Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log In
Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
The forums are currently locked and only available for read only access
sp_TopicIcon
Does God Have NPD?
January 7, 2006
12:37 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Tez,

{In regard to the very many anomalies in the Bible, I originally did and He pointed me away from the bible and in the direction of the book called the Bhagavard Gita - the name of which means the Song of God.}

Funny -- the anomalies in the Bible had the opposite effect on me. They caused me to realize how wonderful it was that God entrusted the capturing of his inspired thoughts and words to the hands of mere mortals. Even though portions of manuscripts may have been miscopied, even though entire books (like the books of Gad and Nathan) may have been lost to history, even though sections may have been changed by conspiring leaders, I can still sense God, feel his presence, in the words that survived and became what we know as the Bible.

I've read about three-quarters of the Bhagavad Gita. It's an interesting book -- I think it reads better than scriptures from other religions I've read.

I used to look forward to talking with the Hare Krishnas in the airports, before they were banned. That's where I got my copy of the book.

And according to the Gita, I'm saved! For the name of Hare Krishna is so powerful, and he is so good, that all one has to do is say the words "Hare Krishna" and one is saved, even if you don't put any heart into it. I can't tell you where that's written, but I remember reading it.

So not to sound flippant, but since I'm a saved Krishna-ite (pardon my butchering of the word, but I trust you get the concept), I can rest assured that I will reach Nirvana and that karma will smile on me.

Seriously, the Gita reads differently from the Bible. The Bible moves me, speaks to me, enraptures me, chastises me, much more powerfully than the Gita. That's basically why I believe the Bible.

January 7, 2006
12:46 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

WD,

{I think you may have hit one of my pet nails on the head, regarding "which part" of the Bible...

I like the whole idea of MArtin Luther, the Protestant revolution. I like the idea that people who can read and think ought to interpret the sacred texts available to them rather than have some priest tell them what they can read and what it means.}

Yes. As the New Testament so aptly illustrates, living apostles -- those to whom God actually appeared and instructed to teach others, or those appointed by other apostles -- are the only ones authorized to proclaim doctrine. Anybody else's opinion of the Bible, even the most learned and studied opinion, is not doctrine and is not binding on anybody.

January 7, 2006
12:53 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Tez,

{The fact that He does not overtly manifest, has never done so nor is likely to ever do so proves to me that he either does not exist or He loves the ignorance, confusion and consequent suffering in his sad, pathetic creations. Either way why would I bother to ask such a God anything?? }

Or what of this possibility: God has to stay out of the way, he has to make it appear that he does not exist, and he cannot force himself on anybody, even the lowliest of his creations. The ignorance, confusion, and consequent suffering of his children pain him every bit as much, and more so, than it does any of us.

He's like a helicopter pilot, hovering over a road, watching two cars about to collide, knowing that somebody will be killed, yet he cannot stop it, or the game would be up.

What do you think of this?

January 7, 2006
7:53 pm
Avatar
zinnia
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I think it is an apt analogy. I have seen a similar one to explain the sacrifice of Jesus:

A man tended a railroad bridge back in the days when they had to manually pull a lever to raise or lower a bridge. His home was a short distance from he small building in which he sat out his watch over the switch. He had a small son.

One day he allowed his son to come to work with him and play around the area. He didn't watch him very closely, but was watching for the passenger train due to cross the bridge. The little boy watched, too, and in his excitement when he saw it, he ran forward and climbed onto the girders of the bridge, right into a place where he would be crushed if his father pulled the lever.

His father saw him, and looked up and saw that the passaenger train full of people was already too close to the bridge to stop.

He pulled the lever.

The passengers were saved.

Many never even knew of the tragedy that rocked the small community whose houses bordered the ravine and whose neighbor lost his only son.

January 7, 2006
8:20 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Seekerw.

You said:

"Seriously, the Gita reads differently from the Bible. The Bible moves me, speaks to me, enraptures me, chastises me, much more powerfully than the Gita. That's basically why I believe the Bible."

I would no more push the Bhagavard Gita's 'barrow' now than I would the Bible's. Since you were undoubtedly raised in the west your enculturation lends itself strongly to this above emotional attachment of yours. I'm hardly surprised.

You said:

"Or what of this possibility: God has to stay out of the way, he has to make it appear that he does not exist, and he cannot force himself on anybody, even the lowliest of his creations. The ignorance, confusion, and consequent suffering of his children pain him every bit as much, and more so, than it does any of us. ... ...or the game would be up. "

Ahhhh ... so your God is not omnipotent? The game is more powerful than he is? Is that how you see Him - a god with a lower case 'g'? Or if your God is omnipotent and omniscient and yet invented the cruel 'game' of which you speak then is he still unconditionally loving in your eyes? If so how is the horrific game in our best interests? Whoops!

