The religion of atheists is socialism

[danielpalos]

You don't know what you are talking about, dear. Simply having a public sector involves the socialism of group rights

You are repeating yourself again. Rights are granted and removed from the individual, not the group.

How did that work for the South?

Great once the Republicans stepped in. Before that time the Democrats deemed that blacks were not people but property to be disposed of at the will of its owner. Just like they do now with children in the womb.

group rights changing based upon politics and the law?

 

[danielpalos]

Then you won't mind if I repeat my position, right?

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

socialism requires social morals for free; capitalism requires capital morals for a price.

Capitalism is not based on morals. Capitalism is based on the efficient use of capital to provide a product or a service at competitive pricing. The religion of socialism worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

capital based morality. the subjective value of morals cannot preclude this.

Free enterprise does not need morals to function. Free enterprise only needs Darwin to function. Surprisingly enough the morals part works itself out nicely. Socialism on the other hand is a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

rational choice theory can be a form of "moral" under capitalism.

True capitalists should try to practice, Perfection in Money Management, as "holy grail".

 

[ding]

You don't know what you are talking about, dear. Simply having a public sector involves the socialism of group rights

You are repeating yourself again. Rights are granted and removed from the individual, not the group.

How did that work for the South?

Great once the Republicans stepped in. Before that time the Democrats deemed that blacks were not people but property to be disposed of at the will of its owner. Just like they do now with children in the womb.

group rights changing based upon politics and the law?

We have already established that there is no such thing as group rights.

 

[ding]

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

socialism requires social morals for free; capitalism requires capital morals for a price.

Capitalism is not based on morals. Capitalism is based on the efficient use of capital to provide a product or a service at competitive pricing. The religion of socialism worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

capital based morality. the subjective value of morals cannot preclude this.

Free enterprise does not need morals to function. Free enterprise only needs Darwin to function. Surprisingly enough the morals part works itself out nicely. Socialism on the other hand is a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

rational choice theory can be a form of "moral" under capitalism.

True capitalists should try to practice, Perfection in Money Management, as "holy grail".

Rational choice theory is an economic principle that states that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions. These decisions provide people with the greatest benefit or satisfaction — given the choices available — and are also in their highest self-interest.

 

[Mudda]

socialism requires social morals for free; capitalism requires capital morals for a price.

Capitalism is not based on morals. Capitalism is based on the efficient use of capital to provide a product or a service at competitive pricing. The religion of socialism worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

capital based morality. the subjective value of morals cannot preclude this.

Free enterprise does not need morals to function. Free enterprise only needs Darwin to function. Surprisingly enough the morals part works itself out nicely. Socialism on the other hand is a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

rational choice theory can be a form of "moral" under capitalism.

True capitalists should try to practice, Perfection in Money Management, as "holy grail".

Rational choice theory is an economic principle that states that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions. These decisions provide people with the greatest benefit or satisfaction — given the choices available — and are also in their highest self-interest.

"individuals always make prudent and logical decisions", you mean like believing in an invisible superhero in another dimension that no one can prove?

 

[ding]

Capitalism is not based on morals. Capitalism is based on the efficient use of capital to provide a product or a service at competitive pricing. The religion of socialism worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

capital based morality. the subjective value of morals cannot preclude this.

Free enterprise does not need morals to function. Free enterprise only needs Darwin to function. Surprisingly enough the morals part works itself out nicely. Socialism on the other hand is a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

rational choice theory can be a form of "moral" under capitalism.

True capitalists should try to practice, Perfection in Money Management, as "holy grail".

Rational choice theory is an economic principle that states that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions. These decisions provide people with the greatest benefit or satisfaction — given the choices available — and are also in their highest self-interest.

"individuals always make prudent and logical decisions", you mean like believing in an invisible superhero in another dimension that no one can prove?

How many times do we need to go over this? The evidence for a supernatural being is what He has created.

 

[Mudda]

capital based morality. the subjective value of morals cannot preclude this.

Free enterprise does not need morals to function. Free enterprise only needs Darwin to function. Surprisingly enough the morals part works itself out nicely. Socialism on the other hand is a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

rational choice theory can be a form of "moral" under capitalism.

True capitalists should try to practice, Perfection in Money Management, as "holy grail".

Rational choice theory is an economic principle that states that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions. These decisions provide people with the greatest benefit or satisfaction — given the choices available — and are also in their highest self-interest.

