General Chat / Obama Elected President

deleted

What a waste of bandwidth that topic is...

We all knew that Obama was going to win anyway.

Edited by lucas92, 10 November 2008 - 09:22 PM.

zburns999:

haha

That which you cannot comprehend doesn't necessarily defy logic, even while that which seems to defy logic is not necessarily incomprehensible.

Like any intelligent person though, you should see why those who are affected by your actions, being those your actions and they derived from your personal ideals and principles, and them not being shared with those you act against, act against you in kind.

I say, logically, if you want your own religious and cultural freedom in this free multi-cultural society of many differing faiths and philosophies, then it would stand to reason that you would yield certain indoctrinations from being labored to law in order to protect those freedoms which we all share in and enjoy.

I really don't understand you guys. I have plenty of atheist friends who are really great people, and I couldn't say one bad thing about them. So what if they don't share my views on religion? That's not my business. I do what's right for me, they do what's right for them.

...As I have plenty of highly religious friends. This isn't about sharing views though, this is about forcing those views upon others. Atheists don't legislate away your religious freedoms, though they may disagree. Prop 8 is a group of highly ignorant (though not necessarily religious) people legislating away my religious freedoms. And yes, it IS considered religious freedom, since the right to marry is on the person marrying the couple, it is his right whether he marries the couple or not. When you vote to have peoples rights taken away, that isn't doing right for yourself, but forcing what you think is right on other people. Lowering their quality of life for the sake of your own peace of mind.

Here, it seems like everyone who's anti-religion has some kind of personal problem with religious people. I feel like people are so insecure about their own intellect, that they feel like they need to denounce religion to make themselves feel "superior" for refusing to believe in something that reason and logic says "can't exist." Well, fuck reason and logic. It's not like quoting famous scientists and writers (Fullmetal), makes me feel like I must be stupid because all of these "intelligent" minds disagree with my beliefs. If someone is truly that close-minded that they can't believe in anything other than what's in front of their faces, then I'd have to say that I feel sorry for them.

And you are right, reason and logic are not everything. To say that, one has to throw out context and perspective, which are essential to critical thinking in the first place. And personally, I don't think believing things you don't experience or see for yourself is a wise way to act when it affects others. Instead, I think of possibility, and struggle to act out of logic and compassion whenever I am conscious of the consequences.

I personally think that there's more to god than what Christians, Muslims, or jews have indoctrinated themselves with. In fact, I think the Gnostics were closest in their basic ideals of how the spark of god is in all things. But just because I think so does not make me murder, cheat, steal, goad, or judge those around me that don't think the same way. I only attack what gives itself to attack: that which lacks logical bearing and context. That which I can disprove with logic coupled with experience, I will voice. That which I cannot, I only ponder upon and theorize about. I like to keep people honest, you see, but only attempt to do so through suggestion. It is still an individuals choice to listen.

I can accept the possibility that homosexuality may be an abomination for reasons I cannot currently comprehend, or may never comprehend. I will, however, denounce flawed reasons that people give: that it is unnatural, that it leads to the degradation of society, that it is a matter of choice, and that it infringes physically upon the religious rights of Christians. These things have logical foils. Therefore, if the only argument against homosexuality is "because god said so", then being without logic, it stands that no law should be made to deter people from these actions by force. Preach if you like, but when you make the choice for people, I am not one to stand idly by, and many would struggle to retain their rights. What would you do?

You make a point to say that some in this conversation are including themselves for the wrong reasons, and that is something I wouldn't entirely disagree with. But in saying so, you have overstated your own position. You have in turn, put yourself above them on grounds of a crime you commit in doing so.

You guys say that religion is what deters humanity from becoming tolerant of other people's life-styles. Last time I checked, I haven't said one negative thing about gays (which I guess is how this whole debate started), yet look who's so fast to attack religion. That doesn't sound very tolerant to me. If you really need to blame religion for your problems, then that's pathetic. California voted against gay marriage, not Christians. Don't make religion a scapegoat when it's not directly. Obviously, there were enough people who thought marriage to be "sacred" that it was banned, and I'd be willing to bet that they weren't all Christians.

