How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

  • Strong Theist

    Votes: 21 25.9%
  • De-facto Theist

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • Weak Theist

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • Pure Agnostic

    Votes: 14 17.3%
  • Weak Atheist

    Votes: 4 4.9%
  • De-facto Atheist

    Votes: 8 9.9%
  • Strong Atheist

    Votes: 16 19.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 12 14.8%

  • Total voters
    81
But even if they do, what harm is there? If the Chic-fil-a CEO advertises their policy that all their stores will close on Sundays so that their employees can attend church or just have a day off on what he believes is God's Sabbath Day, how does that harm anybody? If Tom and Jerry's choose to put a float in a Gay Nazi parade, how does that harm anybody? Am I going to refuse to buy something in either place because of their religious or political stances? No.

Should I refuse to enjoy "Sister Act", a movie I do enjoy, just because Whoopi Goldberg is politically offensive to me? Or "Moonstruck" (Cher) or "Shall We Dance" (Susan Sarandon.)

I do confess when Target refused to allow the Salvation Army Santa and kettle in front of their stores and Wal-mart continued that tradition, I chose to go to Wal-mart instead of Target. But that was to reward Wal-mart for what I see as a wonderful tradition, not to punish Target. If what I needed was at Target and not at Wal-mart, I would go to Target.

From one of my favorite all-time movies: "Chocolat":



I think you mean Ben & Jerry's. :)

To an extent, you're both correct. Mixing political or religious views with business is probably bad business practice, but that doesn't mean people should be stopped from doing so if that's their choice. Freedom means the freedom to be stupid, if that's what floats one's boat.

SHOULD you avoid things simply because one aspect of it is offensive to you? Not if you don't want to. By the same token, there's no "should" about ignoring those aspects, either, if you don't want to.

I stop doing business with companies when their offensive behavior becomes too much for me to ignore. Maybe it's cumulative, or maybe it's just one big thing they do that's too much for me. Depends entirely on the business and what they do. I won't eat Ben & Jerry's or buy Starbucks because their self-righteous proselytizing through their products has just accumulated too much, to the point where it completely overshadows their actual product. I won't watch a movie with Jake Gyllenhaal or Alec Baldwin in it, to name two, because their behavior outside of their acting has become so pervasive in my consciousness that I simply can't forget who they are and see them as their characters any more. I think it's a serious mistake for actors to make the public too aware of them as regular people, because their careers depend on their ability to make us believe in them as their characters, at least for the length of time that the show lasts.

On the other hand, there are companies who do things I don't care for, but I still do business with, because they haven't shoved it into my face sufficiently to make me stay away. There are actors whose personal politics I find distasteful, but they're smart enough to mostly keep it personal and allow to largely ignore it.

Won't shop at Target, because I don't like shopping somewhere I don't feel comfortable using the bathroom.


Yeah, I did mean Ben and Jerry's. (I thought that didn't look right when I typed it, but. . .) :)

I pretty much allow people to be who and what they are unless their actions are physically or materially harming somebody. So I can honor and respect your choices who where to shop based on your personal code of ethics, right and wrong, etc. and will not criticize you for that. You are acting on your convictions in a way that harms nobody.

I personally take the point of view that if I value the right to be able to express my point of view, my values, my beliefs, my opinions without fear some gang of snowflakes will descend on me to prevent me for speaking at a venue, will try to get me fired from my job, or threaten my customers, suppliers, advertisers, etc. in my business. . .

. . .then it logically follows to me that I should allow them their point of view, their values, their beliefs, their opinions without fear that I will try to punish, or if possible destroy them.

It sort of follows the commandment to do unto others what you would have them do unto you. That is something the snowflakes among us neither embrace nor comprehend and certainly does not respect.


But don't we have the right to descend onto an event you are speaking at and boycott your sorry ass?

If you are a right wing nutjob and we don't like rwnj's and you are open about it, don't we have to right to write your boss and tell them we are boycotting his business because he employs you?

Is it illegal to fire someone for being a liberal or Democrat or Republican? I hope it is. But it's not illegal to boycott a conservatives business. Least not last I checked. And that's affecting his income or YOUR income. So keep your politics to yourself until you find out all your co-workers and customers are conservative because if I found out you were a con I'd look for a new supplier.

Do unto others as I would have them do unto you? Sorry pal. I'm an atheist. I would love it if theists didn't discriminate against atheists but the fact is they do. So, I keep my religious beliefs to myself. If not I would expect a lot of customers to stop buying from me. For one reason because I'm an atheist and for two I'm stupid to have let it become public. Same with your politics. Don't put that on facebook. You will lose friends. You don't care? Neither do I. But I do care if I lose customers.


