Politics & Stuff

[Atomiswave 6,117]

28 minutes ago, Vesper said:

but it was, is, and will be done IN THE NAME of some god or gods

thus the danger of all religions

you cannot have it both ways

'god' or gods get all the credit for everything, right up until it comes down to humans (acting in their name or names) doing horrific shit

The Handmaids Tale is a VERY plausible look at a dystopian society of death, one run by fundie Christians

Iran is areal life version of a dystopian society run by fundie Shi'ite Muslims

both are fucked up places to live for anyone who does not conform to their arbitrary, totalitarian visions

Thats our fault, its on our door steps. Iran was not the best example, the likes Pakistan and Saudi are far worse. The regime has used Islam as a weapon to enforce their bs. The people are not like that.

[Vesper 30,100]

17 minutes ago, Fernando said:

What is at the founding?

How did we get consciences to set that up? How did we "collective sense organization" in the evolutionary process? 

Anyhow we are set up now and if we go by that, then it seems like a herd mentality. We go by circumstances. 

I am NOT going to be taken off course and get into a voluminous 2 week long discourse on fundamental organising of a modern nation state, especially as they already exist as fully fleshed out entities.

You your repeated allusions to a herd mentality are absolutely non-germane as no modern secular, pluralistic, democratic state is organised as such.

You are now just trying to pettifog and veer away from my original simple point.

There is a word for it that all the cool kids use

sealioning

Done here

[Vesper 30,100]

18 minutes ago, Atomiswave said:

Thats our fault, its on our door steps. Iran was not the best example, the likes Pakistan and Saudi are far worse. The regime has used Islam as a weapon to enforce their bs. The people are not like that.

people invented religion

[Atomiswave 6,117]

3 minutes ago, Vesper said:

people invented religion

Most of them yes I agree

[Fulham Broadway 17,306]

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

sceptic land

It's septic - as in septic tank -yank  

I know, ''fuck off you pedant'' 

[Vesper 30,100]

1 minute ago, Fulham Broadway said:

It's septic - as in septic tank -yank  

I know, ''fuck off you pedant'' 

oh snap

misspelt

sorry

(obviously sceptic was not what I meant, as septic land equals yank land)

dyslexia

not pedantic upon your part nor a misuse upon mine

simple error

if you go back and look at my 26,000+ posts you shall find them littered with errors (and even on ones that appear correct they often are edited after the fact, I am horrid, it has been a huge struggle my whole life, especially in academia)

[kolovrat 20]

2 hours ago, Atomiswave said:

Hey its fine by me Vesper, we all have a choice. I respect yours as I do with anyone else. It does not make you more or less of a person. Its all good.

We don't know if we have a free choice.  There is no experiment to prove it.

[Fernando 6,585]

19 minutes ago, Vesper said:

I am NOT going to be taken off course and get into a voluminous 2 week long discourse on fundamental organising of a modern nation state, especially as they already exist as fully fleshed out entities.

You your repeated allusions to a herd mentality are absolutely non-germane as no modern secular, pluralistic, democratic state is organised as such.

You are now just trying to pettifog and veer away from my original simple point.

There is a word for it that all the cool kids use

sealioning

Done here

Those fundamental are important because you are tying disprove God based on 2 concepts of all powerful and and all good. 

So then I state okay let's take away God from the equation then you must answer other things that explain why God does not exist. 

If God does not exist then how we as evolving things got any conscious to decide what is wrong and right? 

So my main point was how you decided that, as far as law and what not? And you state that the modern nations do that. And laws are amended as we progress. Hence we collective decide what is good and wrong? 

[Vesper 30,100]

7 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

It's septic - as in septic tank -yank  

I know, ''fuck off you pedant'' 

fixed for correctness

I really wish I was not so cursed with this, as it is only amplified by my speed of thought and typing

I drove people INSANE in Second Life for years, as text was my main method of communication in game, and I could keep up with people on voice, but often at the price of borderline incoherency, lol

I was almost incapable of logging in on alts and maintaining anonymity, as people who knew me would instantly recognise my typing patterns due to both repetitive mistakes and my vocabulary, which invariably slipped out and betrayed my attempts at stealth

[Fernando 6,585]

4 minutes ago, kolovrat said:

We don't know if we have a free choice.  There is no experiment to prove it.

What is the opposite of free choice? Is it pre determined? 

Now let me ask you, are you free to answer that question? Are you making a truth claim? 

[Atomiswave 6,117]

5 minutes ago, kolovrat said:

We don't know if we have a free choice.  There is no experiment to prove it.

Of course you have a choice. You can choose to be good or bad, choose this and that.

[Vesper 30,100]

2 minutes ago, Fernando said:

Those fundamental are important because you are tying disprove God based on 2 concepts of all powerful and and all good. 

So then I state okay let's take away God from the equation then you must answer other things that explain why God does not exist. 

If God does not exist then how we as evolving things got any conscious to decide what is wrong and right? 