But still no one takes up the challenge to rationally reconcile the three attributes of the Christian God with either the harsh Biblical God of the Isrealites or the horrors of the world that the Christian God either causes or permits.

January 7, 2006
8:54 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia

You are on the horns of the Christian dilemma.

Your train analogy in your posting of 7-Jan-06 has a train driver as analogous to your God and his baby son as Christ's analogy.

So here we have a God (train driver) who is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. Had your train driver(God) been both, the son and the passengers would never been allowed to be placed in harms way in the first place. Your driver would never have permitted the dangerous circumstance to evolve.

Or are you saying that your God is not omniscient or not omnipotent?

Or did your train driver (God) set up the crash scenario just so he could sacrifice his son to make up for his ineptitude? Is your God passing the buck onto his creation for the analogous (train crash) horrors and then 'big noting' himself to his creation by sacrificing his son supposedly for their benefit? Why did He not make the sacrifice Himself at the 'beginning of creation' by getting the design of human nature and the world right in the first place??

What excuse does your God have? After all for all of time your God knows in advance the consequences of his poor designing of human nature and the predatory world. With the full benefit of foresight and absolute power, He still went ahead with the flawed design into the mass production stages! Billions of flawed production models later, your God still hasn't got it right. Any court of law would call this highly irresponsible and reprehensible behavior and award full damages against your God.

Your God has always had the power to make design changes long before the year 0 CE but didn't. According to Christian Doctrine your God demanded a blood sacrifice of a human being to reconcile that which still hasn't been fixed!! What a ghastly image of a horrendous God.

Or is it that your God is not unconditionally loving of all sentient beings? It seems that he plays favorites by setting up human predators supposedly at the top of the food chain. In fact according to Christian doctrine your God even instigated the whole predatorial food chain in the beginning. Or was that Adam and Eve's fault too? Or perhaps Satan's?

Your God seems to want to pass the buck everywhere else but where it belongs - with HIM!

That is, if your God were to really exist as you believe that he does of course. 🙂

January 7, 2006
11:03 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

zinnia,

That story puts it all into perspective, doesn't it? Yes, it's very fitting indeed. Thanks for sharing it. Can you imagine the sacrifice made for those people who weren't even aware at the time that anything special had happened?

January 7, 2006
11:51 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Tez,

"Ahhhh ... so your God is not omnipotent? The game is more powerful than he is? Is that how you see Him - a god with a lower case 'g'? Or if your God is omnipotent and omniscient and yet invented the cruel 'game' of which you speak then is he still unconditionally loving in your eyes? If so how is the horrific game in our best interests? Whoops!"

"But still no one takes up the challenge to rationally reconcile the three attributes of the Christian God with either the harsh Biblical God of the Isrealites or the horrors of the world that the Christian God either causes or permits."

Do you, at the core of your soul, want an answer to these questions and challenges, or are you asking simply as an intellectual exercize?

January 8, 2006
12:02 am
Avatar
zinnia
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Tez,
Your comments all seem to carry two threads: omniscience and omnipotence, and seem to be missing the third: love.

But this modern-day parable is not about power and knowledge, it is about love, and the tragic dilemma of measuring the good of one versus the good of many.

I think you expect too much of a simple analogy.

If there must be a God who is omniscient and omnipotent, then it is impossible ever to get a full description by any human hand of God, because no human being can grasp omnipotence and omniscience.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a rock so heavy He cannot lift it?

Right in that question lies the fact of human limits to knowledge.

You seem so angry at what you call "my" ["your"] God, for all the horrors: but the bloody steps of Inca and Aztec altars had nothing to do with Yahweh, the killing fields of the Kmher Rouge and the deaths in the Russian Gulag were not done by worshipers of Yahweh. The Rwandan massacres were not carried out by worshippers of Yahweh.

Does this mean worshippers of Yahweh are better than the various kinds of people who carried out the above? No, because like all other human beings, worshippers of Yahweh have made war on each other and on others outside their groups.

If Yahweh is to be blamed for not preventing or stoppaing all this human misery, then what about all the other deities? They all seem to be out to lunch, if you ask me.

January 8, 2006
5:40 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Seekerw

You said:7-Jan-06

"Do you, at the core of your soul, want an answer to these questions and challenges, or are you asking simply as an intellectual exercize?"

As I have said several times before, I don't like experiencing cognitive dissonance.

I need to reconcile to my own satisfaction, how otherwise seemingly intelligent Christians, especially those who are scientists, reconcile what to me seems to be an irreconcilable dichotomy.