You have every right to share as much or as little of your opinions and beliefs as you choose to do so. You have every right to run your business as you see fit for your own benefit.

You also have every right to boycott anybody you want to, to call people names, to insult their intelligence, or anything else you wish to do.

You even have the right to organize your buddies and picket my business, harass and threaten my customers, threaten my suppliers or advertisers or pretty much do anything you want to make my life miserable, punish me, and destroy me if you can because I don't agree with you.

That is pretty much legal. It shouldn't be, but it is.

But when you do that, you diminish us all, you weaken us as a society, and make us meaner, more coarse, more hateful, and more intolerant.

I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better. They will build people up, do good when all others are doing bad, and only those who have never sinned have any grounds to judge others as somehow morally inferior.


Thank God there are at least legal limits on how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives. Now if we could only get the authorities to enforce those limits.


 
But don't we have the right to descend onto an event you are speaking at and boycott your sorry ass?

If you are a right wing nutjob and we don't like rwnj's and you are open about it, don't we have to right to write your boss and tell them we are boycotting his business because he employs you?

Is it illegal to fire someone for being a liberal or Democrat or Republican? I hope it is. But it's not illegal to boycott a conservatives business. Least not last I checked. And that's affecting his income or YOUR income. So keep your politics to yourself until you find out all your co-workers and customers are conservative because if I found out you were a con I'd look for a new supplier.

Do unto others as I would have them do unto you? Sorry pal. I'm an atheist. I would love it if theists didn't discriminate against atheists but the fact is they do. So, I keep my religious beliefs to myself. If not I would expect a lot of customers to stop buying from me. For one reason because I'm an atheist and for two I'm stupid to have let it become public. Same with your politics. Don't put that on facebook. You will lose friends. You don't care? Neither do I. But I do care if I lose customers.

You have every right to share as much or as little of your opinions and beliefs as you choose to do so. You have every right to run your business as you see fit for your own benefit.

You also have every right to boycott anybody you want to, to call people names, to insult their intelligence, or anything else you wish to do.

You even have the right to organize your buddies and picket my business, harass and threaten my customers, threaten my suppliers or advertisers or pretty much do anything you want to make my life miserable, punish me, and destroy me if you can because I don't agree with you.

That is pretty much legal. It shouldn't be, but it is.

But when you do that, you diminish us all, you weaken us as a society, and make us meaner, more coarse, more hateful, and more intolerant.

I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better. They will build people up, do good when all others are doing bad, and only those who have never sinned have any grounds to judge others as somehow morally inferior.
.
I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better.


what event during the 1st century makes you believe atheism was ever discussed or made an issue of for consideration.

that is your 4th century christ that placed himself before the Almighty in your book, who can disagree with loving of anything .... though it is not loving the Almighty that moves a Spirit to Remission.

This is the second time you have posted something so non sequitur to what was being discussed that I don't have a clue what you are getting at. I suspect you might not either.
.
This is the second time you have posted something so non sequitur to what was being discussed that I don't have a clue what you are getting at.


How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?



I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better.


what event during the 1st century makes you believe atheism was ever discussed or made an issue of for consideration.

that is your 4th century christ that placed himself before the Almighty in your book, who can disagree with loving of anything .... though it is not loving the Almighty that moves a Spirit to Remission.


I disagree that you find the response non sequitur to the subject of the thread, whether to respond to the content pertaining to the events of the 1st century from your post is not my concern.

No I agree you often don't make any sense. The other times you make little sense. I think I understand the point you are trying to make but I'm not sure.
.
No I agree you often don't make any sense. The other times you make little sense. I think I understand the point you are trying to make but I'm not sure.


not responding is the safest choice, I disagree in that post they were unable to respond from its content ... 4th century language is fun to replicate with christians, if they can not interpret from their book where in the 1st century atheism was ever discussed it makes it that much easier for them to respond the same through ignorance than reply with a definitive answer. I agree it is a bit of a shortcoming than clearly stating one's point of view.
 
Perhaps, but it would also create significant changes in who humans are and how they interact and form societies. I highly doubt that we would be the social creatures we are now.
Agreed except I think we'd be even more sociable. You seem to think such a thing would be bad, while I think it would be the next step in our evolution.

I can't imagine how you think that knowing intimately the negative aspects of another person's character and psyche would make us more sociable with them. Right now, we have the ability to suppress and censor those things from others and keep them to ourselves and present to others the parts of ourselves that reflect the person we aspire to be, rather than everything about what we are at the moment.
That's the point, we'll all human. We all have "negative aspects", but we also have positive ones. Why are you focusing on the negative? By being able to read each other's minds, not only would we be able to see the weaknesses and strengths of others, but it would be impossible for assholes to hide themselves. We'd all be laid open clearly.

