiion. I think the stuff you say about "simple concepts" is ridiculous, since you have not yet eluded to this concept that is so simple yet.

Android339

Not only have I alluded to this concept, it is the only thing I have been able to allude to, because it is the only thing I have been able to say, because of the misconceptions already of what I am saying. This may seem like "back-tracking" to you, but it's a necessity to have to go this slow in this forum.

Unless you are meddling with the concepts of cleanliness and acceptability. Who knows.

RationalAtheist

Not sure what you mean here. If you mean to criticize my consistent need to reiterate my points over and over (due to the misconceptions already), then it certainly isn't my fault. I surely would have gone farther than this if the responders actually understood what I said when I said it the first time.

If my attempts at understanding something that is entirely (by your own definition) tangential to the actual converstaion in the thread are not right, then surely there is an issue somewhere about the transferring of understanding over this concept that seems more important to you than the real discussion, all of a sudden. I think it's your responsibility to make clear statements about your concepts, rather than have me guess. Please do clarify and lay out this concept for me.

RationalAtheist

Please do clarify and lay out this concept for you? This is what I have been doing this entire time. I will lay out the concept, once again, in as simple and slow terms as I can muster, for your benefit. Although, my previous statements have been more than clear for a 1st grader to understand.

THE CONCEPT OF ANDROID339 CONCERNING THE LOGICAL GROUNDWORK OF THE MUSLIM USER'S ARGUMENT:

((( An object can be unacceptable to use in one scenario, and fit to use in another scenario. )))

Notice the complete lack of reference to anything the Muslim users have actually said? Or have you, once again, read much too much into what I am saying and interpreted it as "not being able to do something for no good reason"? As a special bonus, I will also give you my opinion on what the Muslim users have actually said. I'll try to be brief again.

THE OPINION OF ANDROID339 ON WHAT THE MUSLIM USERS HAVE ACTUALLY SAID:

((( It is silly to say that pork is an unclean thing to eat while also saying that the organs of a pig are fit to be put in a human body.)))

WHERE ANDROID339 WAS GOING WITH THIS:

((( While the Muslim users have used the concept above to justify their saying that pig organs can be used as human organs even when pork is considered unclean, under a practical light this is not a justifiable groundwork considering that the world has gone far in making our food clean. Also, the idea that I can't eat something because it is considered "dirty", while being able to put it into my body next to all my other organs, is contradictory. The logical groundwork is non-contradictory, but sadly their argument does not fit the groundwork they used. )))

Do you like pork? A little conceptual refresh:

[QUOTE="Android339"]I'm saying that the concept of not being able to eat something, but being able to use it for other things, is non-contradictory.RationalAtheist

Are you saying that something which is clean for one use is unclean for another use? Would you prefer to stick something dirty in your mouth or inside an incision in your chest? How's that for a concept?

That's not what I said. ;)

By the way, I love bacon.

It is what you said - I copied and pasted it from earlier this thread! Does it make all the other stuff you wrote above it invalid? Please be assured that I'm not trying to read anything into what you said, only understand why you said it, what it meant and how it added to the conversation. I was also trying to understand what concept you were referring to, since you began by conceptually referring to eating something.

I still think this logical groundwork of yours was entirely misguided, since I see no conceptual fit between the general usage of objects and specific religious laws being discussed, or any association with eating. Why were you laying out this "logical groundwork" if you were going to come to the same conclusions anyway?

If you think you need to go slow for us in this forum, do you really think its the best place for you to express yourself? What I'd prefer is continued debate without direct insults attached. Can you slow down enough to stop being derisory? Perhaps reiterating is not quite the same as explaining. What more point is there discussing this to you? I do see a tendency for you to try belittling the audience you try and communicate with. Is that a wise technique for encouraging understanding - criticising the ability of your audience (me, in this case) to understand you, while making imposing demands of first graders?

{joke}

Has bacon poisoned your mind?

{/joke}