December 30, 2011
National Defense
And:
Ron Paul Senior Advisor Doug Wead speaks about the core values of Ron Paul. Worth listening to.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
And:
Ron Paul Senior Advisor Doug Wead speaks about the core values of Ron Paul. Worth listening to.
I was encouraged to see you support Ron Paul also. There are so many reasons why he is the best, or should I say ONLY, choice if the US is to survive in any meaningful way.
ReplyDeleteI've been in small debates with some Christian friends who insist that waterboarding is not torture and is ethical. But when I dug into this issue, I found it pretty conclusive that that Christian ethics is centered on absolutism and duty-based ethics, not relativist end-based ethics.
I think if more Christians could understand this, then they would understand the need to support Ron Paul, and not neocon republican puppets, such as Bachmann, who probably doesn't even realize she is being played when she adopts neocon policies as a Christian politician.
Vote your conscience. If everyone who's ever said, "I like Ron Paul, but he doesn't have a chance" votes for him, Ron Paul will win by a landslide
ReplyDeleteOf course, a heavily armed force placed in Texas probably wouldn't be noticed given all the other heavily armed people in the state.
ReplyDeleteHey, Rick Warden, I've sent you an email, would like you to appear on my podcast
ReplyDeleteDon't do it Rick. Alex will just have his wife bang the dishes, and make noises in the background, when you try to say something. :7p
ReplyDeleteDan, I found some things about Ron Paul you may want to have a look at.
ReplyDeleteI just noticed your header at the top Dan..."until you get your country back?" Who the hell do you think has your country?
ReplyDeleteThe religous right virtually runs the Republican party which was in the White House until 2008...and they run Congress now, don't they?
OK forgive my late night rant here, but my mind is racing. I find it mind boggling that the Christian Evangelicals of Iowa chose NOT to vote for the ONLY Christian out of those three. Romney is a Mormon, Santorum is a Roman Catholic, and Ron Paul is the ONLY Christian of the three. *sigh
ReplyDeleteChrist like
Well Christian evangelicals tend to be in favor of unlimited US support of Israel. Even though Ron Paul foreign policy makes sense, he never had a chance of winning evangelical vote, because he won't support Israel. I'm sure there may be a few other issues that might have caused some people to not vote for him, but for evangelicals, his views on Israel are probably what keeps people from supporting him.
ReplyDeleteIsn't Roman Catholicism a denomination of xianity? If not, Dan had better let Micheal Coren know.
ReplyDeleteDan, I wasn't talking to you. Rick, you have laid down a challenge to atheists via your blog, Fundamentally Flawed accepts, and would like to record a podcast with you where we will happily meet that challenge head on.
ReplyDeleteMan enough to appear?
Alex,
ReplyDeleteAre you man enough NOT to act like a child during a Podcast?
The answer is NOPE.
One could ask the same of you sometimes, Dan.
ReplyDeletedan, please provide a single example. Tell me the episode number and give me a time in that episode where i behave as you claim i do.
ReplyDeleteGood luck finding anything remotely like me 'acting like a child'
Rick, the challenge has been posted on my blog, given your boasting that no atheists can meet YOUR challenge i shall look forward to hearing from you re. time and date for a debate.
Nothing? Not got any evidence, Dan? WHAT A FUCKING SURPRISE
ReplyDeleteI don't think he needs any evidence. He just starts with the presupposition that you act like a child.
ReplyDeleteEvery conversation with Dustin, even the Reynold one. They are all there. I do not have time to get you timestamps when. They are all there for the record. I should also mention all the girly giggling that you did speaking with Sye and Eric towards the end.
ReplyDeleteI have things to do. I have a kid with a 103 temp so I have to find a flask of holy water and a cross made out of a thorny bush branches. :7p
You know Dan, I'd like to hear your "evidence" for your claims about Alex myself.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that maybe Ron Paul may be something of a nutter.
ReplyDelete"It appears that maybe Ron Paul may be something of a nutter."
ReplyDeleteAs evidenced by the last 40 years, that's a job requirement.
"Who ... do you think has your country?"
I can't speak for Dan. But I think the corporations pretty much have a stranglehold on the government as no one can be a viable candidate without their support.
dan is full of shit. Remember, he's the vile CUNT who stated that atheists 'cause children to get cancer'.
ReplyDeleteThe man is an anus.
Alex,
ReplyDeleteAnd you're a fanboy of a "man" (PZ) that views dead babies as meat.
Hah! Dan, you dumb hypocrite. You're a fanboy of a person who has no problem with outright fucking genocide!