January 8, 2006
6:26 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia

On the 8-Jan-06 you said:

"Tez, Your comments all seem to carry two threads: omniscience and omnipotence, and seem to be missing the third: love."

You seem not to have read my post of 7-Jan-06 to which you responded.

For your convenience I'll quote the relevant part from my post below:

"Or is it that your God is not unconditionally loving of all sentient beings? It seems that he plays favorites by setting up human predators supposedly at the top of the food chain. In fact according to Christian doctrine your God even instigated the whole predatorial food chain in the beginning. Or was that Adam and Eve's fault too? Or perhaps Satan's?"

Many times on the Liberation threads I have quoted what Christians claim are the three attributes of the Christian God.

Once again for your convenience I will do so again.

According to Christians, their God is:

1. Omnipotent.

2. Omniscient.

3. Unconditionally loving.

Please note attribute three.

Based upon the validity of the Christian God's attributes, the logical conclusion is that IF the Christian God exists with these 3 attributes THEN:

1. The Christian God MUST either 'cause' OR 'permit' all things to happen that happen AND all things to exist that exist.

2. Since the Christian God is unconditionally loving of all sentient beings AND conclusion 1. above is valid, then all that happens or exists in the lives of ALL sentient beings MUST be in their 'best interests'.

I repeat my unanswered question posted on many threads over the years:

Assuming the validity of Conclusion 2. above, how can the horrors of this world be in the best interest of its victims????

If even 'one' happening or circumstance is NOT in the best interests of even 'one' sentient being then EITHER one or more of the three attributes of the Christian God must EITHER be false OR that Christian God doesn't exist at all.

IMHO, the above 'as yet not shown to be flawed' logic demonstrates the irrationality of the Christian beliefs.

I will now restated the question that underpins my cognitive dissonance:

How does a rational Christian scientist compartmentalize his/her mind so as to be rational in everything but his/ber Christian beliefs??

Perhaps I need to direct the question to an eminent psychologist rather than to some illogical but albeit 'knowledgeable' theologin. I'm not sure on this point.

January 8, 2006
7:02 pm
Avatar
zinnia
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I am neither theologian nor psychologist. I am an artist with special training in curriculum design.

In the field of curriculum design, one focuses on pedagogy and behavior as well as on material. Is the logical argument really about the statements being made, and the logic contained therein, or is some other lesson being taught at a deeper level?

Tez, you question the logic of what you say are attributes of a Christian God, and I don't argue for or against your perceptions. I just wonder why you focus so heavily on them.

Whether or not Yahweh or any other God created the predatory chain of life, or whether it is a result of random molecular events, it is there. We can't change the fact that from amoeba up to grizzly bear, life consumes life in order to survive.

We can't change gravity or the climate.

And we can't seem to change war. Or the dilemma we each face either with a pregnancy or with a loved one on life support machines.

Tez, if I agreed with all your points about the Christian God, what would it mean to you?

January 8, 2006
7:19 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia.

So as not to distract you in my previous response, I decided to address one of your logical conundrums separately.

You said:

"If God is omnipotent, can He create a rock so heavy He cannot lift it?"

Since I do not believe in the existence of the Christian God, then for me such a question is redundant and meaningless.

However, I can see that for a Christian who might have a naive belief in the existence of an anthropomorphic God separate from all his creation then this question is indeed a paradox.

However, if the Christian God were inseparable from all his creation and all is One with there being no 'other', no 'beyond', then in that sense God 'lifting' 'God', the Rock that He made too heavy for himself to lift, is an absurdity. It is like an eye seeing its itself. So again from this perspective the question is redundant.

Unless Christians maintain that the Christian God contains all, is All and that all sentient beings are also an integral part of that God, my previous posting poses no such logical absurdities. Only the question of God's masochism would then remain.

I am not talking about what your Christian God causes or permits to happen to himself. I am talking about what your God causes or permits to happen to separate sentient beings, his vulnerable and hapless creations.

You do believe in the existence of both your separate permanent selfhood - call it your soul if you like - separate from a Christian God who also has a Self albeit with an upper case 'S' - don't you? Do I state your belief about your 'self' in relation to your God accurately?

January 8, 2006
7:33 pm
Avatar
zinnia
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I was not posing the rock question as a paradox, I was posing it as an illustration of human limitation in even perceiving "omnipotence", Tez, because you seem to express so much anger that this character you keep referring to as "my" Christian God is not exercising "omnipotence". That question is a direct illustration of the human brain short-circuiting itself.

