Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
From left to right: Kliment Vorishilov, Vyachoslav Molotov, Joseph Stalin, Nikolai Yezhov (one photo only):
https://www.history.com/news/josef-stalin-great-purge-photo-retouching
Before Bucks or anyone starts, no I am not comparing Tories to the Bolsheviks. Of course I realis the latter was far worse. It’s just intended as a joke, since this Shapps/Sunak stunt reminds me of this.
1 user thanked author for this post.

Am I? I completely accept that not everything can be pigeon holed.
However, I would argue the opposite. I accept there are generalisations above. Some things are more irrational or rational than others, not everyone would put comfort as the reason for their faith. However, my comments are aimed at those who don’t seem to understand why someone like JI may choose a religious path, even if it seems irrational, and a lot of it does appear to be ridicule because of a failing to understand why someone might still believe.
I have let it known that I am an atheist. I have argued with bpg about his own rigid fundamentalism several times before and I have with JI on things like abortion. I stand by my opposition to what I see as controlling aspects of religion which affect others. However, I don’t think some of the comments above are about that. They seem to be dismissive and ignorant of why some people might believe. Despite disagreements on faith I feel like we can understand why someone believes, based on a human desire to feel connected with others, wanting something more and connection. Faith gives that. Just because it’s not for me, or others, it doesn’t mean some can’t get a lot out of it.
I would say my position is not religious at all. I am sceptical of all ideology. Religions like Christianity and Islam. Political ideologies like communism or fascism. More moderate positions too. It’s these things which cloud people’s minds and cause them to act in manners we’d see as inappropriate, through a belief it’s for the greater good. However, I realise that we need to have some guiding principles in how we want society to be, politically, so having a political ideology you generally subscribe to is hard to avoid. Similar applies for others when it comes to religion. It’s not a necessity for a moral life, you can find purpose without it, but it is one avenue for some to find purpose. So long as they don’t infringe upon others I am fine with it.
My objections to the above is that calling JI’s beliefs fairy stories and loony is antagonistic and ignorant of why people like JI believe. Yes, In theory I agree with such statements, because I don’t believe the Biblical story to be an accurate representation of the world, but it often hides a lack of empathy for or understanding as to why some believe. Maybe this is a little politically correct of me, but I think it would be better for a unity with as many people as possible, so long as they’re decent in spirit (not meant religiously here). If I was to set off against everyone who believed in things I find disagreeable I’d have few friends, colleagues or allies.
I agree that some people are beyond comradeship and hold too many objectionable views or personality traits to be close to in any way, and sometimes any unification of humanity is sometimes hindered by others’ actions (as I have discussed with JI earlier in this very thread). Life is full of paradoxes and we do have limits. However, I think such limits should be minimised.
I am sorry if this is preachy, but one paradox in this is that I accept no-one is perfect, let alone me. I fail to be an ideal match for my principles, as outlined above, just like anyone.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I don’t think the talk of loony views is understanding of the human condition really. Many people want to feel comfort and a purpose in life, and religion fills that for some. I don’t like it when bpg and others make out this is the only possible way for a fulfilling life, but it obviously does for some.
The need for comfort and desire to see loved ones again is very real and an understandable feeling. I don’t think it’s comparable to flat Earth for this reason, and while I may agree that I don’t find Christianity or other religion to be evidence based or necessarily rational, it is part of a common human desire for understanding and feeling of fulfilment. Even if we don’t agree with the beliefs we can understand the desire, surely, with empathy? Inability to comprehend the beliefs in the literal Biblical claims is understandable, as is seeing a move to describe Biblical teachings as metaphorical to be a bit wishy washy. However, surely the underlying motivations to do this aren’t.
It’s not just religion which is irrational. Humans as a whole are often irrational. I don’t think anyone here is without irrational beliefs, and I include myself in that. All ideology is an uneven fit for how humans behave. Communism and small state libertarianism are two examples I can think of which fit this perfectly. Their adherents seem adamant that they can solve the world’s problems, yet their cognitive dissonance prevents them from seeing how harmful this can be. Communism fails to understand that humans have individual needs and that not everything can be explained by the poor being done over by the bourgeoisie; greed can exist at all levels. Small state libertarianism assumes common sense and people’s own knowledge leads to a greater society. Yet it fails to understand that an individual’s decision impacts others (which is why a critique of libertarians often centres around selfishness; their fight for rights is often based on their own individual need, to the lack of care for others), that some people won’t take others into account for important decisions to the detriment of the whole and that some people won’t go with the evidence based position, which can have hugely negative impacts on society.
Given all this, I cannot be too harsh on theists for believing. Just so long as they don’t push their ideology on others and expect debate when they say stuff like God is the source of morality, I am fine.
An interesting video on this to finish off:
1 user thanked author for this post.
I heard DeereyMe led the game stalling antics. :-)
None outside of religion promise an afterlife where you can exist after death with loved ones though.
Hatred of women permeates through every culture among many men. I had sympathy with the idea that men felt left out, even if I am far less sympathetic to the crux of the idea itself (such as that given by the mum), but that thread raises a good point. Misogyny has been existent through history, it’s nothing new, so the idea that these men would have been fine if women’s right’s hadn’t gone ‘too far’ is one I am sceptical of. It sounds and feels more like an excuse.