ReplyDeleteAt least Myers knows that once the kid is born, it's hands off! Craig (and YOU) have no problem with killing kids once their born if biblegod says to kill them!
Reynold: God does not exist because He is bad
ReplyDeleteMe: are you bad
Reynold: yeah
Me: than you do not exist
Reynold: D'oh!
no, Dan, god doesn't exist. At all
ReplyDeleteHuh? Ok Dan, let's try to get something straight..that is not what I'm trying to say. I'm trying to say that you are a moral hypocrite.
ReplyDeleteAs for god's character, all that his immorality shows is that it's one trait (good, holy, just etc) that just doesn't match up. That by itself is not "proof" that biblegod doesn't exist.
I think it's telling though that you completely ignore the fact that I just pointed out your moral hypocrosy.
Let's try something else, shall we?
Dan: PZ Myers thinks dead babies are just meat, so atheism is wrong.
Name that fallacy.
Agh. What I'm trying to say is:
ReplyDeleteThe disproving of god's so-called moral character is just one piece of evidence that shows that if biblegod exists, he ain't what the bible claims he is.
Something like that. It's bedtime.
And by the way: Unlike your god dan, I didn't order genocide, so I'm not near as "bad" as your so-called "just" god is.
Dan seems to struggle with the concept that 'god' not existing is entirely down to the fact that he does not exist, and has nothing to do with supposed 'traits' of this imaginary being.
ReplyDeleteWhy does Dan struggle so? Probably because he's a cunt, a cunt whose ability to think rationally has been destroyed by his believe in fantasy.
I disagree, Alex. Dan's not struggling
ReplyDeleteHe's tired of his faith being undermined by reality. He's also tired of making claims and having them be debunked by his critics. His faith gives him comfort, and it must be upsetting (to say the least) when it's shown to be faulty at almost every turn.
This is why he's dishonest. This is why he clings to Sye's nonsense. This is why he ignores what people say to him on his blog. Dan is sad or mad or bitter, and he's not going to take anyone seriously (unless that person supports his faith) because he's learned that doing so makes him upset.
>> I'm trying to say that you are a moral hypocrite.
ReplyDeleteYour worldview cannot even account for that as being wrong. How is it absolutely wrong? Or is that merely just your arbitrary opinion?
Dan, you're coming across as an insanely monomaniacal robot
ReplyDeleteAlex,
ReplyDeleteI don't think you have ever seen one, if you believe I am one. Poor kid, does your wife have a penis? That would explain the confusion.
Wem,
ReplyDelete>> He's tired of his faith being undermined by reality.
Are you looking into a mirror saying that, deist? Are you finally willing to admit you're an Atheist? Or are you sticking with God existing still?
Hypocrisy at its finest here folks.
What's that meant to even mean, Dan? Clearly you're becoming incoherent as your delusions start to unravel
ReplyDeleteDan quoting me:
ReplyDeleteI'm trying to say that you are a moral hypocrite.
Your worldview cannot even account for that as being wrong. How is it absolutely wrong? Or is that merely just your arbitrary opinion?
"aritrary"? Are you joking? What's so "arbitrary" about caring about little kids? Without kids, the human race can't continue, you know.
And you have missed the obvious point that since it's your god who is responsible for child-killing in the OT, it is you who has the worldview that can NOT consistently say that child-killing is wrong.
It's telling that you don't even try to justify that shit anymore, but instead just try to dodge the issue.
Yeah...Myers had you kind of people pegged Dan. You people claim "absolute morality" but in reality, that's bullshit.
The other problem with Dan's point of view (which claims that atheists don't have a basis for morality from our worldview) is that they are all rejecting every and any reason that any atheist can give to be moral.
In other words, they are saying that there is no reason to be moral or to care for others or to give a damn about the future of humanity, really. The only reason for morality as they see it is that they figure that biblegod is watching over their shoulders.
That's the same kind of "morality" that a child has.
Or a sociopath with a leash...
I wouldn't care overmuch, except for this: What kind of morality do you think that these people are teaching their children?
They're telling their kids that there is no real reason to be good to others except that biblegod expects it of them. Atheists, they are told, have no reason to act moral at all.
So, what do you think can happen if any of those kids gives up their faith later on?
Dan doesn't give two shits about logic or reason, despite his bleating to the contrary
ReplyDelete>>Without kids, the human race can't continue, you know.
ReplyDeleteWhy are you assuming that is the goal? Your worldview, in the end is just...end. Purposeless.
Would you grant this, that your worldview only allows for time and chance acting on matter, that its just the material universe, that its just random, there is no guidance, there is no governance, no sovereign, no purpose or plan over the universe?