The evolutionary step here is that we'd all be united in a single cause. A multi-celled creature is more advanced than a single-celled one. Being unified in mind and body with all of humanity is, IMHO, an evolutionary step closer to God. An afterlife would do the same, be unified with God in totality, not separated from God.
 
Perhaps, but it would also create significant changes in who humans are and how they interact and form societies. I highly doubt that we would be the social creatures we are now.
Agreed except I think we'd be even more sociable. You seem to think such a thing would be bad, while I think it would be the next step in our evolution.

I can't imagine how you think that knowing intimately the negative aspects of another person's character and psyche would make us more sociable with them. Right now, we have the ability to suppress and censor those things from others and keep them to ourselves and present to others the parts of ourselves that reflect the person we aspire to be, rather than everything about what we are at the moment.
That's the point, we'll all human. We all have "negative aspects", but we also have positive ones. Why are you focusing on the negative? By being able to read each other's minds, not only would we be able to see the weaknesses and strengths of others, but it would be impossible for assholes to hide themselves. We'd all be laid open clearly.

The evolutionary step here is that we'd all be united in a single cause. A multi-celled creature is more advanced than a single-celled one. Being unified in mind and body with all of humanity is, IMHO, an evolutionary step closer to God. An afterlife would do the same, be unified with God in totality, not separated from God.

I'm focusing on the negative ones because those are the ones that are currently hidden behind our ability to keep things private and express only what we choose to express. Those are the ones that would be exposed.

Yes, assholes would be unable to hide themselves, but that's the point: we're ALL assholes somewhere inside us.

I think humans aren't a hive mind for a reason, and considering that the only creatures on Earth who ARE hive minds are much lower and less-advanced life forms than we are, I have to assume that becoming a hive mind is not a step in evolutionary progress for us.

As for God, He already sees and knows everything about us. There is no advantage in terms of closeness to God to be found in other humans knowing those things. I find no reason to believe that other humans are capable of unconditionally loving us despite knowing all our flaws the way God does. Hell, humans have trouble loving each other NOW, when they DON'T know each other's worst aspects. Knowing what I do about human nature, I think it's far more likely that any love or admiration we might feel for "knowing each other's strengths" would be inalterably poisoned by the presence of each other's weaknesses.
 
I'm focusing on the negative ones because those are the ones that are currently hidden behind our ability to keep things private and express only what we choose to express. Those are the ones that would be exposed.

Yes, assholes would be unable to hide themselves, but that's the point: we're ALL assholes somewhere inside us.

I think humans aren't a hive mind for a reason, and considering that the only creatures on Earth who ARE hive minds are much lower and less-advanced life forms than we are, I have to assume that becoming a hive mind is not a step in evolutionary progress for us.

As for God, He already sees and knows everything about us. There is no advantage in terms of closeness to God to be found in other humans knowing those things. I find no reason to believe that other humans are capable of unconditionally loving us despite knowing all our flaws the way God does. Hell, humans have trouble loving each other NOW, when they DON'T know each other's worst aspects. Knowing what I do about human nature, I think it's far more likely that any love or admiration we might feel for "knowing each other's strengths" would be inalterably poisoned by the presence of each other's weaknesses.
That's part of my point, by being "one" in mind and spirit, there would be no secrets, nothing hidden unless we're just fooling ourselves. We would cease to be "individuals" but become something greater just as a multi-celled creature is greater than a single-celled one.

It's not God knowing us that benefits by becoming "one with God" but us knowing God.
 
I'm focusing on the negative ones because those are the ones that are currently hidden behind our ability to keep things private and express only what we choose to express. Those are the ones that would be exposed.

Yes, assholes would be unable to hide themselves, but that's the point: we're ALL assholes somewhere inside us.

I think humans aren't a hive mind for a reason, and considering that the only creatures on Earth who ARE hive minds are much lower and less-advanced life forms than we are, I have to assume that becoming a hive mind is not a step in evolutionary progress for us.

As for God, He already sees and knows everything about us. There is no advantage in terms of closeness to God to be found in other humans knowing those things. I find no reason to believe that other humans are capable of unconditionally loving us despite knowing all our flaws the way God does. Hell, humans have trouble loving each other NOW, when they DON'T know each other's worst aspects. Knowing what I do about human nature, I think it's far more likely that any love or admiration we might feel for "knowing each other's strengths" would be inalterably poisoned by the presence of each other's weaknesses.
That's part of my point, by being "one" in mind and spirit, there would be no secrets, nothing hidden unless we're just fooling ourselves. We would cease to be "individuals" but become something greater just as a multi-celled creature is greater than a single-celled one.

