Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lead by example Pope!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    Is it at least equal to me chances of hitting the Powerball?



    Why not?
    Eh, I'm no mathematician, but yeah pretty low chance.

    Because I'm not a theist or socialist?

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    The chance is greater than zero, but it's more of a utopian idea.
    Is it at least equal to me chances of hitting the Powerball?

    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    Don't ask me.
    Why not?

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    And what chance is that? Zero? Sounds pretty magical to me.



    So how can a person who disregards Marx's "opiate of the masses" critique qualify as a socialist? Lenin had some thoughts on that type.
    The chance is greater than zero, but it's more of a utopian idea.


    Don't ask me.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    Theist. The theory of socialism hasn't worked, but there is a chance it could work.
    And what chance is that? Zero? Sounds pretty magical to me.

    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    Also, socialism doesn't require you to be an atheist btw. I've met a couple who were theists.
    So how can a person who disregards Marx's "opiate of the masses" critique qualify as a socialist? Lenin had some thoughts on that type.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    'Tis true, 'tis true -- but socialists are obliged by the founding tenets of their ideology to be united in their view of god. They deny the existence of that which can be neither proven nor disproven -- but believe fanatically in that which has long been proven wrong. Whose more delusional: the theist -- or the socialist atheist?
    Theist. The theory of socialism hasn't worked, but there is a chance it could work. A theist believes magic runs their world.

    Also, socialism doesn't require you to be an atheist btw. I've met a couple who were theists.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    You seem to hold the misconception that atheists agree on politics. That's not true. Atheists simply hold that believing something is caused by magic or the supernatural or magic isn't supported by facts. Atheists hold many different political views.
    'Tis true, 'tis true -- but socialists are obliged by the founding tenets of their ideology to be united in their view of god. They deny the existence of that which can be neither proven nor disproven -- but believe fanatically in that which has long been proven wrong. Whose more delusional: the theist -- or the socialist atheist?

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    That socialism works. That much was known well over a century ago, hence Frederick Engels' cooking of Marx's mathematical proofs in his Capital. It was a fraud then, and it's a fraud now. So why do so many keep falling for it again, and again, and again?
    You seem to hold the misconception that atheists agree on politics. That's not true. Atheists simply hold that believing something is caused by magic or the supernatural or magic isn't supported by facts. Atheists hold many different political views.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    You're being extremely vague here. Why not actually address what you think atheists deceive themselves of?
    That socialism works. That much was known well over a century ago, hence Frederick Engels' cooking of Marx's mathematical proofs in his Capital. It was a fraud then, and it's a fraud now. So why do so many keep falling for it again, and again, and again?

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    Yeah: if they don't understand it, they just cook the numbers and pass it off as science.

    Moral behavior is the exclusive province of neither theists nor atheists. Likewise, an ability to delude oneself into believing complete and utter bullshit with religious intensity is likewise exclusive to neither theists nor atheists. Self-deceit respects no religious belief.
    You're being extremely vague here. Why not actually address what you think atheists deceive themselves of?

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    Atheists also share this weird thought that perhaps they shouldn't believe things that they don't understand must be caused by magic.

    Yeah: if they don't understand it, they just cook the numbers and pass it off as science.

    Moral behavior is the exclusive province of neither theists nor atheists. Likewise, an ability to delude oneself into believing complete and utter bullshit with religious intensity is likewise exclusive to neither theists nor atheists. Self-deceit respects no religious belief.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post


    Just supernatural theories.
    Atheists also share this weird thought that perhaps they shouldn't believe things that they don't understand must be caused by magic.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Delenda estRoma View Post
    Atheists don't share anything except the fact that they don't believe in any supernatural beings.


    Just supernatural theories.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by Michele View Post
    Well, of course you can't achieve a complete separation as long as both the church and state are run by humans. Note that in this sense, even if the state was run solely by atheists, even atheism has its beliefs and tenets, and even its leaders and loose organizations - thus there still wouldn't be a complete separation of the state.

    But apart from that, a rule that you can't be a prime minister if you're a priest, or that the state won't protect any religion nor persecute any other, are entirely feasible, in practice too - and recommendable in my opinion.
    Atheists don't share anything except the fact that they don't believe in any supernatural beings.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by Michele View Post
    You can, in the sense intended by the First Amendment.
    I.e., you can have a state that has no "state religion", and no laws discriminating in favor or against any religion. You can also have laws that prevent clergy from working in the state administration, or from running for elective office.
    All of the above measures do not require that religious leaders abstain from doing their job.



    I agree on the above, which should also be pretty obvious.
    The US has many laws that favor religions. Sin taxes, closing of businesses on Sunday, atheists can't hold office in some states, and a number of others influenced by religion. Many of those religious laws are in effect because leaders decided their religious values should be put into law.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    Originally posted by Wooden Wonder View Post
    The problem is that you cannot effectively separate church from state, unless perhaps in the case of an atheist.

    For the Pope to advise on matters spiritual, is also to advise on morality and ethics. To advise on morality and ethics is also to impact on the politics of 'believers'. You cannot separate the spirit/soul from the body, at least as long as the body lives.
    Or perhaps you may realize there is no soul .

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X