>> …it is you who has the worldview that can NOT consistently say that child-killing is wrong.
Sure I can. The entire Bible is about love. To love thy neighbor. Liberties. Our consciences reaffirms that. You know with complete certainty this is so, YET, you cannot account as to why. Care to try?
"Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." ~ 1 John 3:15
You justify it with chemical reactions, but its love. Remember this gem?
>> You people claim "absolute morality" but in reality, that's bullshit.
Wait, so morality is merely subjective? Everyones personal morality is acceptable?
>> The other problem with Dan's point of view (which claims that atheists don't have a basis for morality from our worldview) is that they are all rejecting every and any reason that any atheist can give to be moral.
Reason for morality =/= account for morality
>> What kind of morality do you think that these people are teaching their children?
What does it matter if its SUBJECTIVE?
>> They're telling their kids that there is no real reason to be good to others except that biblegod expects it of them.
Is that absolutely wrong?
Dan...all you did was verify what I said earlier. You just admit above that you don't see any value in the continuance of the human race!
ReplyDeleteDan, quoting me:
They're telling their kids that there is no real reason to be good to others except that biblegod expects it of them.
Is that absolutely wrong?
You just admited above that without biblegod, you have no reason to care about other people.
You do some good cherry picking of the bible to pretend that your god is "love" but we all know that a being who orders genocide has no true clue of the concept.
Then of course, there's hell itself. Oh yeah, what a testament to "love" that is!
You keep saying that it's the atheist view that's subjective. Baloney. Your view is worse. If biblegod says to kill kids, then it's ok. If humans do it for whatever reason it's wrong (at least we'd agree on that last part).
Reason for morality =/= account for morality
How so?
By the way, Dan... God who acts inconsistently with his own moral mandates =/= account for morality
I think the mental strain Dan must be under has sent him over the edge
ReplyDelete" Poor kid, does your wife have a penis?"
ReplyDeleteThat's the kind of thing I hear true Christians say everyday.
So Dan has created a false dichotomy between and objective and universal standard, and personal opinion, leaving out the fact that some things are societal agreements. Money is not universal nor is it personal, it is a societal agreement that a coin or piece of paper can be exchanged for goods, despite the money having absolutely no use of its own.
ReplyDeleteLanguage is neither universal, because there are many languages, or personal, because you can only communicate if you can agree on the meaning of words. In fact the development of language is analogous to the development of morality, new words are often not accepted by the older generation, but if they gain enough support in the new generation eventually the new words get official recognition as part of the language.
In the same way new moral ideas are often rejected and suppressed by the older generation but if those ideas gain support in the younger generation those ideas will eventually be accepted as moral. Those same "radicals" who changed the standard of morality will fiercely resist attempts by future generations to change it further.
Hypocrisy at its finest here folks.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, Dan. Indeed.
Thanks for admitting that Deist.
ReplyDeleteDO you admit that you're an Atheist now Wem?
MaxFF,
ReplyDeleteRef, straw man of "societal agreements" of languages.
Lets drive it home.
No matter what "possible" world, or universes, that there could be, the Law of Non-contradiction (LNC), would still apply universally. The implications are fantastic. That even if there were intelligent alien life somewhere in the universe, or any universe, that spoke something that sounds like it came from a Star wars bar, that no matter how advanced, or how evolved their civilization. Their language would follow the laws of logic in a very universal, and absolute, way just like us.
Reynold,
ReplyDelete>>You just admited above that without biblegod, you have no reason to care about other people.
Actually, without God there is no justification or account as to why you should.
Are you now claiming you can get an "ought" from an "is"?
*rest fists on chin.
>>You do some good cherry picking of the bible to pretend that your god is "love" but we all know that a being who orders genocide has no true clue of the concept.
Pretty rich with irony from a man that just did a Taxicab fallacy. We have been over this before, what you call "genocide" was Capital Punishment. How do you know your reasoning is valid?
>>Then of course, there's hell itself. Oh yeah, what a testament to "love" that is!
Perfect love is a constant confronter. You wish there were no speeding laws or no laws what so ever, for anything? That society be based on, in its strictest form, the arbitrary merit system? Are you perfectly insane, or a complete hypocrite?
You're invoking your "moral standard" by telling people its wrong to steal and you go to jail IF you do. Are you not? So what is the difference? Oh that is right, your mantra of "God does not exist because He is bad".
"Society sends you to jail if you steal, society is bad"
You're a dork. Please repent.
BTW, I just did a *facepalm with your "moral mandate" straw man assertion.
