Religion and Science - Barbour’s dialogue model represents wise approach

[Anonymous]

What does Nancy’s husband do? How big was her inheritance from her wealthy family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What does Nancy’s husband do? How big was her inheritance from her wealthy family?

Do you know? Didn’t her husband get caught doing shady things with insider information? Wasn’t he using information from Nancy in his job?

As far as I know, Nancy had no significant inheritance, if you have something that shows that, post it.

[Anonymous]

Paul Pelosi’s questionable Wall Street windfall spurs bipartisan calls for stock trading ban

On the things-that-should-be-done-but-haven’t-for-whatever-reason front, legislation exists that would prohibit members of Congress from trading stocks. It’s called the Banning Insider Trading in Congress Act and it would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from trading individual stocks.

For those who live in a sane world wallpapered in logic, this proposal makes perfect sense. Why? Because currently lawmakers can pass legislation that creates favorable conditions for certain companies or industries, and if a lawmaker knows that this legislation will pass, he or she could profit off it.

Now more eyes are turning to Paul Pelosi, the House speaker’s husband. From a trading perspective, he’s like the real-life version of Gordon Gekko from the 1987 Oliver Stone classic “Wall Street.” His portfolio has substantially outperformed the S&P 500. In 2020 alone, a year when the stock market was as turbulent as in any year in recent memory thanks to COVID-19 shutdowns, Paul outperformed the S&P 500 by 14.3 percent, according to Hawley’s office. And per a New York Post analysis, the Pelosis have made approximately $30 million from trades involving Big Tech companies the House speaker is responsible for regulating.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3571790-paul-pelosis-questionable-wall-street-windfall-spurs-bipartisan-calls-for-stock-trading-ban/amp/

[Anonymous]

Joyce Meyer flies around in her own Gulfstream IV, worth $10 million and owns several homes. All from preaching.

From Wikipedia: In November 2003, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch published a four-part special report[8] detailing Meyer's "$10 million corporate jet, her husband's $107,000 silver-gray Mercedes sedan, her $2 million home and houses worth another $2 million for her four children," a $20 million headquarters, furnished with "$5.7 million worth of furniture, artwork, glassware, and the latest equipment and machinery," including a "$30,000 malachite round table, a $23,000 marble-topped antique commode, a $14,000 custom office bookcase, a $7,000 Stations of the Cross in Dresden porcelain, a $6,300 eagle sculpture on a pedestal, another eagle made of silver bought for $5,000, and numerous paintings purchased for $1,000 to $4,000 each," among many other expensive items – all paid for by the ministry. The articles prompted Wall Watchers[10] (a Christian nonprofit watchdog group) to call on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to investigate Meyer and her family.

[Anonymous]

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/b/contributor/joel-osteen/_/N-2kcp

Joel Osteen takes no salary from his popular church. He has written many bestselling books, that have been translated into many different languages, and has become wealthy from massive book sales. Have I ever read his books? No. Do I watch his broadcasts? Never. But millions and millions of people around the world do, and they also buy his books.

So he’s not collecting money from his church and using it for his planes and cars and wealth. He’s extremely wealthy, yes. But the other guys you listed are not at all compared to our elected officials.

[Anonymous]

Don/t forget Kenneth Copeland of Kenneth Copeland Ministries, $300 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Paul Pelosi’s questionable Wall Street windfall spurs bipartisan calls for stock trading ban

On the things-that-should-be-done-but-haven’t-for-whatever-reason front, legislation exists that would prohibit members of Congress from trading stocks. It’s called the Banning Insider Trading in Congress Act and it would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from trading individual stocks.

For those who live in a sane world wallpapered in logic, this proposal makes perfect sense. Why? Because currently lawmakers can pass legislation that creates favorable conditions for certain companies or industries, and if a lawmaker knows that this legislation will pass, he or she could profit off it.

Now more eyes are turning to Paul Pelosi, the House speaker’s husband. From a trading perspective, he’s like the real-life version of Gordon Gekko from the 1987 Oliver Stone classic “Wall Street.” His portfolio has substantially outperformed the S&P 500. In 2020 alone, a year when the stock market was as turbulent as in any year in recent memory thanks to COVID-19 shutdowns, Paul outperformed the S&P 500 by 14.3 percent, according to Hawley’s office. And per a New York Post analysis, the Pelosis have made approximately $30 million from trades involving Big Tech companies the House speaker is responsible for regulating.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3571790-paul-pelosis-questionable-wall-street-windfall-spurs-bipartisan-calls-for-stock-trading-ban/amp/

google says Joyce is worth an estimated $8 million.

