Is tee-totalism also nihilism?
Not that I'm a fan of either but I like to keep informed
Is tee-totalism also nihilism?
Not that I'm a fan of either but I like to keep informed
EDIT Surprisingly relevant. Happy Easter!
Originally Posted by P.J.
Last edited by jmervyn; 31-03-2013 at 23:14.
Not all the time, but sometimes I hear people justifying their god's behavior, and it's just so off putting. He nuked a town (or dropped a meteor on it or whatever), and no one cared. This entity is supposed to be your source of morality, and he's off killing people and no matter how much dodging goes into it, whether it's for the buttsecks or the illegal search and seizure or it's for general asshattery, it doesn't matter. Nuking towns is wrong. But we teach that it's okay. I think the idea of God itself is benign, but when you start applying all these lessons to it, it becomes very inconsistent, and frankly, often immoral.Originally Posted by glurin
I'm not sure what Merv is talking about below, he likes to take things and extract his own meanings from them. I have had several serious girlfriends who were religious enough to attend services/masses, but I've only rarely been obligated to go, and I just refused the eucharist when i had to. No one has really cared. It's never been the reason behind the break ups. I assume he's talking about my ex-fiance, since I've shared a lot about that. That break up was because she cheated on me, and I was oblivious. There wasn't anything i felt i was being judged on as it pertains to religion, perhaps he's thinking about someone else.
1. Sorry to break it to you, the overton window has moved a few notches just in the last few years.
2. That's not feasible. It's not just the tax code, it's a huge list of things and all sorts of law and precedent scattered over 50 states and the federal government. Changing the tax code to be marriage neutral wouldn't fix the social security benefits issue, it would just let rand take this issue and turn it into another try at the flat tax--which is an entirely different discussion.
3. The article admits directly that it has happened, and has only recently been fixed. instead of fixing each issue indepedentaly, we could solve them all by letting them get married. the "we fixed it" argument doesn't apply to all 1000+ benefits that they're asking to be fixed. your canard is canarded.
4. And i'm okay with there being a stated rule that says no church can be forced to marry a couple they don't approve of. it's not about that and it never was. I think the IL bill to switch from civil unions to *** marriage has such a statement in it, not that it was ever an issue with civil unions.
Here's another one of those opposite day replies. I'll let you reread that. Or skip it.That you challenge my opinion on this speaks volumes about yourself. So you define yourself primarily by what's between your legs, and think I may be wrong in sneering at such mentality? I remember one discussion where your motivation to 'get some' was touched on, and I thought to myself how hilarious it is that YOU accused ME of sexism and bigotry.
No I just don't abide YOUR morals. I find your positions on some things morally objectionable. That's not a lack of morals, it's just different ones. Ones i happen to think are better since you frequently talk about perpetrating violent behaviors on people with whom you have political differences (real or imagined).Yeah, we've already covered this; you don't believe in shame, or morality, or pretty much anything that expects humans to behave better than animals. No need for rehash.
I'm not sure what this is in reference to. the last practicing roman catholic girl I dated never made my lapse from the church an issue.*************************************************
It's buried in some old threads; Steve felt "judged" when he was trying to score some Roman Catholic poon-tang, as I recall. See above "shallow" discussion.
In all seriousness, I find the report of a lack of good people less than trustworthy. I find the idea that it's okay for god to just kill people after he's commanded us not to to be a little unsettling, and the fact ath it doesn't bother people is also unsettling.Glurin's recognition of the 'final straw' was already identified in at least one of the links, plus I'd already pointed it out. Sorry, that's not just reading comprehension failure, that's a devotion to hatred of God. Given your expressed desire to eliminate religion and the religious, plus your absolute disbelief in any "higher power", I'm surprised you suddenly express dismay and horror at the thought of wiping out a large city of r@pists, thieves, and worse, amongst whom not even ten nice guys can be found.
I'd also like to mention i did not say i wanted to kill religious people. I wanted to change their minds. I also did not say I wanted to use the force of government or god to do so. And as for eliminating the organized religions themselves, yes i would hope that as people moved to a saner understanding of god (or none at all), they'd realize that the time they spend in church isn't getting them any closer to heaven. Even christianity says you only need to love Jesus. weekly donations and silly rites are unnecessary.
You keep saying things like this but I don't know where you got it from. Why would i feel guilty when i don't agree with what the bible says is right and wrong. i can't even tell half the time because it seems to disagree with itself.That said, it's not like you know feck-all about it in the first place; you're taking an extremely shallow and uninteresting look at something, recognizing that you don't like feeling guilty for a lot of stuff you've done, and are passing judgement on the entirety to make yourself feel better about yourself.
Well, first off, i don't like being labelled politically because I'm not consistently liberal or conservative. that said i'll play your game and react to what appears to be a list you've copied from an email chain:No different from most of the Left:
Actually, there's a pretty handy list:
- Liberals are relativists and hate Christians because Christians believe in absolute truth.
- Liberals do not want anyone to say that immorality is immoral.
- Liberals are selfish and are more interested in their "feelings" then they are with what is right for others.
- Liberals misunderstand what Christians really believe.
- Since liberals see themselves as the superior enlighten ones they do not recognize that taking a position against their position is not automatically hate.
- Liberals do not want to listen to what makes sense, they would rather listen to their senses.
- Liberals ignore the clear evidence of the result of their philosophical positions influence on the last 40 years. It had been a social disaster and they do not want to hear it.
- They see Christians as intellectually inferior.
- Liberals see Christians as wanting to impose their religion on them when in truth it is the liberals who have used the courts system to impose their secular humanism religion on all of us.
- Liberals are spiritually lost and blind to the truth of the gospel.