It's not God knowing us that benefits by becoming "one with God" but us knowing God.

I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.
 
I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.
It's not a "conversion" nor is it a mindless "hive mind". It's a different level of sophistication and advancement.

When I was a child, there were times when I was concerned about "growing up" out of fear of losing my sense of wonder. The fear turned out to be useless. The sense of wonder remained, but what maturation brought was the ability to discern fact from fiction. Example; as a child, watching a magician allowed one to fantasize about "magic", but as an adult, while the enjoyment was still there, was the wonder of how the magician did it.

What you dismiss as a "hive mind" would, instead, result in a world where crime was nonexistent. Where the human race focused upon the betterment of the species. All of the "Seven Deadly Sins" would cease to exist.
 
I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.
It's not a "conversion" nor is it a mindless "hive mind". It's a different level of sophistication and advancement.

When I was a child, there were times when I was concerned about "growing up" out of fear of losing my sense of wonder. The fear turned out to be useless. The sense of wonder remained, but what maturation brought was the ability to discern fact from fiction. Example; as a child, watching a magician allowed one to fantasize about "magic", but as an adult, while the enjoyment was still there, was the wonder of how the magician did it.

What you dismiss as a "hive mind" would, instead, result in a world where crime was nonexistent. Where the human race focused upon the betterment of the species. All of the "Seven Deadly Sins" would cease to exist.

I still disagree.

Since this is all speculation with no definitive proof either way, and since we obviously read very different types of science fiction ;), I'm gonna say we'll have to agree to disagree.
 
I think you mean Ben & Jerry's. :)

To an extent, you're both correct. Mixing political or religious views with business is probably bad business practice, but that doesn't mean people should be stopped from doing so if that's their choice. Freedom means the freedom to be stupid, if that's what floats one's boat.

SHOULD you avoid things simply because one aspect of it is offensive to you? Not if you don't want to. By the same token, there's no "should" about ignoring those aspects, either, if you don't want to.

I stop doing business with companies when their offensive behavior becomes too much for me to ignore. Maybe it's cumulative, or maybe it's just one big thing they do that's too much for me. Depends entirely on the business and what they do. I won't eat Ben & Jerry's or buy Starbucks because their self-righteous proselytizing through their products has just accumulated too much, to the point where it completely overshadows their actual product. I won't watch a movie with Jake Gyllenhaal or Alec Baldwin in it, to name two, because their behavior outside of their acting has become so pervasive in my consciousness that I simply can't forget who they are and see them as their characters any more. I think it's a serious mistake for actors to make the public too aware of them as regular people, because their careers depend on their ability to make us believe in them as their characters, at least for the length of time that the show lasts.

On the other hand, there are companies who do things I don't care for, but I still do business with, because they haven't shoved it into my face sufficiently to make me stay away. There are actors whose personal politics I find distasteful, but they're smart enough to mostly keep it personal and allow to largely ignore it.

Won't shop at Target, because I don't like shopping somewhere I don't feel comfortable using the bathroom.

Yeah, I did mean Ben and Jerry's. (I thought that didn't look right when I typed it, but. . .) :)

I pretty much allow people to be who and what they are unless their actions are physically or materially harming somebody. So I can honor and respect your choices who where to shop based on your personal code of ethics, right and wrong, etc. and will not criticize you for that. You are acting on your convictions in a way that harms nobody.

I personally take the point of view that if I value the right to be able to express my point of view, my values, my beliefs, my opinions without fear some gang of snowflakes will descend on me to prevent me for speaking at a venue, will try to get me fired from my job, or threaten my customers, suppliers, advertisers, etc. in my business. . .

. . .then it logically follows to me that I should allow them their point of view, their values, their beliefs, their opinions without fear that I will try to punish, or if possible destroy them.

It sort of follows the commandment to do unto others what you would have them do unto you. That is something the snowflakes among us neither embrace nor comprehend and certainly does not respect.

But don't we have the right to descend onto an event you are speaking at and boycott your sorry ass?

If you are a right wing nutjob and we don't like rwnj's and you are open about it, don't we have to right to write your boss and tell them we are boycotting his business because he employs you?

Is it illegal to fire someone for being a liberal or Democrat or Republican? I hope it is. But it's not illegal to boycott a conservatives business. Least not last I checked. And that's affecting his income or YOUR income. So keep your politics to yourself until you find out all your co-workers and customers are conservative because if I found out you were a con I'd look for a new supplier.

