Although times are changing and making amendments to the Bible seems like the logical solution, the Bible is code on moral behavior basically and I don't think civil rights will really ever change. Besides, the original view on the life by the Bible is served in an intended context in which we can just understand and follow the thematic guidelines served to us.

God didn't make the world so it can be perfect- or else we would all be robots. We all have our ups and downs for a reason. If bad things didn't happen to us, then we couldn't fully appreciate the bad things in life. Then we would just be living a world of boring monotony. What kind of life would that be living? That's not a life! The world is colorful and that's what makes us all so fun to be around. If God made life perfect, then what would be the point of life?

Nathaniel Hawthorne had a Puritan upbringing but unconverted because he did not like some aspects that his ex-religion had developed into. However, you can see themes of the effects of reaching enlightenment or perfection in several of his works. Basically what his message is saying is that once we achieve this level of perfection, there is no need for us to be living anymore. In this sense, God has put thought into carefully making such an array of beings- the vast amount of things and stuff he has created.

God represents a way to live life. If there was no God then there would be no reason for people to not do whatever they want. Yes there would be rules and such in the framework of our government. But internally speaking, there would be no need to follow such rules. A world without God is no world indeed.

As for the problems for segregation, well you're just basing it off of certain individuals who chose for themselves to pervert the foundational value of their "religion", those who use religion as an excuse. They don't represent the whole of religion. It's more about the interpersonal relationship with God and oneself.

As for the Hitler comment, well he was just a corrupted individual. I'm pretty sure there are corrupted atheists too like Mao Ze Dong, Joseph Stalin, and Benito Mussolini. Religion doesn't define a person, it's ones individual morals that define him/her self. No individual person is a representation of their whole entire faith, that's just silly and absurd.

Actually the foundational theme in just about all religion is to love each other. In one sense, religion can just be another way for living out their moral code. Just how you carry it out is a different matter.

You can't directly challenge God to literally show you a sign that he exists and stuff. If life were that easy, then everyone would be religious. That's why we have to have faith. I think the reason he lets sin run around loose is because he didn't create robots, he created humans. We get feel emotions sometimes good sometimes bad. One can't fully appreciate the full extend of something good without being in a negative position. In a way, it also motivates us, gives us passion and drive. That's why we sometimes look highly to those who strive past a lot of negative issues in their life. If we were to only have good things happen to us, that would be a very boring world.

I don't think you don't believe in God, I just think that you resent him a little right now. But you have to understand, life will always be about ups and downs. I know I have no right to say that so let it speak for itself. You can't demand God to show you a sign in accordance to your will. Just as it said in the Bible Judgement Day will come, but no one will know when. Recently in the past, there were a few raptures of people claiming that a certain day was Judgement Day. But God did not answer on those days because he is God. You can't go around believing in him that way. You have to have real faith. I struggle with it too but I know in my heart He is there.

Ok well you yourself may be an exception which I am sure there are more like you. But generally speaking if a person- especially a child of young age- is exposed to content such as blood, guts, gore, violence, gamer rage...then that kid is more prone in having dehumanized effects, if not on some kind of minor level, which I don't see in the most positive light.

No it's not it's rated M for mature. 17 and up for blood, violence, and gore. How would little kids raging at each other be a good thing??

As much as television is helpful with all the information it provides, it is also a source for a ton of useless matters such as cartoons, certain documentaries (like finding bigfoot), tv shows intended to be sources of entertainment, etc...

One may argue that most shows contain words of wisdom, a universalizing message of some sort. However, there are other beneficial ways to obtain these words of wisdom such as reading literature or conversing with an elderly. Although it is true that shows display these messages in a positive fashion with humor and entertainment, the time it takes that was wasted watching it does not get canceled out with the underlying theme.

Certain documentaries although interesting (like Animal Planet) are actually useless. Do we really need to know about the honey badger or meerkat manor? It's not like we're going to Africa any time soon.

News shows can also be arguable as well. These days, I've been noticing that they've been sometimes showing useless youtube videos. Information about the weather is useful, but weather info is everywhere. It would be more convenient to check on a phone app.

So that only leaves us with the useful informative material (like the Dog Whisperer) and sometimes the news. But come on now, are we only ever going to watch television for the news and shows like the Dog Whisperer? Of course not, eventually we're going to flip the channel and before you know it, we're going to be zombified for the next few hours playing with the kids, spending time with the family, running, and being a more productive individual. These are precious hours spent that we can never get back. In this sense, television is less than useful and at time, even harmful.

If we're using nondomesticated animals in like zoos, circus, or pets then I would usually cringe because it's hard to think about what kind of position the animal must be in. Yeah in a domesticated environment it would be a lot safer from all the predators and such but thats what the animal was designed to do. We can't control these animals lives from them like that. I think the biggest factor I feel sorry for them is boredom. If they're out in the wild their mind thinks of hunting, shelter, parenting, and keeps their minds active. But if they're in an enclosed area I wouldn't be surprised if they had depression. After all, there wouldnt be much meaning to their lives then- nothing at stake, no adventure or anything.

However, in animal documentaries it's more for information thant entertainment. I think that's ok because we're essentially promoting them in their natural habitats so no harm no fowl.