"individuals always make prudent and logical decisions", you mean like believing in an invisible superhero in another dimension that no one can prove?

How many times do we need to go over this? The evidence for a supernatural being is what He has created.

Again, you have no proof that a supernatural being created this universe. Just a somewhat plausible theory.

 

[ding]

Free enterprise does not need morals to function. Free enterprise only needs Darwin to function. Surprisingly enough the morals part works itself out nicely. Socialism on the other hand is a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

rational choice theory can be a form of "moral" under capitalism.

True capitalists should try to practice, Perfection in Money Management, as "holy grail".

Rational choice theory is an economic principle that states that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions. These decisions provide people with the greatest benefit or satisfaction — given the choices available — and are also in their highest self-interest.

"individuals always make prudent and logical decisions", you mean like believing in an invisible superhero in another dimension that no one can prove?

How many times do we need to go over this? The evidence for a supernatural being is what He has created.

Again, you have no proof that a supernatural being created this universe. Just a somewhat plausible theory.

lol

 

[RWS]

nope; i got it from them. allegedly, it is a moral from the Age of Iron, referenced in a Bible.

We both know better. Should we seriously expect a socialist to be able to define free enterprise without distorting the truth? Like I already told you before, Socialists are inherently liars and thieves masquerading as moralists. Socialism is inherently evil.

Everything you have written thus far to describe a Socialist, and that I have read, actually describes YOU and your posts!

The only person lying or cheating in these theads, is YOU!

The only people who have an understanding of morals and goodness, are the people YOU are calling socialists...

Meanwhile, you hide inside your box of righteousness, and don't even realize that you're calling yourself out...


So I guess I was wrong when I said there are no Socialists here, before...

You are the Socialist! By your own definition...

I know, you're not gonna like that, but again, step outside of your box and look at what you have been promoting.

Then you won't mind if I repeat my position, right?

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

You have no distinction between good and evil because your morals are relative and can change. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. Your only distinction is pleasure and primitive needs.

There you go again... You can't just keep repeating stuff in hopes that it sticks. I have already shown to you in this and other threads that my morals don't change. And I have also shown you that your morals do change constantly, based on what the latest and greatest decrees are.

You believe what is accepted and promoted by your religion. And that can literally change tomorrow. And it will again at some point, repeatedly. Your morals are relative to what your religion tells you is good or bad. You do not think for yourself. You follow and believe what somebody else tells you, your morals are a spiritual yo-yo, and then you try to tell us that our morals are relative???

You gotta be kiddin me...

 

[ding]

We both know better. Should we seriously expect a socialist to be able to define free enterprise without distorting the truth? Like I already told you before, Socialists are inherently liars and thieves masquerading as moralists. Socialism is inherently evil.

Everything you have written thus far to describe a Socialist, and that I have read, actually describes YOU and your posts!

The only person lying or cheating in these theads, is YOU!

The only people who have an understanding of morals and goodness, are the people YOU are calling socialists...

Meanwhile, you hide inside your box of righteousness, and don't even realize that you're calling yourself out...


So I guess I was wrong when I said there are no Socialists here, before...

You are the Socialist! By your own definition...

I know, you're not gonna like that, but again, step outside of your box and look at what you have been promoting.

Then you won't mind if I repeat my position, right?

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

You have no distinction between good and evil because your morals are relative and can change. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. Your only distinction is pleasure and primitive needs.

There you go again... You can't just keep repeating stuff in hopes that it sticks. I have already shown to you in this and other threads that my morals don't change. And I have also shown you that your morals do change constantly, based on what the latest and greatest decrees are.

You believe what is accepted and promoted by your religion. And that can literally change tomorrow. And it will again at some point, repeatedly. Your morals are relative to what your religion tells you is good or bad. You do not think for yourself. You follow and believe what somebody else tells you, your morals are a spiritual yo-yo, and then you try to tell us that our morals are relative???

You gotta be kiddin me...

No, you showed that your morals were dependent upon the times and conditions.

The highest standard of conduct (i.e. the upper boundary condition) cannot change as it is a boundary condition.

One does not need religion to be able to figure out the highest standard of conduct. Although you do seem to prove the opposite.

 

[Mudda]

Everything you have written thus far to describe a Socialist, and that I have read, actually describes YOU and your posts!

The only person lying or cheating in these theads, is YOU!

The only people who have an understanding of morals and goodness, are the people YOU are calling socialists...

Meanwhile, you hide inside your box of righteousness, and don't even realize that you're calling yourself out...


