| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
"You have your perspective....carry on." Yet more arrogant preaching, this time of the glaringly obvious while pretending to wield authority over whether I may or may not carry on here? Awfully strange and entirely meaningless commentary. Are you high on dope or something? | ||
| Hootowl |
He could be drunk  | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Anyone read the "Riverworld" books by Philip José Farmer? A very interesting take on the afterlife & religions. Also a very enjoyable read no matter what faith you have. | ||
| Hex |
He could be drunk Unfortunately, that is an inaccurate statement. I haven't got your homebrew yet, still waiting!  | ||
| Hootowl |
UPS says it is out for delivery. | ||
| Hex |
Wooohooo! Thanks Hoot! grumble, brumble, grumble, blake, blah, blah, bla... | ||
| Hex |
For all you freethinkers out there: http://ffrf.org/ Welcome to the Freedom from Religion Foundation The history of Western civilization shows us that most social and moral progress has been brought about by persons free from religion. In modern times the first to speak out for prison reform, for humane treatment of the mentally ill, for abolition of capital punishment, for women's right to vote, for death with dignity for the terminally ill, and for the right to choose contraception, sterilization and abortion have been freethinkers, just as they were the first to call for an end to slavery. The Foundation works as an umbrella for those who are free from religion and are committed to the cherished principle of separation of state and church. | ||
| Methed |
I have a difficult time with the concept that 'anti-religious' philosophies and organizations are not religious or faith-based in principal. How can you not be non-religious if your organization is founded on principals regarding religion? It seems to me that badging this with any kind of 'objectivity' is simply a falsely proclaiming a belief, albeit diametrically opposed. In the words of Bender: "No, don't you see? That's like Christina Aguilera singing in Spanish." | ||
| Blake |
"The history of Western civilization shows us that most social and moral progress has been brought about by persons free from religion. In modern times the first to speak out for prison reform, for humane treatment of the mentally ill, for abolition of capital punishment, for women's right to vote, for death with dignity for the terminally ill, and for the right to choose contraception, sterilization and I fixed one glaring error. The rest is dubious. Christians were at the center of the underground railroad, actually helping to free the victims of slavery. Elitists in their ivory towers are always proclaiming their high ideals. It means little to the real world where people are living and breathing. Actions are what count. Take the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. for example. (Message edited by blake on January 30, 2010) | ||
| Boltrider |
What does it say for this freethinker who supports capital punishment? | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
Opinion: What is wrong with being respective and guided by a "Higher Power"? Why do we have to totally eliminate It from our sight and hearing? The individual still has the right to agree or dis-agree, that is to choose which higher power, or no higher power. Sorry, right or wrong, this country was founded and develop with a respect for the "Higher Power". Seems like this helped us start and develop one of the greatest countries of all ages! Why would most of us want to ignore It now? I do respect the right of the "freethinkers" to have their opinion and even to keep in check use/abuse of pubic funds. But what would happen on many of these "wins" that the ACLU and the "Freethinkers" claim, if they went to a popular vote? How about gay marriage rights... Courts and legislators say yes... Popular voting so far tends to say no, even in the very liberal state of CA? | ||
| Hex |
even in the very liberal state of CA You would be surprised how conservative a lot of California is. Sure we have all this sunshine, but like Florida, we also have wealth, old age, and a lot of conservative 'minorities' who all got out to vote. If it were a true demographic, I say you were correct in your assumption, but the gays hardly lobbied prop 8 and we had numerous baby carriage pushing canvassers knocking door to door. The issue will see the supreme court, so I'll withhold much of my opinion until the case is settled there. So far, the conservative led plaintiffs of prop 8 put on a good argument. To be continued. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
What is wrong with being respective and guided by a "Higher Power"? I'm still trying to understand the argument as well. If I didn't believe in God I would have the same social policy opinions. | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
Another opinion: The Supreme court does not necessarily agree with the public or Presidential opinion. If the the Supreme court overrules a popular vote, we are in deep excrement. Those are some interesting thoughts on your CA demographics and who "worked" the proposition the hardest, but... a popular vote is what it was | ||
| Hex |
a popular vote is what it was Yes, temporary. | ||
| Slowride |
Sorry, right or wrong, this country was founded and develop with a respect for the "Higher Power". It was a little more specific than a "Higher Power" The First Charter of Virginia (granted by King James I, on April 10, 1606) • We, greatly commending, and graciously accepting of, their Desires for the Furtherance of so noble a Work, which may, by the Providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the Glory of his Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian Religion to such People, as yet live in Darkness and miserable Ignorance of the true Knowledge and Worship of God… Instructions for the Virginia Colony (1606) Lastly and chiefly the way to prosper and achieve good success is to make yourselves all of one mind for the good of your country and your own, and to serve and fear God the Giver of all Goodness, for every plantation which our Heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted out. William Bradford • wrote that they [the Pilgrims] were seeking: • 1) "a better, and easier place of living”; and that “the children of the group were being drawn away by evil examples into extravagance and dangerous courses [in Holland]“ • 2) “The great hope, and for the propagating and advancing the gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world" The Mayflower Compact (authored by William Bradford) 1620 “Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together…” | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
...and there the issue is... not... God or no God not... ACLU, free thinkers, or uneducated voters But, is this a democracy that the people, as in a popular vote determining this countries direction and ultimate destiny or... the supreme court and which lawyers present the best case to them and not a jury? ooohps, I digress politically on a religious thread. I am not sure on how the "Higher Power" will judge the gay marriage thing, but the people in several areas have said no, and this is still some sort of a democracy. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Not democracy. Representative Republic. | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
Slowride, I totally agree, I used "Higher Power" so as not offend more people than needed and still get a point across. It so happens that our "Higher Power" here in the USA, is predominatly Christian. The founders being predominatly Christian, which might offend non-Christian or "No Higher Power" people from time to time, which, sorry to say, are the minority. | ||
| Hex |
Wow again. This is great stuff. We are in fact not a democracy, thank you Mr. Bastard. | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
Ft_bstrd, Yes, I stand corrected again, but we still get to vote on stuff now and then. | ||
| Hex |
And being 'not a democracy', we grant rights to minorities!!!! Brilliant. | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
...and I did say "some sort of democracy"! | ||
| Hex |
If you consider everything as politics of opinion, then yes I would agree, some sort of Democracy. Welcome to the internet. My voice is still here. I am interested now in a new idea besides this one. I'm not quite sure how to title it, just yet... | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The founding fathers had the option of making the US a Democracy. They understood, though, that a pure democracy created some inadvertent imbalances in the electorate. One of these being the potential for mob rule. You can see this in the creation of the Electoral College. Sorry to side track. | ||
| Swampy |
It's not what's best for everybody, it is what is best for the individual. Mobocracy VS Republic | ||
| Indy_bueller |
For all you freethinkers out there: No offense to Hex or anyone else that uses that term, but did you ever notice that people on both sides of an argument like this refer to themselves as "freethinkers" and the other side as "zombies" or something of the like? I would submit that actually neither side is made up of "freethinkers". They believe what they believe, everyone else is wrong, and therefore there is no credence to their argument. Both sides are closed minded to anything the other has to say, regardless of how valid it is or is not. | ||
| Hex |
Indy, I agree. I would in fact agree with your statement more if you had written: ...and therefore there is no credence to any argument. "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. ..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelema | ||
| Aussiexbox |
Wot's religion.......?it's a war ain't tit....  sorry heathin in the midsts | ||
| Hex |
Thank you, good night, see you in the AM. Hex |