So my main point was how you decided that, as far as law and what not? And you state that the modern nations do that. And laws are amended as we progress. Hence we collective decide what is good and wrong? 

I have already proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the concept of an all good, and all powerful good (as defined by the god beleivers themselves) does not exist

the onus is not upon me anyway

you and your fellow believers are the ones claiming a god or gods exist, yet can offer no definitive proof, and quite often end up at insanity like the Young Earth theories, which is ludicrously pushed about to make sense of a ridiculous interpretation of a man-made book(s)

 

blind faith is fine on an individual, utterly self-contained basis, BUT you never stop there

you always want to use your blind faith to force your beliefs and rules emanating from said faith to rule over others

and you always end up killing (along with a myriad number of other anti-human tortures and mis-deeds) over it

must suck to be so insecure in your own life that you have to project your own internal issues and fears (which is where 'god' came from in the first place, raw human fear of the unknown and the need to explain it) onto others

 

[Fernando 6,585]

8 minutes ago, Vesper said:

I have already proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the concept of an all good, and all powerful good (as defined by the god beleivers themselves) does not exist

the onus is not upon me anyway

you and your fellow believers are the ones claiming a god or gods exist, yet can offer no definitive proof, and quite often end up at insanity like the Young Earth theories, which is ludicrously pushed about to make sense of a ridiculous interpretation of a man-made book(s)

 

blind faith is fine on an individual, utterly self-contained basis, BUT you never stop there

you always want to use your blind faith to force your beliefs and rules emanating from said faith to rule over others

and you always end up killing (along with a myriad number of other anti-human tortures and mis-deeds) over it

must suck to be so insecure in your own life that you have to project your own internal issues and fears (which is where 'god' came from in the first place, raw human fear of the unknown and the need to explain it) onto others

 

You did not prove anything. 

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able, and willing?
Thence whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

1. I'm not arguing for omnipotent, i'm arguing that only using that 1 rule then yes he is not omnipotent. But if you use other stuff god is love, god is all knowing, god is everlasting etc etc then you got to take each side without creating a contradiction. 

2. You can argue that not willing makes he seem malevolent but we are stuck in this side of eternity that we can't see past all the angles. In nature there's some animals that must suffer in order to help develop to fly and fend for themselves. If they where to get helped they would be weak. We don't know enough to come to that conclusion

3 Whence cometh evil? I answer that but you don't want to accept, it came from Lucifer that rebelled against god. 

4. And last neither able nor willing, I think my point 2 answer that. 

[robsblubot 3,595]

there is no such thing as evil.

Whichever definition of evil one may have, it would've been entirely different decades and centuries ago - by the same religion too!

Don't even have to go that far back in history: burning "witches" at the stake took place pretty recently in our history.

good read "Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind" by Yuval Noah Harari (and it's free too as you can download the PDF from edu sites).

[Vesper 30,100]

4 minutes ago, Fernando said:

You did not prove anything. 

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able, and willing?
Thence whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

1. I'm not arguing for omnipotent, i'm arguing that only using that 1 rule then yes he is not omnipotent. But if you use other stuff god is love, god is all knowing, god is everlasting etc etc then you got to take each side without creating a contradiction. 

2. You can argue that not willing makes he seem malevolent but we are stuck in this side of eternity that we can't see past all the angles. In nature there's some animals that must suffer in order to help develop to fly and fend for themselves. If they where to get helped they would be weak. We don't know enough to come to that conclusion

3 Whence cometh evil? I answer that but you don't want to accept, it came from Lucifer that rebelled against god. 

4. And last neither able nor willing, I think my point 2 answer that. 

 

you are delusional m8

literally

you are talking about fairy tales (battles with Satan, lolol, what the fuckery!)

and not only think they are real

but that you and your ilk can make their so-called rules (coming from your delusional beliefs) manifest and put into motion processes that end up with my death (literally, as religious fanaticism unchecked ALWAYS ends up at extreme outcomes)

what's next, a re-birth of the flat-earth concept?

how about modern modern medicine? god's love not good enough to heal?

this is all rat-in-a-tin-shithouse level madness

 

pro tip

the Dark Ages are not coming back unless your side wins

and there are more of us (who will violently, if need be, resist theocracy) in the Western world than there are of you

you want theocracy, go somewhere else and stop trying to shove your god delusions down our throats and up and about our privy parts

and by somewhere else, by which I mean get the fuck out of our western, democratic, pluralistic, tolerant nations, as you clearly have ill-intent for the populations who dwell here

seriously, GTFO

if you do not want to leave, then by all means continue on in private with your faith, BUT leave it fucking PRIVATE, it has no place in the public political sphere when it endeavours to force others to submit to your arbitrary and anti-humanist ways, we are past that point here and t is not coming back, bar a cataclysmic collapse of most all of society as it is presently ordered

 

religious-based hate and power dominance has no place in the modern world