So I guess I was wrong when I said there are no Socialists here, before...

You are the Socialist! By your own definition...

I know, you're not gonna like that, but again, step outside of your box and look at what you have been promoting.

Then you won't mind if I repeat my position, right?

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

You have no distinction between good and evil because your morals are relative and can change. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. Your only distinction is pleasure and primitive needs.

There you go again... You can't just keep repeating stuff in hopes that it sticks. I have already shown to you in this and other threads that my morals don't change. And I have also shown you that your morals do change constantly, based on what the latest and greatest decrees are.

You believe what is accepted and promoted by your religion. And that can literally change tomorrow. And it will again at some point, repeatedly. Your morals are relative to what your religion tells you is good or bad. You do not think for yourself. You follow and believe what somebody else tells you, your morals are a spiritual yo-yo, and then you try to tell us that our morals are relative???

You gotta be kiddin me...

No, you showed that your morals were dependent upon the times and conditions.

The highest standard of conduct (i.e. the upper boundary condition) cannot change as it is a boundary condition.

One does not need religion to be able to figure out the highest standard of conduct. Although you do seem to prove the opposite.

Then why do people of religion often have the lowest standards of conduct?

 

[ding]

Then you won't mind if I repeat my position, right?

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

You have no distinction between good and evil because your morals are relative and can change. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. Your only distinction is pleasure and primitive needs.

There you go again... You can't just keep repeating stuff in hopes that it sticks. I have already shown to you in this and other threads that my morals don't change. And I have also shown you that your morals do change constantly, based on what the latest and greatest decrees are.

You believe what is accepted and promoted by your religion. And that can literally change tomorrow. And it will again at some point, repeatedly. Your morals are relative to what your religion tells you is good or bad. You do not think for yourself. You follow and believe what somebody else tells you, your morals are a spiritual yo-yo, and then you try to tell us that our morals are relative???

You gotta be kiddin me...

No, you showed that your morals were dependent upon the times and conditions.

The highest standard of conduct (i.e. the upper boundary condition) cannot change as it is a boundary condition.

One does not need religion to be able to figure out the highest standard of conduct. Although you do seem to prove the opposite.

Then why do people of religion often have the lowest standards of conduct?

Maybe that is just you confirming your bias.

 

[Mudda]

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

You have no distinction between good and evil because your morals are relative and can change. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. Your only distinction is pleasure and primitive needs.

There you go again... You can't just keep repeating stuff in hopes that it sticks. I have already shown to you in this and other threads that my morals don't change. And I have also shown you that your morals do change constantly, based on what the latest and greatest decrees are.

You believe what is accepted and promoted by your religion. And that can literally change tomorrow. And it will again at some point, repeatedly. Your morals are relative to what your religion tells you is good or bad. You do not think for yourself. You follow and believe what somebody else tells you, your morals are a spiritual yo-yo, and then you try to tell us that our morals are relative???

You gotta be kiddin me...

No, you showed that your morals were dependent upon the times and conditions.

The highest standard of conduct (i.e. the upper boundary condition) cannot change as it is a boundary condition.

One does not need religion to be able to figure out the highest standard of conduct. Although you do seem to prove the opposite.

Then why do people of religion often have the lowest standards of conduct?

Maybe that is just you confirming your bias.

Pedophile priests, Christians in the US government that attack other countries for no reason and kill hundreds of thousands. The GOP, ...

 

[RWS]

Then you won't mind if I repeat my position, right?

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains its extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity towards a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

No, you're totally wrong dude. You can't just keep repeating that in hopes that it will stick.

I have distinction between good and evil, and I am not a socialist.

You however, cannot comprehend that the reason you have your religion is because your religion had to kill millions of people, and subjugate the rest.

You promote it like it's the greatest thing in the world, when in fact, it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. You totally don't see the evil your religion has caused. Totally blinded... You just repeat the stuff that you were taught.

So I ask, do you have distinction between good and evil?

Because I 100% don't think you do...

And you have no morality, and obviously no sense of equality. Since you think you are the righteous one, and we're all dirtbags and deserve the spite of god.

Your hostility towards anyone who thinks differently from you, is a red flag that you intentionally ignore.

Let me tell you something.... IF there is a "heaven", your train of thought does not belong there... You should be denied. That's if it exists, and actually cares about goodness.

