Why I hate liberals(democrats)

[brightgoo]

I had missed this one earlier, please dilate about Endogamy, Exogamy, Polygyny, Matrilocal Marriage or Concubinage ... and ... 21st century governance?

btw good read Eagle #58

[gazzthompson]

There is no link between atheism and mass murder. There can't be, there is no logical pathway from atheism to murder, there is no religious texts to tell you how and who to hate and kill. Atheism has no cause, leaders, agenda.

Stalin, mao didn't kill because they where atheists, they killed because they where totalitarians. I'll quote 3 people who explain it better.

people of faith often claim that the crimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the inevitable product of unbelief. The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.

-Sam harris

another thing to realize is that these reigns were not driven by Atheism, or a doctrine of Atheism; there is no such doctrine for Atheism, any more than there is a doctrine for not believing in fairies. There is no logical pathway between unbelief and violence “in the name” of unbelief. There is, however, a logical pathway between Theism and violence. Not everyone who is religious follow this pathway, in fact, most do not. Let’s be clear. Most religious people would not hurt a fly if they can help it. However, the logical pathway to violence does exist from religious doctrine nevertheless.

-dawkins

Steven Weinberg points out about Religion; “With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”

-dawkins again

If the only reason people aren't out murdering each other is because of fear of punishment from a sky fairy... then humanity is fucked.

[brightgoo]

Weinberg should leave theology to the theologians. And of course Sam Harris, a self avowed atheist, and that makes money on his dogma, is not going to highlight similarities between the two. Sam Harris tries to derive values from data, which is superfulous. Where is this quote from Moral Landscape?

I can cherrypick qoutes from Dawkins and agree, but then I feel he will contradict himself. There are different types of alcohol as there are different types of atheism, Christianity, Islamic beliefs, etc.

[MadeInRu]

Guys...

You trying to put a link between mass murders and atheism? What were you smoking all?

[eaglethebeagle]

Guys...

You trying to put a link between mass murders and atheism? What were you smoking all?

im smoking facts as in historical facts. its hard to deny history.

[brightgoo]

Just because they dont openly and consciously say they are atheist does not mean they arent. So I consider Mao, Kim, Wormhole, (jk) but you get the point.

[gazzthompson]

There is no link. Atheism has no agenda, no scripture to promote hatred or dogma. Coupled with the common examples (starlin, mao) being totalitarians, this is clearly the cause. Totalitarian has much more in common with religious values, than secular.

They also both wore pants. Clearly the link here.

[MadeInRu]

They were totalitarian regimes. ((Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible. Totalitarian regimes stay in political power through an all-encompassing propaganda campaign, which is disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that is often marked by political repression, personality cultism, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of speech, mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror.))

Atheism is a by product of it, as tyranny is a single hand rule and a single handed control over minds. Religion offers alternative to that control and as such considered to be a threat to that control.

All of them did those things not because they were atheists, they were atheists because they wanted a total control over their way of ruling the nation. Religion btw was used when it was needed, in USSR that is, in propaganda ways and such.

[gazzthompson]

Very well said, much better than my response.

[eaglethebeagle]

great point about the totalitarian governments being atheist. They then shed the blood of millions because that is part of government in those atheist countries. It isn't coincidence that the two happen together.


I am glad you understand now right?

[eaglethebeagle]

Here is obama being tough on terror right???



KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Five top Taliban leaders held by the U.S. in the Guantanamo Bay military prison told a visiting Afghan delegation they agree to a proposed transfer to the tiny Gulf state of Qatar, opening the door for a possible move aimed at bringing the Taliban into peace talks, Afghan officials said Saturday.
The U.S. is considering transferring the five from the prison in Cuba to a presumably less restrictive custody in Qatar as an incentive for the Taliban to enter negotiations — though Washington has not yet outright agreed to the step, and some in Congress oppose it.
Talks with the Taliban are seen as key to bringing some level of calm to Afghanistan, allowing American troops to come home without the country descending into further chaos. But months of efforts to cobble together talks have failed.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai initially opposed sending the prisoners to Qatar instead of home to Afghanistan. But his government sent a delegation to Guantanamo Bay this past week to visit the prisoners, a possible sign of Karzai's consent to the arrangement.
The five prisoners agreed to the transfer as long as they would be reunited with their families in Qatar, said two senior Afghan officials.
A former U.S. official familiar with the negotiations over the prisoners confirmed the Afghan delegation's visit.
All three officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
The delegation could not have visited the prison without U.S. approval, but a spokeswoman for the White House national security council declined to comment.
The prisoners proposed for transfer include some of the detainees brought to Guantanamo during the initial days and weeks of the U.S. invasion that toppled the Taliban government in Afghanistan in 2001. At least one has been accused in the massacre of thousands of Shiite Muslims in Afghanistan, according to U.S. and other assessments, but none are accused of directly killing Americans.
The Obama administration does not want to send the prisoners to Afghanistan, in part for fear they might be released. The men are considered "enemy combatants" who were, at least until recently, considered too dangerous to release.
They would likely be held in Qatar under conditions that are less secure and less restrictive than at Guantanamo.
Afghan officials said previously that they discussed with the U.S. a plan to give Afghanistan a form of legal custody over the men if they are released as a way to satisfy their earlier objection to sending the prisoners to a third country. It's unclear whether that plan came under discussion during the recent visit or if anything was finalized.
Several members of Congress oppose any release, and lawmakers have erected several legal hurdles that military and other officials acknowledge would slow and complicate the process.
Several GOP lawmakers who object to the transfer have pushed the White House to keep the detainees in Guantanamo "until the end of hostilities," a U.S. official with knowledge of the negotiations said earlier this year. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss conversations with the White House.
Of particular concern is Mullah Norullah Nori, described in U.S. military documents as one of the most significant former Taliban officials held at Guantanamo. He was a senior Taliban commander in Mazar-e-Sharif when the Taliban fought U.S. forces in late 2001. He previously was a Taliban governor in two provinces Northern Afghanistan, where he has been accused of ordering the massacre of thousands of Shiite Muslims.
The U.S. is increasingly focused on jump-starting peace negotiations with the Taliban, especially because the country is scheduled to bring most of its combat troops home from Afghanistan by the end of 2014.
The Taliban have agreed to set up a political office in Qatar to facilitate negotiations. But the peace process has been shrouded in rumor and uncertainty, and it's unclear how much urgency the militants feel to strike a deal given that foreign troops are on their way out.
____
Gearan reported from Washington.