You also seem to be attributing beliefs to me. You really know nothing of my beliefs about God or my perception of my spirit life, or "soul" as you call it.

This whole thread started with my question of whether the God described in the Bible exhibits Narcissistic Personality Disorder. There are lots of threads in this board showing a wide range of awareness of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

So, I return to the question, but slightly rephrase it:

Why does Western civilization choose to deify a being that carries traits of Narcissistic Personality Disorder?

I am going on at least a partial assumption that Buddha and Hindu and other deities do not exhibit these traits, but I am not familiar enough with any of those traditions to say if that is true.

January 8, 2006
7:35 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Tez

On the 8-Jan-06 you asked:

"Tez, if I agreed with all your points about the Christian God, what would it mean to you?"

Firstly I would draw the conclusion that you were a logical thinker.

You also being a Christian, your being in agreement would be highly significant for me because I would then have the right person to ask how they reconcile their highly contradictory(illogical) religious beliefs with the logical part of their brain that agreed with my logic. This is the ultimate point of interest for me.

To further reiterate this point, I will shift your focus onto my question that I thought already answered this question of yours in the post to which you responded:

I asked:

"How does a rational Christian scientist compartmentalize his/her mind so as to be rational in everything but his/ber Christian beliefs??"

January 8, 2006
7:35 pm
Avatar
zinnia
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I meant "Hindu gods"

January 8, 2006
7:48 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia

On the 8-Jan-06 you said:

"You also seem to be attributing beliefs to me. You really know nothing of my beliefs about God or my perception of my spirit life, or "soul" as you call it."

In this regard, that's why I phrased my statements as questions. Despite the question marks, perhaps you didn't read them as questions, but rather as imputations.

If you look closely at my posts, I am talking about a fundamental belief espoused by all Christians; namely about the three attributes of the Christian God.

Are you implying that this is not in accordance with your belief about the three fundamental attributes of your God?

If not then I would be very interested in learning which fundamental attributes, as opposed to 'derived' attributes, you would discard or add?

January 8, 2006
8:08 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia

On the 8-Jan-06 you said:

"I am going on at least a partial assumption that Buddha and Hindu and other deities do not exhibit these traits, but I am not familiar enough with any of those traditions to say if that is true."

My understanding of Buddhism is that the Buddha is not a diety, he never claimed to be one. He created nothing. In fact the Buddha never expounded the existence of a God at all. In that sense Budhism could be considered to be an 'athiestic' religion. 🙂 But it is my impression that 'agnostic' would be a better adjective to use.

I do not consider this statement of mine immediately above is about point scoring but only about information giving.

My understanding of Hinduism is somewhat restricted to Raja Roga beliefs that differ a little from mainstream Hinduism, if such a thing exists. I know that there are very many deities in the Hindu religion with divided responsibilities for the world as we know it. Though sects have a primary focus on certain deities, to my knowledge it is not a monethiestic religion generally speaking.

For example in certain Hindu sects Bramha, Vishu and Shiva are beliefed to be the three Gods of Creation, Sustenance, and Destruction respectively. Their attributes are considered to be very specific. They base this belief on the observable fact that everything is born, sustained and eventually dies including stars.

I do not subscribe to this belief system at all. However it is logically consistent with what can be observed in the world. Rape, torture etc would probably very logically be ascribed to God Shiva the destroyer. Of course like belief in the existence of the Christian God this belief is IMHO also in the realm of mythology.

January 8, 2006
8:19 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia

On the 8-Jan-06 you asked:

"Why does Western civilization choose to deify a being that carries traits of Narcissistic Personality Disorder? "

I guess that you are talking about a component of that civilization who are Christian.

I would not know the answer to that question. That is why I posed my question. Why would they???

There seems to me to be some compartmentalization of the psyche going on. That is, when it comes to religious beliefs, seemingly rational people, seem able to switch off their rationality and believe what appears to me to be naive scriptural mythology.

January 8, 2006
10:45 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hi Tez,

Turning this statement of yours around:

{I asked:

"How does a rational Christian scientist compartmentalize his/her mind so as to be rational in everything but his/ber Christian beliefs??"}

I can just as validly ask you:

"How does a rational agnostic/atheistic scientist compartmentalize his/her mind so as to be ascribe rationality to everything in a Christian scientist except his/her Christian beliefs??"

January 8, 2006
11:45 pm
Avatar
zinnia
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Not all Christians belief in the Trinity, Tez, although I tend more to accept it than reject it. I don't see why my own beliefs are relevant to this topic. Not all discussion has to be involved with establishing personal "positions", IMO. I enjoy ruminating kinds of discussions in which we can examine and think about something without necessarily having a "position".