You, are certainly not a "good" person, at least not based on what you post here. You may be a good person in real life, but based on what you post here, you're a Nazi/Socialist/Supremist combo. You're a dictator-in-waiting, that wants to wipe out anyone who disagrees with your belief. And you use lies and propaganda and false news to promote yourself and your religion. And flat-out ignore, ridicule, and deny anyone who says differently...

Again, take a look in the mirror....

You have no distinction between good and evil because your morals are relative and can change. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. Your only distinction is pleasure and primitive needs.

There you go again... You can't just keep repeating stuff in hopes that it sticks. I have already shown to you in this and other threads that my morals don't change. And I have also shown you that your morals do change constantly, based on what the latest and greatest decrees are.

You believe what is accepted and promoted by your religion. And that can literally change tomorrow. And it will again at some point, repeatedly. Your morals are relative to what your religion tells you is good or bad. You do not think for yourself. You follow and believe what somebody else tells you, your morals are a spiritual yo-yo, and then you try to tell us that our morals are relative???

You gotta be kiddin me...

No, you showed that your morals were dependent upon the times and conditions.

The highest standard of conduct (i.e. the upper boundary condition) cannot change as it is a boundary condition.

One does not need religion to be able to figure out the highest standard of conduct. Although you do seem to prove the opposite.

Then why do people of religion often have the lowest standards of conduct?

Exactly.

My morals are true regardless of the time and religious/political movement in power. It's easy... just be good to people and the world, and don't destroy stuff.

Religions have done the exact opposite throughout history, based on their relative morals dictated to them by their rulers. And they still justify it, because they all want to save face.

People like you and I don't need to have stuff dictated to us, in order to know what is right and wrong. Our morals are stable.

But religious morals are relative to their respective religious leader of the time.

 

[RWS]

And regarding the "highest standard of conduct", no religion can do better than "just be good to people and the world, and don't destroy stuff".

That is the ideal they hold in front of you like a carrot, with idols like Jesus, but they never let you get there in life. They always tell you it is out of your reach until death. Because if you got there during life, you wouldn't need to listen to them anymore, and then they lose power and money flow.

Religions may advertise that they have this so-called "high conduct", but they actually thrive on promoting your sins, and then your subsequent servitude and search for forgiveness.

I don't need no stinkin' forgiveness...

My moral standard will never be breached by some corrupt ruler.

 

[ding]

And regarding the "highest standard of conduct", no religion can do better than "just be good to people and the world, and don't destroy stuff".

That is the ideal they hold in front of you like a carrot, with idols like Jesus, but they never let you get there in life. They always tell you it is out of your reach until death. Because if you got there during life, you wouldn't need to listen to them anymore, and then they lose power and money flow.

Religions may advertise that they have this so-called "high conduct", but they actually thrive on promoting your sins, and then your subsequent servitude and search for forgiveness.

I don't need no stinkin' forgiveness...

My moral standard will never be breached by some corrupt ruler.

Your moral standard was such that you could not say that it was wrong for one human being to own another human being. I gave you the opportunity to do so and you punted. You claimed that if it were good for society as a whole then it would be moral.

As for your oversimplification on the highest standard possible, it is just that a massive oversimplification. The standard is specific to each conduct. For instance, it is wrong to end a human life or it is wrong for one human to own another human. Just be good to people and the world and don't destroy stuff doesn't cut it because it allows idiots to make morally relative claims such as it is not wrong for one human to own another human as long as it were good for society as a whole.

 

[Mudda]

And regarding the "highest standard of conduct", no religion can do better than "just be good to people and the world, and don't destroy stuff".

That is the ideal they hold in front of you like a carrot, with idols like Jesus, but they never let you get there in life. They always tell you it is out of your reach until death. Because if you got there during life, you wouldn't need to listen to them anymore, and then they lose power and money flow.

Religions may advertise that they have this so-called "high conduct", but they actually thrive on promoting your sins, and then your subsequent servitude and search for forgiveness.

I don't need no stinkin' forgiveness...

My moral standard will never be breached by some corrupt ruler.

Your moral standard was such that you could not say that it was wrong for one human being to own another human being. I gave you the opportunity to do so and you punted. You claimed that if it were good for society as a whole then it would be moral.

As for your oversimplification on the highest standard possible, it is just that a massive oversimplification. The standard is specific to each conduct. For instance, it is wrong to end a human life or it is wrong for one human to own another human. Just be good to people and the world and don't destroy stuff doesn't cut it because it allows idiots to make morally relative claims such as it is not wrong for one human to own another human as long as it were good for society as a whole.