Google says Nancy Pelosi is worth between $112 million and $251 million, and her husband makes money off shady deals with businesses Nancy is in charge of “regulating.”

No one is claiming Joyce or Joel are not wealthy. They are. pp claimed that religious leaders are more wealthy by passing the plate. Joyce Meyer has written over 100 books.

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/b/contributor/joyce-meyer/_/N-2wo8

So the pp was wrong. Political figures have more wealth than religious figures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Paul Pelosi’s questionable Wall Street windfall spurs bipartisan calls for stock trading ban

On the things-that-should-be-done-but-haven’t-for-whatever-reason front, legislation exists that would prohibit members of Congress from trading stocks. It’s called the Banning Insider Trading in Congress Act and it would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from trading individual stocks.

For those who live in a sane world wallpapered in logic, this proposal makes perfect sense. Why? Because currently lawmakers can pass legislation that creates favorable conditions for certain companies or industries, and if a lawmaker knows that this legislation will pass, he or she could profit off it.

Now more eyes are turning to Paul Pelosi, the House speaker’s husband. From a trading perspective, he’s like the real-life version of Gordon Gekko from the 1987 Oliver Stone classic “Wall Street.” His portfolio has substantially outperformed the S&P 500. In 2020 alone, a year when the stock market was as turbulent as in any year in recent memory thanks to COVID-19 shutdowns, Paul outperformed the S&P 500 by 14.3 percent, according to Hawley’s office. And per a New York Post analysis, the Pelosis have made approximately $30 million from trades involving Big Tech companies the House speaker is responsible for regulating.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3571790-paul-pelosis-questionable-wall-street-windfall-spurs-bipartisan-calls-for-stock-trading-ban/amp/

? Does Paul Pelosi get an income tax exemption like the Ministers? I don't think so. Joyce Meyer et al. get rich tax free. And what do we taxpayers get out of it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul Pelosi’s questionable Wall Street windfall spurs bipartisan calls for stock trading ban

On the things-that-should-be-done-but-haven’t-for-whatever-reason front, legislation exists that would prohibit members of Congress from trading stocks. It’s called the Banning Insider Trading in Congress Act and it would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from trading individual stocks.

For those who live in a sane world wallpapered in logic, this proposal makes perfect sense. Why? Because currently lawmakers can pass legislation that creates favorable conditions for certain companies or industries, and if a lawmaker knows that this legislation will pass, he or she could profit off it.

Now more eyes are turning to Paul Pelosi, the House speaker’s husband. From a trading perspective, he’s like the real-life version of Gordon Gekko from the 1987 Oliver Stone classic “Wall Street.” His portfolio has substantially outperformed the S&P 500. In 2020 alone, a year when the stock market was as turbulent as in any year in recent memory thanks to COVID-19 shutdowns, Paul outperformed the S&P 500 by 14.3 percent, according to Hawley’s office. And per a New York Post analysis, the Pelosis have made approximately $30 million from trades involving Big Tech companies the House speaker is responsible for regulating.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3571790-paul-pelosis-questionable-wall-street-windfall-spurs-bipartisan-calls-for-stock-trading-ban/amp/

google says Joyce is worth an estimated $8 million.

Google says Nancy Pelosi is worth between $112 million and $251 million, and her husband makes money off shady deals with businesses Nancy is in charge of “regulating.”

No one is claiming Joyce or Joel are not wealthy. They are. pp claimed that religious leaders are more wealthy by passing the plate. Joyce Meyer has written over 100 books.

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/b/contributor/joyce-meyer/_/N-2wo8

So the pp was wrong. Political figures have more wealth than religious figures.

That's impossible. Her Gulfstream alone is worth $10 million, and her several $2 million dollar homes - gotta wonder if there is some fishy accounting there somewhere. No wonder the IRS investigated her

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^

Apart from fighting extreme poverty, another area where religion and science can collab is better understanding Just War Theory and Practice in modern contexts. Just War theory was originated by St Augustine in fourth century and refined by St Aquinas in Middle Ages and has been employed by many countries over hundreds of years to shape their war responses. It emphasizes that wars of aggression should be presumed to be immoral unless in cases of self defense and that civilian loss and non military targets should be avoided.