Actually, there was enough money put forth by an association of Mormons from Utah, well enough timed that it would be overshadowed by a huge election, well enough campaigned that lies and confusion could steal votes from a population not wholly aware of the consequences, and enough homophobic or bigoted voters in the state of California to let the measure slip by. Do not believe for a second that just because enough people voted on something, that it makes it right. I'm sure if you had a vote in the southern states on the legal status of slavery 200 years ago, that slavery would win.

And the government has no business designating marriage as "sacred" in the first place, either. Only religion should have that right, and only for themselves. A Muslim does not dictate to a Christian on which day the sabbath lies, does he? Does he change the law to force the Christian to recognize a different day?

Basically, I just find it pathetic how insecure some of you are that you need to attack religion. If you don't agree with it, that's fine. You have that option in life. But don't attack it, acting like all of us God-fearing people are wasting our time. Wasting what time? I lose nothing by believing in God, and don't even tell me that I do. I'm an intelligent kid. I've always been a good student, and I'd like to think that I have a bright future ahead of me. Believing in God is not a product of my ignorance, or inability to reason. That's bullshit. I hate all these people who argue that "religion is a thing of the past. We're too advanced to believe in this." That's not true. In my opinion, the truly intelligent man is one who can see the bigger picture, and know that there could be more to life than what we see. And even if you don't believe that, respect those who do, rather than calling them ignorant or stupid for believing something that defies reason.

Are you really seeing the bigger picture, or do you just believe you are? And I didn't say we are too advanced to believe in god, that will never be the case. We are, however, too advanced to shackle society to old practices that have been out-dated by technological and societal advancement. Pregnancy, for one, is now a lot safer than it was when all that scripture on the cleanliness of certain acts was written. Food is a lot safer than it was back when scripture was written about not consuming certain animals. Societal Advancement has now obsoleted slavery as legitimate social structure since more effective and logically fair social structures have been developed and are now in use. What makes this case of homosexuality being considered deviancy any different?

To people with excuses, I copypasta this to them:

"...Oh, don't lie to yourself. It's REALLY because it grosses you out. If you say anything different, it's just a ruse to protect your credibility as a mature individual. It's why you still believe it is a sin even while you eat your pork.

I know what you're thinking: you asshole, pork is delicious!

Yes. Pork IS delicious, and gay butt-fag sex is gross.

Go watch your lesbian porn, hypocrite."

In the end though, I am not blaming the spiritual or religious. I even consider myself a spiritual person. What I don't like are people who don't think for themselves, or those who force their beliefs upon others. This prop is a good example of both.

i thought we changed the subject?

who said there had to be only one subject?

ALSO: people, don't stop watching the news. Pay attention to what obama is doing. If he promised shit, people shouldn't let him forget it =)

Blitz, really nice post man. I read that, thought about it, and I do think that you're right on most points. Your argument for gay marriage as a religious freedom is strong as well. I just want to make it clear that while marriage is something I view as "sacred," I try my best to be open minded on the subject. I don't have too strong of an opinion on Prop 8, because I'm from Pennsylvania and we don't hear much about things like this. Nice post though.

And as far as "seeing the bigger picture," no, I don't beleive I've reached that point quite yet. I do think that religion/spirituality is a great guide, though.

And as far as "seeing the bigger picture," no, I don't beleive I've reached that point quite yet. I do think that religion/spirituality is a great guide, though.

I think so as well. =3

Though, not all of us were meant for the organized bit. IMHO, philosophy and spirituality should be like brother and sister.

Furthermore zburns, were not attacking religion persay, more people like Kevin who cling to it as their justification for everything, while not allowing any thoughts from us sinners to penetrate the thick skull his parents have built for him. You at least can admit that there might possibly be another belief set out there. Furthermore, your willingness to allow us our beliefs without condemning us to hell shows a level of religious maturity that kevin clearly lacks.

On another note: Praise Jebus!!

deleted

kevin you should have said that you believe you are right and that he believes he is right, you can't say you are right just like we can't.

deleted

I cut out that last past because it didn't look like something useful.

Anyways, I do agree their are other beliefs out there, otherwise this debate wouldn't happen. It's just I am right, just as you believe you are right, otherwise it wouldn't be your belief, so I don't see what you're saying.

And I built my own skull, don't you dare say I'm the way I am b/c of my parents.