Do unto others as I would have them do unto you? Sorry pal. I'm an atheist. I would love it if theists didn't discriminate against atheists but the fact is they do. So, I keep my religious beliefs to myself. If not I would expect a lot of customers to stop buying from me. For one reason because I'm an atheist and for two I'm stupid to have let it become public. Same with your politics. Don't put that on facebook. You will lose friends. You don't care? Neither do I. But I do care if I lose customers.

You have every right to share as much or as little of your opinions and beliefs as you choose to do so. You have every right to run your business as you see fit for your own benefit.

You also have every right to boycott anybody you want to, to call people names, to insult their intelligence, or anything else you wish to do.

You even have the right to organize your buddies and picket my business, harass and threaten my customers, threaten my suppliers or advertisers or pretty much do anything you want to make my life miserable, punish me, and destroy me if you can because I don't agree with you.

That is pretty much legal. It shouldn't be, but it is.

But when you do that, you diminish us all, you weaken us as a society, and make us meaner, more coarse, more hateful, and more intolerant.

I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better. They will build people up, do good when all others are doing bad, and only those who have never sinned have any grounds to judge others as somehow morally inferior.

Thank God there are at least legal limits on how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives. Now if we could only get the authorities to enforce those limits.


And you equate the Westboro Baptists with Christianity? Here is where the anti-religious, "I hate Christians" group goes way over the line. I know of no Christian or conservative group anywhere that would approve of this sign or who condone what the Westboro Baptists do. There should be some way to sue to prevent that hateful group from using the label 'baptists' as I know no Baptists, even the more fundamental groups who believe homosexuality is sin, who would condone this.

And I think it is pretty hateful to misrepresent it as appropriate for this thread.
 
I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.
It's not a "conversion" nor is it a mindless "hive mind". It's a different level of sophistication and advancement.

When I was a child, there were times when I was concerned about "growing up" out of fear of losing my sense of wonder. The fear turned out to be useless. The sense of wonder remained, but what maturation brought was the ability to discern fact from fiction. Example; as a child, watching a magician allowed one to fantasize about "magic", but as an adult, while the enjoyment was still there, was the wonder of how the magician did it.

What you dismiss as a "hive mind" would, instead, result in a world where crime was nonexistent. Where the human race focused upon the betterment of the species. All of the "Seven Deadly Sins" would cease to exist.

I still disagree.

Since this is all speculation with no definitive proof either way, and since we obviously read very different types of science fiction ;), I'm gonna say we'll have to agree to disagree.
No worries. Agreed we can disagree on the benefits or detriments of human beings who can read each other's minds.

This conversation began regarding the meaning of becoming "one with God" and how, in my belief, we'd lose our mortal individuality in joining with God. Like a raindrop falling into the ocean, the raindrop isn't lost, it's just becoming part of something greater than itself.
 
Yeah, I did mean Ben and Jerry's. (I thought that didn't look right when I typed it, but. . .) :)

I pretty much allow people to be who and what they are unless their actions are physically or materially harming somebody. So I can honor and respect your choices who where to shop based on your personal code of ethics, right and wrong, etc. and will not criticize you for that. You are acting on your convictions in a way that harms nobody.

I personally take the point of view that if I value the right to be able to express my point of view, my values, my beliefs, my opinions without fear some gang of snowflakes will descend on me to prevent me for speaking at a venue, will try to get me fired from my job, or threaten my customers, suppliers, advertisers, etc. in my business. . .

. . .then it logically follows to me that I should allow them their point of view, their values, their beliefs, their opinions without fear that I will try to punish, or if possible destroy them.

It sort of follows the commandment to do unto others what you would have them do unto you. That is something the snowflakes among us neither embrace nor comprehend and certainly does not respect.

But don't we have the right to descend onto an event you are speaking at and boycott your sorry ass?

If you are a right wing nutjob and we don't like rwnj's and you are open about it, don't we have to right to write your boss and tell them we are boycotting his business because he employs you?

Is it illegal to fire someone for being a liberal or Democrat or Republican? I hope it is. But it's not illegal to boycott a conservatives business. Least not last I checked. And that's affecting his income or YOUR income. So keep your politics to yourself until you find out all your co-workers and customers are conservative because if I found out you were a con I'd look for a new supplier.

Do unto others as I would have them do unto you? Sorry pal. I'm an atheist. I would love it if theists didn't discriminate against atheists but the fact is they do. So, I keep my religious beliefs to myself. If not I would expect a lot of customers to stop buying from me. For one reason because I'm an atheist and for two I'm stupid to have let it become public. Same with your politics. Don't put that on facebook. You will lose friends. You don't care? Neither do I. But I do care if I lose customers.

You have every right to share as much or as little of your opinions and beliefs as you choose to do so. You have every right to run your business as you see fit for your own benefit.