Now modern warfare can operate so differently with drones/ nuclear arms/ chemical warfare and cyber attacks. Science and religion could dialogue to propose moral limits for many forms of modern war fare.

Much of the non Western world is very religious and many people tend to trust religious leaders more than scientific leaders/ politicians. Again, religion and science could engage in dialogue to figure out the best ways to serve many people facing unprecedented challenges related to climate change.

So…social science, not physical science?

Back to science & religion.

…social science?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^

Apart from fighting extreme poverty, another area where religion and science can collab is better understanding Just War Theory and Practice in modern contexts. Just War theory was originated by St Augustine in fourth century and refined by St Aquinas in Middle Ages and has been employed by many countries over hundreds of years to shape their war responses. It emphasizes that wars of aggression should be presumed to be immoral unless in cases of self defense and that civilian loss and non military targets should be avoided.

Now modern warfare can operate so differently with drones/ nuclear arms/ chemical warfare and cyber attacks. Science and religion could dialogue to propose moral limits for many forms of modern war fare.

Much of the non Western world is very religious and many people tend to trust religious leaders more than scientific leaders/ politicians. Again, religion and science could engage in dialogue to figure out the best ways to serve many people facing unprecedented challenges related to climate change.

So…social science, not physical science?

OP again -

Science can help faith leaders who partner with other local leaders to help alleviate poverty in many ways. I would imagine social science is important as well for understanding demographic needs of their populations. Hard science is also needed for volunteer medical clinics such as mobile child wellness clinics in rural areas (even just monitoring weight and heights can detect developmental issues, providing basic medical assistance and dental care as well as vaccines).

Like many things in life factual science based knowledge and services often needs softer delivery with human touches locals can relate to. In many parts of the world, religious leaders can help with garnering trust. In fact, I have lived in places where it is only religious groups providing health and education services. It could help if they collaborate with government agencies and science based agencies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul Pelosi’s questionable Wall Street windfall spurs bipartisan calls for stock trading ban

On the things-that-should-be-done-but-haven’t-for-whatever-reason front, legislation exists that would prohibit members of Congress from trading stocks. It’s called the Banning Insider Trading in Congress Act and it would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from trading individual stocks.

For those who live in a sane world wallpapered in logic, this proposal makes perfect sense. Why? Because currently lawmakers can pass legislation that creates favorable conditions for certain companies or industries, and if a lawmaker knows that this legislation will pass, he or she could profit off it.

Now more eyes are turning to Paul Pelosi, the House speaker’s husband. From a trading perspective, he’s like the real-life version of Gordon Gekko from the 1987 Oliver Stone classic “Wall Street.” His portfolio has substantially outperformed the S&P 500. In 2020 alone, a year when the stock market was as turbulent as in any year in recent memory thanks to COVID-19 shutdowns, Paul outperformed the S&P 500 by 14.3 percent, according to Hawley’s office. And per a New York Post analysis, the Pelosis have made approximately $30 million from trades involving Big Tech companies the House speaker is responsible for regulating.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3571790-paul-pelosis-questionable-wall-street-windfall-spurs-bipartisan-calls-for-stock-trading-ban/amp/

? Does Paul Pelosi get an income tax exemption like the Ministers? I don't think so. Joyce Meyer et al. get rich tax free. And what do we taxpayers get out of it?

Can you put a dollar value on religion?

One Georgetown University researcher has attempted something close to it, releasing findings from a study that says organized religion and behaviors associated with it contribute, by one estimate, nearly $1.2 trillion to the United States.

Depending on which factors one considers, religion contributes $378 billion, by the most conservative of estimates, and up to $4.8 trillion to the U.S. annually, Brian Grim said of the study sponsored by Faith Counts, a nonprofit organization of religious groups, whose aim is promoting the value of faith.

Cnaan, who said he is not affiliated with a religion, said he believes it's important to gauge, not if religion is important but how much it is important, in terms of its dollar value to society. That's because churches and other centers of worship benefit society, financially and otherwise, through schools, hospitals, charitable institutions, by providing certain social services and volunteer work that help people in need in their local communities.