http://news.yahoo.com/taliban-prison...GVzdAM-;_ylv=3

[MadeInRu]

Beags, i understand now what? That atheism is part of totalitarian regime? Yeas, just like many other things. Is atheism the reason because of which they commit all those atrocities? No.

Atheism is used for single purpose, to counter the influence of church on people, nothing else.

[gazzthompson]

great point about the totalitarian governments being atheist. They then shed the blood of millions because that is part of government in those atheist countries. It isn't coincidence that the two happen together.

I am glad you understand now right?

They both wore pants, coincidence? I think not, this is clearly the reason (what your argument sounds like) .

[veritas44]

Man this thread has gone from the inane to the dicking refuckuless .

obama on a flag(thumbs down by the way)... to coronal temperatures as an explanation for God (caused mostly by magnetic reconnection) to atheism vs monotheistic belief ( ? ) all the way to atheistic totalitarian regimes being more like a religion by brandishing the carrot and the stick.

For the love of ( add your belief here ), pick a topic and stay on it. even though i must admit there is some amusement to be had by watching a thread slip into entropy.

[brightgoo]

You gave me a good laugh this morning Veritas!

[eaglethebeagle]

this is a great thread. Nothing like tackling all of mans controversies and physics at the same time.

[MadeInRu]

I agree, this thread is superb. We do go off topic from time to time, but discussion is always interesting and never ugly.

[Clodius]

...though i must admit there is some amusement to be had by watching a thread slip into entropy.

ROFL...
Entropy, what an awesome concept for discussions based on politics (and Eagle's grip on reality as a Teabagger). Jesus Ackbar!!!

[eaglethebeagle]

this comment below belongs here and not on the Trayvon Martin post except that it was a response to gazz and his remarks on that other thread.


i have posted several reasons why I have disdain for democrats(liberals). If you remove religion from the two sides of politics liberals still stand for gun grabbing, socialism, less freedoms more government control, it is very simple. This is so simple to understand and I dont understand military men or women that support the democrats either. The democrats are actually anti military. Obama is going to reduce benefits and jobs across the entire military if he gets his way.

To what extent will be only by how much the republican party can resist his goal. Its odd that democrats are all for entitlements for the poor yet they are against entitlements for our military. Why would you not want to support the people who are risking their lives to keep us free and safe? The poor are doing nothing in a figurative definition to support America. The answer is they are a segment that democrats have embraced only for the votes that can be gained from this segment. You cant be anti gun and pro military and so at least democrats have that understood.

There is so much more I can go on and I probably will just not now.

[eaglethebeagle]

just attaching this here as it relates and I posted it on another thread that it related well to.

Be safe everyone....enjoy your family and friends....maybe consider how you can do more good than remain in the same old routine for another year of life.-------

----------
COMMENTARY | President Barack Obama signed an executive order Friday titled "National Defense Resources Preparedness." The news media is unsure of the precise meaning of the information included in the order and average citizens are left to figure out what it means in general. As a longtime supporter of the president, I've been reluctant to jump to conclusions, but the general tide of recent legislation and this order give me reason for concern about the intentions of this administration.
The order lists items such as the power of the executive departments of the U.S. federal government and its agencies to "identify requirements for the full spectrum of emergencies, including essential military and civilian demand." This same section, labeled "General Functions," also enumerates these departments and agencies might ensure availability of domestic resources and industries to secure national defense. Do these and other line items signal that America is on the verge of another war -- and will that war be with another nation or on U.S. citizens?
The first step in the direction of applying military law to private citizens occurred Dec. 31, when the president signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. This legislation sounded the initial alarm to me because although its main purpose is for providing necessary funding of the military, it included provisions that allowed the indefinite detention without charge of private citizens.
The next signal of alarm came on March 8, when the president signed into law H.R. 347, the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. The law restricts protests at political functions among other things. This is offensive since the U.S. was founded upon protest and revolution.
Perhaps each law taken individually wouldn't be a cause for concern, but the totality of these three suggests the federal government is envisioning more control over the civilian population than it has ever enjoyed. The president's order on Friday suggests to some the executive branch might be ready to enact martial law in peacetime.
Smack dab in the middle of the baby boomer generation, L.L. Woodard is a proud resident of "The Red Man" state. With what he hopes is an everyman's view of life's concerns both in his state and throughout the nation, Woodard presents facts and opinions based on common-sense solutions.


this was on yahoo or ABC news site. google it.


To all of you I love you as fellow AC members even the ones I dont agree with. The world is going in a direction that is quite literally leading to our end. If you care about your families and your own life then wake up and think about things in a grander scale than just your own selfish interest.

I am sorry but things just require a new way of thinking.