You also have every right to boycott anybody you want to, to call people names, to insult their intelligence, or anything else you wish to do.

You even have the right to organize your buddies and picket my business, harass and threaten my customers, threaten my suppliers or advertisers or pretty much do anything you want to make my life miserable, punish me, and destroy me if you can because I don't agree with you.

That is pretty much legal. It shouldn't be, but it is.

But when you do that, you diminish us all, you weaken us as a society, and make us meaner, more coarse, more hateful, and more intolerant.

I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better. They will build people up, do good when all others are doing bad, and only those who have never sinned have any grounds to judge others as somehow morally inferior.

Thank God there are at least legal limits on how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives. Now if we could only get the authorities to enforce those limits.


And you equate the Westboro Baptists with Christianity? Here is where the anti-religious, "I hate Christians" group goes way over the line. I know of no Christian or conservative group anywhere that would approve of this sign or who condone what the Westboro Baptists do. There should be some way to sue to prevent that hateful group from using the label 'baptists' as I know no Baptists, even the more fundamental groups who believe homosexuality is sin, who would condone this.

And I think it is pretty hateful to misrepresent it as appropriate for this thread.
While sealybobo is certainly a bomb-thrower when it comes to religion, in this case I think his comment was being juxtaposed against your comment to have authorities enforce laws against "how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives" As a veteran and supporter of the Constitution, I'm certainly conflicted on what is both Free Speech and Freedom of Religion versus a bunch of assholes who use religion to interrupt the funerals of veterans where families are grieving.

westboro-child.jpg
 
Yeah, I did mean Ben and Jerry's. (I thought that didn't look right when I typed it, but. . .) :)

I pretty much allow people to be who and what they are unless their actions are physically or materially harming somebody. So I can honor and respect your choices who where to shop based on your personal code of ethics, right and wrong, etc. and will not criticize you for that. You are acting on your convictions in a way that harms nobody.

I personally take the point of view that if I value the right to be able to express my point of view, my values, my beliefs, my opinions without fear some gang of snowflakes will descend on me to prevent me for speaking at a venue, will try to get me fired from my job, or threaten my customers, suppliers, advertisers, etc. in my business. . .

. . .then it logically follows to me that I should allow them their point of view, their values, their beliefs, their opinions without fear that I will try to punish, or if possible destroy them.

It sort of follows the commandment to do unto others what you would have them do unto you. That is something the snowflakes among us neither embrace nor comprehend and certainly does not respect.

But don't we have the right to descend onto an event you are speaking at and boycott your sorry ass?

If you are a right wing nutjob and we don't like rwnj's and you are open about it, don't we have to right to write your boss and tell them we are boycotting his business because he employs you?

Is it illegal to fire someone for being a liberal or Democrat or Republican? I hope it is. But it's not illegal to boycott a conservatives business. Least not last I checked. And that's affecting his income or YOUR income. So keep your politics to yourself until you find out all your co-workers and customers are conservative because if I found out you were a con I'd look for a new supplier.

Do unto others as I would have them do unto you? Sorry pal. I'm an atheist. I would love it if theists didn't discriminate against atheists but the fact is they do. So, I keep my religious beliefs to myself. If not I would expect a lot of customers to stop buying from me. For one reason because I'm an atheist and for two I'm stupid to have let it become public. Same with your politics. Don't put that on facebook. You will lose friends. You don't care? Neither do I. But I do care if I lose customers.

You have every right to share as much or as little of your opinions and beliefs as you choose to do so. You have every right to run your business as you see fit for your own benefit.

You also have every right to boycott anybody you want to, to call people names, to insult their intelligence, or anything else you wish to do.

You even have the right to organize your buddies and picket my business, harass and threaten my customers, threaten my suppliers or advertisers or pretty much do anything you want to make my life miserable, punish me, and destroy me if you can because I don't agree with you.

That is pretty much legal. It shouldn't be, but it is.

But when you do that, you diminish us all, you weaken us as a society, and make us meaner, more coarse, more hateful, and more intolerant.

I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better. They will build people up, do good when all others are doing bad, and only those who have never sinned have any grounds to judge others as somehow morally inferior.

Thank God there are at least legal limits on how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives. Now if we could only get the authorities to enforce those limits.


And you equate the Westboro Baptists with Christianity? Here is where the anti-religious, "I hate Christians" group goes way over the line. I know of no Christian or conservative group anywhere that would approve of this sign or who condone what the Westboro Baptists do. There should be some way to sue to prevent that hateful group from using the label 'baptists' as I know no Baptists, even the more fundamental groups who believe homosexuality is sin, who would condone this.