Think of organizations, Grim said, such as the Knights of the Columbus, 1.9 million members strong, who have provided help to communities in distress, physically and financially, at a moment's notice.

Given increasing secularism, "think of what would happen if everyone in America woke up like me. I'm not religious," Cnaan said, encouraging others to ponder a society in which the many social and financial benefits of organized religion are no longer there because there are fewer or no church members left. Would others pick up the slack?

https://www.americamagazine.org/issue/religion-contributes-trillions-dollars-us-study-finds

This is what taxpayers get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul Pelosi’s questionable Wall Street windfall spurs bipartisan calls for stock trading ban

On the things-that-should-be-done-but-haven’t-for-whatever-reason front, legislation exists that would prohibit members of Congress from trading stocks. It’s called the Banning Insider Trading in Congress Act and it would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from trading individual stocks.

For those who live in a sane world wallpapered in logic, this proposal makes perfect sense. Why? Because currently lawmakers can pass legislation that creates favorable conditions for certain companies or industries, and if a lawmaker knows that this legislation will pass, he or she could profit off it.

Now more eyes are turning to Paul Pelosi, the House speaker’s husband. From a trading perspective, he’s like the real-life version of Gordon Gekko from the 1987 Oliver Stone classic “Wall Street.” His portfolio has substantially outperformed the S&P 500. In 2020 alone, a year when the stock market was as turbulent as in any year in recent memory thanks to COVID-19 shutdowns, Paul outperformed the S&P 500 by 14.3 percent, according to Hawley’s office. And per a New York Post analysis, the Pelosis have made approximately $30 million from trades involving Big Tech companies the House speaker is responsible for regulating.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3571790-paul-pelosis-questionable-wall-street-windfall-spurs-bipartisan-calls-for-stock-trading-ban/amp/

google says Joyce is worth an estimated $8 million.

Google says Nancy Pelosi is worth between $112 million and $251 million, and her husband makes money off shady deals with businesses Nancy is in charge of “regulating.”

No one is claiming Joyce or Joel are not wealthy. They are. pp claimed that religious leaders are more wealthy by passing the plate. Joyce Meyer has written over 100 books.

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/b/contributor/joyce-meyer/_/N-2wo8

So the pp was wrong. Political figures have more wealth than religious figures.

That's impossible. Her Gulfstream alone is worth $10 million, and her several $2 million dollar homes - gotta wonder if there is some fishy accounting there somewhere. No wonder the IRS investigated her

What did the IRS find?

[Anonymous]

^^ OP
I am Not interested in arguing about US politics in the religion forum and did not get involved in that except to say that many mainstream Christians are wary of prosperity gospel adherents/ TV preachers/ and white Christian nationalists who misuse religion to spread hatred and division.

I am a firm believer in division of church and state but can see there are areas where religion and science can collaborate to help people in need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^

Apart from fighting extreme poverty, another area where religion and science can collab is better understanding Just War Theory and Practice in modern contexts. Just War theory was originated by St Augustine in fourth century and refined by St Aquinas in Middle Ages and has been employed by many countries over hundreds of years to shape their war responses. It emphasizes that wars of aggression should be presumed to be immoral unless in cases of self defense and that civilian loss and non military targets should be avoided.

Now modern warfare can operate so differently with drones/ nuclear arms/ chemical warfare and cyber attacks. Science and religion could dialogue to propose moral limits for many forms of modern war fare.

Much of the non Western world is very religious and many people tend to trust religious leaders more than scientific leaders/ politicians. Again, religion and science could engage in dialogue to figure out the best ways to serve many people facing unprecedented challenges related to climate change.

So…social science, not physical science?

OP again -

Science can help faith leaders who partner with other local leaders to help alleviate poverty in many ways. I would imagine social science is important as well for understanding demographic needs of their populations. Hard science is also needed for volunteer medical clinics such as mobile child wellness clinics in rural areas (even just monitoring weight and heights can detect developmental issues, providing basic medical assistance and dental care as well as vaccines).

Like many things in life factual science based knowledge and services often needs softer delivery with human touches locals can relate to. In many parts of the world, religious leaders can help with garnering trust. In fact, I have lived in places where it is only religious groups providing health and education services. It could help if they collaborate with government agencies and science based agencies.

OP - bottom line - Science requires rigorous methodology for confirming predictions/ theories. Both physical and social sciences are helpful and vital for better understanding reality.