Thank you for pointing out about Buddha not being a deity. The large statues one sees tends to give me the impression of a deity, so it is confusing to me.

The concept of an "atheistic" religion is interesting. I would tend to use "philosophy" to describe that. And I would distinguish a Buddhist atheist from the militant atheists of the USA. Really, they ought to call themselves antitheists in many cases.

Now "rational thought" is also interesting. A person with NPD can be super-rational. A lot of the more elaborate and more terrible "plans" that are described in the Old Testament are very rational. The various be=attles and treatment of prisoners, Canaanites, etc.

Can we really make a complete split between emotion and rationalism in scientific thought? Scientists like Einstein seem to be affected by emotions, if curiousity and a strong desire to explore are emotions. Other scientists, like the ones who worked out the practical application of Einstein's work to the atomic bomb, they were more completely rational. Likewise the architects of the Nazi death camp system.

January 9, 2006
1:47 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Seekerw
8-Jan-06

"How does a rational agnostic/atheistic scientist compartmentalize his/her mind so as to be ascribe rationality to everything in a Christian scientist except his/her Christian beliefs??"

He doesn't compartmentalize his mind at all.

He would apply the same laws of logic applicable to the philosophy of science as ascribed to by the scientist as he would to the Christian beliefs of the Scientists and find find the latter irrational.

That's why I'm asking my questions to no avail it appears.

January 9, 2006
1:54 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia

On the 8-Jan-06 you said:

"A lot of the more elaborate and more terrible "plans" that are described in the Old Testament are very rational. The various be=attles and treatment of prisoners, Canaanites, etc."

I'm referring to irreconcilability of the fundamental attributes of the Christian God in relation to the horrors of the world and to the nature of that same God as espoused in the Hebrew Torah derived Bible.

January 9, 2006
2:23 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Zinnia

On 8-Jan-06 you said:
"Not all Christians belief in the Trinity,"

I didn't say they did.

Did you confuse the Father, Son, Holy Spirit (i.e. The Blessed Trinity) with the three attributes of the Christian God?

And:

"Can we really make a complete split between emotion and rationalism in scientific thought?"

The philosophy of science is constructed on the pillar of objectivity of the cognitions.

Emotions whilst often a driving force behind the research motivations of the scientist, play no role in the actual validation or otherwise of the hypothesis itself. That is, 'feeling' that some research hypothesis is valid carries no weight at all in the mathematical analysis of significance levels and subsequent conclusions. Whereas for many religious people feelings often dominate their judgements dramatically in such value judgements as the validity of their beliefs. 'Blind spots' seem to proliferate and emotions run high when such people's beliefs are challenged.

Emotions are very subjective and are thus often, but not always, irrational. If a live tiger confronts you with no barrier in between it is highly rational to believe that you are in danger. In that instance your emotions would probably serve you well in the sponetaneity of the short term and hopefully cognitions would follow suit with rational decision making thereafter.

However emotional memories, conditioned in the past, when re-triggered by harmless events in the present are often stimulants of irrational thought unless deep insights into the self preclude such irrationality.

No one has addressed my question nor found a flaw(s) in my logic yet!

For convenience I repeat both.

Based upon the validity of the Christian God's attributes, the logical conclusion is that IF the Christian God exists with these 3 attributes of omnipotence, omniscience and unconditional love for all sentient beings THEN:

1. The Christian God MUST either 'cause' OR 'permit' all things to happen that happen AND all things to exist that exist.

2. Since the Christian God is unconditionally loving of all sentient beings AND conclusion 1. above is valid, then all that happens or exists in the lives of ALL sentient beings MUST be in their 'best interests'.

I repeat my unanswered question posted on many threads over the years:

Assuming the validity of Conclusion 2. above, how can the horrors of this world be in the best interest of its victims????

January 9, 2006
10:48 pm
Avatar
zinnia
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
100sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez,
what are the "three attributes" of the Christian God that you have mentioned several times?

Forum Timezone: UTC -8
Most Users Ever Online: 349
Currently Online:
27
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
onedaythiswillpass: 1134
zarathustra: 562
StronginHim77: 453
free: 433
2013ways: 431
curious64: 408
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 49
Members: 111134
Moderators: 5
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 74
Topics: 38716
Posts: 714574
Newest Members:
kojuyu, NathanielClark, avoid_up, Amin99, Difors, guest_alexander
Moderators: arochaIB: 1, devadmin: 9, Tincho: 0, Donn Gruta: 0, Germain Palacios: 0
Administrators: admin: 21, ShiningLight: 572, emily430: 29

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Health Disclaimer | Do Not Sell My Personal Information