So "an eye for an eye" is a misprint?

 

[ding]

And regarding the "highest standard of conduct", no religion can do better than "just be good to people and the world, and don't destroy stuff".

That is the ideal they hold in front of you like a carrot, with idols like Jesus, but they never let you get there in life. They always tell you it is out of your reach until death. Because if you got there during life, you wouldn't need to listen to them anymore, and then they lose power and money flow.

Religions may advertise that they have this so-called "high conduct", but they actually thrive on promoting your sins, and then your subsequent servitude and search for forgiveness.

I don't need no stinkin' forgiveness...

My moral standard will never be breached by some corrupt ruler.

Your moral standard was such that you could not say that it was wrong for one human being to own another human being. I gave you the opportunity to do so and you punted. You claimed that if it were good for society as a whole then it would be moral.

As for your oversimplification on the highest standard possible, it is just that a massive oversimplification. The standard is specific to each conduct. For instance, it is wrong to end a human life or it is wrong for one human to own another human. Just be good to people and the world and don't destroy stuff doesn't cut it because it allows idiots to make morally relative claims such as it is not wrong for one human to own another human as long as it were good for society as a whole.

So "an eye for an eye" is a misprint?

No. It was the highest standard of the day. "An eye for an eye" meant reasonable pecuniary compensation and nothing more.

 

[Mudda]

And regarding the "highest standard of conduct", no religion can do better than "just be good to people and the world, and don't destroy stuff".

That is the ideal they hold in front of you like a carrot, with idols like Jesus, but they never let you get there in life. They always tell you it is out of your reach until death. Because if you got there during life, you wouldn't need to listen to them anymore, and then they lose power and money flow.

Religions may advertise that they have this so-called "high conduct", but they actually thrive on promoting your sins, and then your subsequent servitude and search for forgiveness.

I don't need no stinkin' forgiveness...

My moral standard will never be breached by some corrupt ruler.

Your moral standard was such that you could not say that it was wrong for one human being to own another human being. I gave you the opportunity to do so and you punted. You claimed that if it were good for society as a whole then it would be moral.

As for your oversimplification on the highest standard possible, it is just that a massive oversimplification. The standard is specific to each conduct. For instance, it is wrong to end a human life or it is wrong for one human to own another human. Just be good to people and the world and don't destroy stuff doesn't cut it because it allows idiots to make morally relative claims such as it is not wrong for one human to own another human as long as it were good for society as a whole.

So "an eye for an eye" is a misprint?

No. It was the highest standard of the day. "An eye for an eye" meant reasonable pecuniary compensation and nothing more.

You read what you want to read into it. You know what? So do I, and it tells me that the whole thing is a scam. So I guess the bible has no universal truth in it. Good to know.

 

[ding]

And regarding the "highest standard of conduct", no religion can do better than "just be good to people and the world, and don't destroy stuff".

That is the ideal they hold in front of you like a carrot, with idols like Jesus, but they never let you get there in life. They always tell you it is out of your reach until death. Because if you got there during life, you wouldn't need to listen to them anymore, and then they lose power and money flow.

Religions may advertise that they have this so-called "high conduct", but they actually thrive on promoting your sins, and then your subsequent servitude and search for forgiveness.

I don't need no stinkin' forgiveness...

My moral standard will never be breached by some corrupt ruler.

Your moral standard was such that you could not say that it was wrong for one human being to own another human being. I gave you the opportunity to do so and you punted. You claimed that if it were good for society as a whole then it would be moral.

As for your oversimplification on the highest standard possible, it is just that a massive oversimplification. The standard is specific to each conduct. For instance, it is wrong to end a human life or it is wrong for one human to own another human. Just be good to people and the world and don't destroy stuff doesn't cut it because it allows idiots to make morally relative claims such as it is not wrong for one human to own another human as long as it were good for society as a whole.

So "an eye for an eye" is a misprint?

No. It was the highest standard of the day. "An eye for an eye" meant reasonable pecuniary compensation and nothing more.

You read what you want to read into it. You know what? So do I, and it tells me that the whole thing is a scam. So I guess the bible has no universal truth in it. Good to know.

No. I read it in the context of the day which was 3000 years ago or so. I don't read it in the context of today. The Bible is full of universal truths. It is actually a very personal message to each person in this regard. It actually tells the whole story. It doesn't shy away telling the truth. It has too because the personal message is how to live and how not to live. Your vast oversimplifications of what you do not understand demonstrates that you are intellectually dead.