And I think it is pretty hateful to misrepresent it as appropriate for this thread.

It's fairly amazing to me that the Westboro cult gets so much attention, and gets designated by the leftists as the official face of Christianity, given that there are only like 34 members of that church, and they're basically all members of the same family.

I don't think anyone can stop them from calling themselves Baptist, since there are lots of types of Baptist churches, and none of them actually own a patent or copyright on that term. They can't claim affiliation with any of the mainstream Baptist denominations, and if anyone rushing to present them as Christian spokespeople ever bothered to research them, they'd realize that, in fact, they AREN'T affiliated with any denomination; in fact, they despise mainstream Christian denominations about as much as they do virtually everyone else who isn't them.
 
It's fairly amazing to me that the Westboro cult gets so much attention, and gets designated by the leftists as the official face of Christianity, given that there are only like 34 members of that church, and they're basically all members of the same family.

I don't think anyone can stop them from calling themselves Baptist, since there are lots of types of Baptist churches, and none of them actually own a patent or copyright on that term. They can't claim affiliation with any of the mainstream Baptist denominations, and if anyone rushing to present them as Christian spokespeople ever bothered to research them, they'd realize that, in fact, they AREN'T affiliated with any denomination; in fact, they despise mainstream Christian denominations about as much as they do virtually everyone else who isn't them.
The Westboro assholes certainly aren't the "face of Christianity", no matter who tries to paint them as such, but they do exhibit the worst among those who claim to be Christians.

Political extremists will often use the worst examples of their polar opposites in order to tar the entire group. In this case, yes, the extremist atheists point at Westboro and claim all religion is bad because of those assholes. Extremist theists point at the fucking communists who murdered tens of thousands of Christians and attempted to stomp out religion completely as being representative of all atheists.
 
But don't we have the right to descend onto an event you are speaking at and boycott your sorry ass?

If you are a right wing nutjob and we don't like rwnj's and you are open about it, don't we have to right to write your boss and tell them we are boycotting his business because he employs you?

Is it illegal to fire someone for being a liberal or Democrat or Republican? I hope it is. But it's not illegal to boycott a conservatives business. Least not last I checked. And that's affecting his income or YOUR income. So keep your politics to yourself until you find out all your co-workers and customers are conservative because if I found out you were a con I'd look for a new supplier.

Do unto others as I would have them do unto you? Sorry pal. I'm an atheist. I would love it if theists didn't discriminate against atheists but the fact is they do. So, I keep my religious beliefs to myself. If not I would expect a lot of customers to stop buying from me. For one reason because I'm an atheist and for two I'm stupid to have let it become public. Same with your politics. Don't put that on facebook. You will lose friends. You don't care? Neither do I. But I do care if I lose customers.

You have every right to share as much or as little of your opinions and beliefs as you choose to do so. You have every right to run your business as you see fit for your own benefit.

You also have every right to boycott anybody you want to, to call people names, to insult their intelligence, or anything else you wish to do.

You even have the right to organize your buddies and picket my business, harass and threaten my customers, threaten my suppliers or advertisers or pretty much do anything you want to make my life miserable, punish me, and destroy me if you can because I don't agree with you.

That is pretty much legal. It shouldn't be, but it is.

But when you do that, you diminish us all, you weaken us as a society, and make us meaner, more coarse, more hateful, and more intolerant.

I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better. They will build people up, do good when all others are doing bad, and only those who have never sinned have any grounds to judge others as somehow morally inferior.

Thank God there are at least legal limits on how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives. Now if we could only get the authorities to enforce those limits.


And you equate the Westboro Baptists with Christianity? Here is where the anti-religious, "I hate Christians" group goes way over the line. I know of no Christian or conservative group anywhere that would approve of this sign or who condone what the Westboro Baptists do. There should be some way to sue to prevent that hateful group from using the label 'baptists' as I know no Baptists, even the more fundamental groups who believe homosexuality is sin, who would condone this.

And I think it is pretty hateful to misrepresent it as appropriate for this thread.
While sealybobo is certainly a bomb-thrower when it comes to religion, in this case I think his comment was being juxtaposed against your comment to have authorities enforce laws against "how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives" As a veteran and supporter of the Constitution, I'm certainly conflicted on what is both Free Speech and Freedom of Religion versus a bunch of assholes who use religion to interrupt the funerals of veterans where families are grieving.

westboro-child.jpg

There are laws that punish those who physically assault others, very poorly enforced in the case of violent riots. There should be laws against harrassing, threatening, or impeding people participating in a legal activity but the liberal courts won't uphold any such laws that are passed.