1. Life has grey ares, that's not relativism. Also, I reject that christians believe in absolute truth. If the nature of their god changes over time, then the nature of their "truth" changes over time. Furthermore, modern christians have tossed aside a lot of archaic rules in leviticus. If they thought morality was timeless and absolute, they'd still be practicing such things.
2. I call you immoral all the time.
3. "what is right for others" implies relativism. I thought there was only one right and one wrong?
4. Christians misunderstand what christians believe. No one can follow it really because there are lots of different types of them and they don't seem to agree. Heck two different priests will give you two different takes on a story. When I compare my old study bible to the craziness you cook up, they don't match.
5. I can differentiate hate from simple disagreement.
6. yes. I prefer reason to blind faith.
7. That's a specious argument I've seen several times. This society is still dominated by christians. it's not like they left or something. Also, a disaster for whom? For every "disaster" we could point to a lot of causes. This could be it's own thread.
8. No, but your arguments in areas like these leave a lot to be desired.
9. First you say there are no atheists, but now you say they run everything? No one has imposed anything on the christians. they have all the power. YOu can't say there are barely any atheists but that they still control you. that's silliness.
10. Muslims say the same about you.
If that were true, then there would be a big push to go back to those ways. back then there was no intarwebs. why are you still here, satan?See #8 above. J/K, actually, but despite your surprising understanding of the difficulty in applying ancient theological belief to a modern context, you subsequently fall for the Satanic trap that involves a kind of "fallacy of novelty". Just because Christian morality is old does NOT mean it's wrong, any more than the fallacy of believing it's right because it's old would be. Smarter minds than yours, and mine, recognized long ago that the Bible is a remarkably legitimate codification of the human condition, and that Enlightenment Christianity is a remarkably sound and functional worldview.
First, i don't have a theology. second, I'm not sure what problems you're talking about. in my lifetime, despite some financial hoopla, the world has become a safer place, where there is less fighting, less hunger, a greater spread of technology, longer lifespans, better quality of living--yes the last 40-50 years or so have been pretty good compared to the first 50 of last century and frankly, much better than the ~100 years before that and so on. You can get your knickers up in a bunch because a bunch of people (black people mostly) are getting locked up for really dumb reasons (drug related stuff), and leaving their kids to fend with their moms, but otherwise, what so terrible has happened? What will history say about the period from 1950-2013? Will they say it was awful, society broke down completely because schools gave out too many ribbons? history won't care about your culture war. The too many ribbons thing is a fad that will turn around becauseThis is the fallacy of novelty in disguise. Do you REALLY believe that things have been oh-so-much better, from a purely social context, over the past 40 years that your theology has been the dominant one in the U.S.?
Atomic energy, man on the moon, the internet, globalization, 9-11, big recession.
Oh, and just to annoy you, first black president.
So no, i don't think the last 40-50 years were so awful.
I'm not sure where you get this idea. A desire to make the world better does not equate to bringing heaven to earth or utopia. And I don't have to presume that your beliefs cause evil and suffering, they already have.I was going to use a great phrase referring to that sick Socialist Jesus claim, but I'll use it here: You believe that we can immenentize the eschaton. I don't, and I know that your belief causes evil and suffering.
God is one thing, that Jesus's death somehow absolves me of any responsibility for my actions (as long as i apologize to one of his earthly minions) is where I think things go off the rails. And the puzzling bit about it is, if I buy this, then suddenly I won't want to sin anymore, (a provably wrong assertation) since his followers sin frequently, that's just added absurdity. Since this is a main tenet of all christianity I'm comfortable saying that all christians are at the very least, partially wrong about the nature of the universe.You just hate anyone who believes there is, and probably would like to kill someone who reminds you that He died for you to have a chance better than the Sodomites.
The fun part is the holy book is written so vaguely, that while followers get to teach their youth things, when we learn enough to question these stories, you simply change what the story is all about and say i'm not smart enough to understand it. That seems like a cop out on the order of "well that's just a parable".
Anyway, since you're still having that reading comprehesion thing, I don't endorse killing anyone. You're wrong all the time, about nearly everything. Even when you're technically right you're still on about it for the wrong reasons. So much that it makes me sad. But I don't hate, nor do i want to kill you. Quite the opposite, i hope that you manage to not say anything so terrible that you find yourself banned. I've said as much before.
Less frills? You say that a complete and utter change in the nature of god happened because his followers decided he no longer needed frills? That's basically admitting that they made it all up. I'm very surprised to see you post that, i always thought you were a very devout believer.The answer to this is that the J00ish culture matured as ancient peoples realized that God's wrath didn't need frills.
I don't think it's fair to attribute to god that which is clearly people. If there is a god, it's not its fault we blow each other up because we disagree about his nature or what it wants the world to look like.You don't think so? What would you call WW1, WW2, and World Communism? That's a hell of a lot of death & suffering that you're suddenly NOT? laying at God's doorstep.
As for the communism, militant atheism is just another church. Killing people because they have irrational beliefs in deities is just as bad as killing them for having the wrong irrational beliefs in deities (or irrational beliefs in the wrong deities or both). You're the one who has the strange desire to kill, injure and maim people who disagree with you (often in ways that I find uncomfortably specific). I find such people more interesting.
Due to popular and loudly stated acclaim by the Forum populace, I'm not playing.
oh, I figured we were safe in here since it was already a political thread.
At most, I might drop something like this, regarding Jim Carrey calling me a heartless mofo:
Oh, he's just desperate to get back in the news. Has he done anything in the last like, I dunno, 10 years? I feel like the last thing i remember seeing him in was batman. They've done a reboot on that, that's their third installment, so it's been a while.
You sound like the kind of guy I can't introduce to a really good hole in the wall restaurant.