I'm not condemning anyone to hell. I'm warning you that GOD will send you to Hell if you don't become a Christian. I can't, don't and don't want to condemn anyone or anything. I'm just giving you a warning, I'm like a lighthouse, the lighthouse doesn't make you hit rocks, it warns you they exist, just like me, I don't condemn you to Hell, I warm you it exists. I also tell you how to escape, but the lighthouse doesn't have to tell, it's pretty obvious, sail the other way, so the analogy only goes so faaaaaaaaar.

Everyone is a product of their environment. Either you act the way you do because of your parents, the people who raised you, your friends etc., or you act in spite of them. And it's quite obvious in your willingness to blindly follow that somebody gave that belief to you. You certainly did not come up with it.

Lighthouses are archeic and outdated. They're a novelty that people visit from time to time and ignore when they're out of sight. Pretty acurate analogy, actually. Well Done, sir. Besides, if you're anything like the ligthhouse in The Most Dangerous Game, you're leading me into a shitstorm anyway.

It's just I am right, just as you believe you are right, otherwise it wouldn't be your belief, so I don't see what you're saying.

it's not that non-christians (well, most anyways) believe that they are right; it's that we are telling you that you may not be 100% right like you automatically think you are. there's a difference.

i don't condemn the possibility of there being a god, i just see tons of evidence that points the other way. the problems like fundamentalists like yourself have, kevin, is that they can't see past their own beliefs. therein lies the problem and the difference.

^ Yeah for me god is unlikely but not impossible.

@MA - ahaha nice. oh and The Most Dangerous Game is really good.

deleted

No. We believe what we believe but you can't rule out something with no evidence. Well I believe it but I can't know it.

I'm not condemning anyone to hell. I'm warning you that GOD will send you to Hell if you don't become a Christian. I can't, don't and don't want to condemn anyone or anything. I'm just giving you a warning, I'm like a lighthouse, the lighthouse doesn't make you hit rocks, it warns you they exist, just like me, I don't condemn you to Hell, I warm you it exists. I also tell you how to escape, but the lighthouse doesn't have to tell, it's pretty obvious, sail the other way, so the analogy only goes so faaaaaaaaar.

Although MA posted a pretty valid arguement, I think I can one up him.

You see, lighthouses show you what to look out for. They don't tell you that rocks are in the way. There's a squirrel in the tall grass over there. Do you see it? Of course not, because you would not be able to see a squirrel in tall grass (assuming there was one). Since you can't see it, you have every right to question the existance of the squirrel. If you walked into the tall grass, the squirrel may hear you and run away, causing the grass to move. Then it would be safe to say that there is a squirrel in the grass, and if it's not a squirrel, it's definitely something. Until you provide concrete evidence of God, Heaven, Hell, or any other biblical oddity, I have every right to doubt it's existence, and in turn, ignore it.

Going back to the cartesian question, I will freely admit that I exist. Further, following more of Descartes reasoning (that I really, really, really don't feel like revisiting), I will allow that there is some form of creator (whatever it may be). I will not however buy a religion that tells me to believe it or I'm going to hell.

Kevin, I think you missed the whole point of my post. We who are not religious allow you your beliefs, and make no judgments of that fact alone. However, notice how you say "I am right", and then say that I believe I'm right. This is the type of intolerance we are judging you over. Zburns has made no judgments of how our afterlife will play out. He simply states that he holds certain beliefs to be true, but allows that others could hold other beliefs to be true. You Kevin, tell us that if we don't accept your ideal of God, then we are going to hell. While you may not be making the decision as to whether or not I actually go to hell, you are certainly holding that belief. Tell me why I would accept such a vengeful god into my life?

Wake up man. Religious experience and relationships should be a personal experience. Do you believe Buddhists are going to hell? I could argue that they are more likely to go to heaven than you..

MA, don't forget there are some elements of birth (nature) that are also important in a person's development. Methinks Kevin didn't get enough brain food when his momma was carrying him.

MA, don't forget there are some elements of birth (nature) that are also important in a person's development. Methinks Kevin didn't get enough brain food when his momma was carrying him.

Let's just not open the can of worms. You say Tomato, I say Tomato. You say Nature, I say Nurture. It's all cool. (That really doesn't work well in text form....)

If I went with the Nature side, I could definitively say that Kevin is the way he is because of his parents, though.






Xin, I have no idea what you just said.