Though I loathe and despise abortion clinics, for instance, so long as they were legal I 100% supported laws that would make it illegal to harass, threaten, impede those who patronized them. But the courts won't uphold such laws, probably out of fear that they would then have to uphold laws prohibiting other protests that they approved of.

Certainly there should be laws prohibiting organizing and funding campaigns to harm, harass, materially damage, and if possible destroy somebody just because you disagree with that person's beliefs, opinions, or convictions.

And yes, these opinions arise out of my Christian convictions of what is right and wrong.
 
It's fairly amazing to me that the Westboro cult gets so much attention, and gets designated by the leftists as the official face of Christianity, given that there are only like 34 members of that church, and they're basically all members of the same family.

I don't think anyone can stop them from calling themselves Baptist, since there are lots of types of Baptist churches, and none of them actually own a patent or copyright on that term. They can't claim affiliation with any of the mainstream Baptist denominations, and if anyone rushing to present them as Christian spokespeople ever bothered to research them, they'd realize that, in fact, they AREN'T affiliated with any denomination; in fact, they despise mainstream Christian denominations about as much as they do virtually everyone else who isn't them.
The Westboro assholes certainly aren't the "face of Christianity", no matter who tries to paint them as such, but they do exhibit the worst among those who claim to be Christians.

Political extremists will often use the worst examples of their polar opposites in order to tar the entire group. In this case, yes, the extremist atheists point at Westboro and claim all religion is bad because of those assholes. Extremist theists point at the fucking communists who murdered tens of thousands of Christians and attempted to stomp out religion completely as being representative of all atheists.

There is a fine line between dishonestly characterizing the other and intellectual honesty though.

I agree that to hold up one small group claiming the Christian label but acting in a decidedly unChristian manner is as dishonest as claiming that Atheist regimes represent all Atheists.

On the other hand, it is intellectually honest to point out that no Christian nation, even under power of corrupt monarchs and popes, has set out to commit genocide or destroy all who do not believe. Even wars and skirmishes identified as 'religious' wars have been more politically or economically motivated rather than religiously motivated. Even in Tzarist Russia, when the Russian Orthodox Church reigned supreme, the pograms against the Jews were politically motivated, not sparked by any Christian principle or zeal.

It is intellectually honest to point out that in modern times predominantly Christian nations have generally had the best track records on respecting and enforcing human rights and individual liberty.

It is intellectually honest to point out that nations that have made Atheism the official policy have had the worst record for mass murders and genocide.

And it is intellectually honest to point out that no nation that made Atheism the official policy has had a good record on human rights or individual liberty,
 
I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.
It's not a "conversion" nor is it a mindless "hive mind". It's a different level of sophistication and advancement.

When I was a child, there were times when I was concerned about "growing up" out of fear of losing my sense of wonder. The fear turned out to be useless. The sense of wonder remained, but what maturation brought was the ability to discern fact from fiction. Example; as a child, watching a magician allowed one to fantasize about "magic", but as an adult, while the enjoyment was still there, was the wonder of how the magician did it.

What you dismiss as a "hive mind" would, instead, result in a world where crime was nonexistent. Where the human race focused upon the betterment of the species. All of the "Seven Deadly Sins" would cease to exist.

I still disagree.

Since this is all speculation with no definitive proof either way, and since we obviously read very different types of science fiction ;), I'm gonna say we'll have to agree to disagree.
No worries. Agreed we can disagree on the benefits or detriments of human beings who can read each other's minds.

This conversation began regarding the meaning of becoming "one with God" and how, in my belief, we'd lose our mortal individuality in joining with God. Like a raindrop falling into the ocean, the raindrop isn't lost, it's just becoming part of something greater than itself.
.
This conversation began regarding the meaning of becoming "one with God" and how, in my belief, we'd lose our mortal individuality in joining with God. Like a raindrop falling into the ocean, the raindrop isn't lost, it's just becoming part of something greater than itself.


were a freed Spirit to be admitted to the Everlasting why would there be a reason for them to give up their identity by becoming a part of the Almighty that enabled their individuality to begin with. for as long as they can survive the new life that undoubtedly will have its own goals to be accomplished.
 
were a freed Spirit to be admitted to the Everlasting why would there be a reason for them to give up their identity by becoming a part of the Almighty that enabled their individuality to begin with. for as long as they can survive the new life that undoubtedly will have its own goals to be accomplished.
So you would do a lot for God, but not give up your identity for God? Interesting.

IMHO, becoming one with God would be the greatest reward ever. Knowing what God knows, seeing what God see, everything.
 
Does anyone understand this bozo?

Yes, I understand what BreezeWood is saying.



2 Corinthians 3:17 “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”
 

Forum List

Back
Top