I had thought that maybe some men being isolated had driven them that way. Maybe it does, but this is a bit of a check that even if some men wouldn’t have been isolated such misogyny would probably still exist.
That penultimate paragraph is agreeable. I wouldn’t be so dismissive in much of the rest. People believe for many reasons, but the comfort it gives is surely one huge factor which is understandable for even the hardened atheist.
I don’t think I could be Christian, because the Bible is very Bronze Age human in mindset, but if others see it as some metaphysical and metaphorical holy book, so be it. I have often thought deism is probably the only way for a god to exist, given the scientific flaws found in every holy book (unless written off as metaphor), but that’s a story for another day. It would be detracting from the point I am making here. You might see it as wishy washy, and I might agree, but ultimately humans have a whole lot of irrational beliefs. It may be that some Christians have abused others for not going with their holy book, but it’s clear that there is a huge discrepancy in Christian thought. Plenty don’t accept the Earth is the centre of the Universe and they’re just as Christian as those who demand literalism. Though, I am sure bpg would disagree (and I’d say treating literalism as the only Christian way, in rebuttal, is playing to bpg’s tune actually).
Maybe it’s these acceptances of JI which has seen bpg turn on him and his doctrine.
These men prey on the vulnerability some young men face today, saying they can cure it through acting like a domineering and aggressive alpha male who cares for no-one else. It gives some men the impression that they are confident and strong if they act like this, and the promised allure of being attractive to women helps those who see themselves as losers.
This is not a healthy vision, given the negative nature of those with that mindset. It has a horrible viewpoint of women and encourages a lack of empathy. However, I think it has an allure because of its promises to make men feel happy and strong, even if that means being cruel, arrogant and bullying towards others.
I have to say this thread challenged my narrative here:
My comments weren’t an argument against the existence of God.
I wouldn’t say my life finds a way to be faith based. I am basing it on previous mass extinctions where the most adaptable survive. I don’t see why that would be different this time, but of course it might be.
The problem with the ‘cyclical’ comment is that we have observed natural cycles and natural evidence through Earth’s history. None line up with today’s climate variations. The Milankovich cycles, which are the likely dominant climate forcing variable of the Pleistocene suggests we should be in a gradual cooling trend, so it’s not that. Similarly, the Sun’s activity is stable, volcanism is stable etc. Despite conspiracy theorists’ claims, all the research suggests man’s fingerprint.
The current incarnation of the SDP are a clown show who won’t get a single MP.
I mean irritation towards JI.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Out of the frying pan and into the fire.
My interpretation is that JI accepts the scientific findings, like the age of the Earth, but sees it as guidance from God.
I don’t know why he has had some irritation over this. I disagree with it, but I have no problem with faith, so long as they don’t force it on others. I am fine with Christians stating they don’t agree with abortion or gay marriage or whatever, so long as it doesn’t influence the state and how others live their lives. That’s when I would push back.
3 users thanked author for this post.
Aye, and the planet has seen several mass extinctions (five major – i.e. greater than 50% species extinct), all due to climate change, in that time. While life finds a way, not all does, and it’s left for the survivors to fill the niche left by the mass extinction. The planet finds an equilibrium after a while, and will do with current life on the planet after current climate change, but many species may not and that might include ourselves or a large number of ourselves. At the very least conditions may life to become more strained with things like crop failure, and an associated increase in migration, as we are witnessing now.
Haweswater?
Where has JI revealed himself to be Catholic? I always assumed he is Protestant.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Don’t forget it was all part of Project Fear, which has all been proven to be false, according to some Brexiters. Either that or Brexit was never really about that, and they accepted the economic shortcomings for sovereignty. Which would be a fine argument if the Brexit campaign didn’t run on how everything like this would be so much better off out of the EU.
I don’t think Pat or anyone on this forum has claimed that catering problems are why the club has imploded.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Greylag and NI are correct with Florida. Easier than I thought. I assumed some might have been swayed by the flat mid-Western states like Nebraska, Iowa or Kansas.
In one! California, correct.
Slightly different question. Which state has the lowest high point (i.e. the state which has its highest point at the lowest elevation when compared with other State’s high points)?
Which US state has the lowest point in the USA?
I wonder what UTI99 would say to defend him against the ‘unjust criticism’ from fans on this. Our abuse probably drove him to gamble so much, in his eyes.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Also, I am struggling to see how Biden’s Green New deal can be blamed for rising prices when it didn’t pass through Congress until August. Prices were already rising before then, so I would say other factors predominate. A lot of it global, since energy prices are driven by the highest price of a source. Renewables are quite cheap, but gas isn’t, ensuring the cost stays high, while Europe demands more from the USA now Russia is out of access.
All this talking of values makes me think of starting a thread on personal values, and positions, so people can clearly show what they represent. Then I think this sounds all a bit self-indulgent. I probably spend too much time thinking about how the world should be based on my own moral values.
I wasn’t making any barbed comments. Though, I do think Putin’s massive mishap with Ukraine displayed his own idiocy, and can be labelled as such due to the epic disaster it put on his own country and the world. A huge backfire which hasn’t gone to plan.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Anyone who puts Biden in the same planet as Putin needs examining. One’s a democratically elected leader who respects the system, the other is an ethnonationalist, essentially fascist autocrat responsible for mass murder of civilians.
-
AuthorPosts