ReplyDelete>>God who acts inconsistently with his own moral mandates =/= account for morality
God cannot act inconsistent with his own nature silly. Its wrong to steal because God is not a thief. You know this though. Denial, and being difficult, is your M.O. after all.
Riddle me this Batman: Are miracles against natural laws, or against God's nature?
If they are against natural laws, does that necessarily mean they are against God's nature?
So, in a long winded way, my point is that God's nature IS morality. Its not possible to be inconsistent with His own nature. This is why your reasoning is reduced, once again, to the absurd.
Keep the comedy coming though. My DVR is full with unnecessary entertainment. I get all I need at this blog.
Do you think your behavior here glorifies God, Dan?
ReplyDelete"That even if there were intelligent alien life somewhere in the universe, or any universe, that spoke something that sounds like it came from a Star wars bar, that no matter how advanced, or how evolved their civilization. Their language would follow the laws of logic in a very universal, and absolute, way just like us."
ReplyDeleteSo lets see if I understand this: If something obeys the law of non-contradiction it is universal. My thoughts are now universal. They either are my thoughts or they aren't, so non-contradiction applies. Some might say you've proven the reverse, that logic is universal not language, but I guess we can just humor you and say everything is objective and universal because everything follows the laws of logic.
Of course you still haven't disproved that language is based on societal agreement. Maybe an example will help. Ignoring for a moment all the different languages lets just use one language, English. In some countries there is a word spelled, "colour", but in other places that same word is spelled, "color". The different societies came to different agreements about how the word is to be spelled.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg. The letters used in a language, the vocabulary, the grammar, the spelling and definitions of words, are all based on societal agreement not a universal standard.
Actually that doesn't even cover everything. I've been thinking too much of written language that I forgot about spoken language. The speed at which a language is spoken can very greatly in different countries. Even people who have a good understanding of French language and grammar can't understand a native speaker who speaks faster than they are used to.
ReplyDeletePronunciation of words even in the same language is something that varies greatly from place to place.
Dan quoting me:
ReplyDelete>>You just admited above that without biblegod, you have no reason to care about other people.
Actually, without God there is no justification or account as to why you should.
So you are a sociopath then. So the xian sense of morality is the same as that of a child who only does things because his parents are watching him.
Thanks for the admission. Without biblegod belief to hold you in, you would see no harm in murdering, rape, theft, etc. no matter the harm that it does to other people.
0channeling "Onslo" from "Keeping Up With Appearances")
Nice!(/channeling)
Are you now claiming you can get an "ought" from an "is"?
How so? I'm claiming that if we actually care about ourselves and each other and our race as a whole we have to act in a certain way to make sure that our race continues, so that our children can have something to inherit.
God cannot act inconsistent with his own nature silly.
Are you admitting then that your god is a baby killer? A being who approves of genocide? Why the pretext that you and your god are "pro-life" then?
Are you one of those people like the Calvinists who claim that "god can do whatever he wants"?
What about lying then?
Its wrong to steal because God is not a thief.
And it's wrong to lie because "god is not a liar", right? Except with that case when he told Samuel to lie about why he was going to David's father's farm?
You know this though. Denial, and being difficult, is your M.O. after all.
Give ONE example, please.
>>Do you think your behavior here glorifies God, Dan?
ReplyDeleteNo, more like filthy rags
"and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags" ~Isaiah 64:6
Poor, broken, mentally exhausted, Dan.
ReplyDelete" The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise." ~ Psalm 51:17
ReplyDeleteDo you think your behavior here glorifies God, Dan?
ReplyDeleteNo, more like filthy rags
So, this means you could lie or tell the truth, and nothing you'd say could bring glory to God. Interesting.
>>So, this means you could lie or tell the truth, and nothing you'd say could bring glory to God. Interesting.
ReplyDeleteNope. In fact people will be glorifying God by choosing to go the Hell for all of eternity. All things are for His glory. Even my apparent wickedness.
Nothing "apparent" about it if you're demented enough to actually believe that people "choose" to go to hell when in actuality we don't believe it exists!
ReplyDeleteAnd just how is that "glorifying" biblegod anyway?
To make this nonsense even worse, calvinists believe that it's god who determines ahead of time who will and who will not go to heaven and hell.
Wow.
Imagine a potter who makes mostly crap and some very good stuff and then says that the fact that he makes mostly crap that he has to destroy somehow makes him look better.
people will be glorifying God by choosing to go the Hell for all of eternity. All things are for His glory
ReplyDeleteI'm just gonna quote that and let it sit there for everyone to enjoy.
No need to Wem
ReplyDeleteI dedicated a post to it. bit.ly/whyevil