Insanity Test...

340 replies [Last post]
coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

Some quotes to get you started on your journey... good luck!
From Wikipedia: "In Jewish belief, God is defined as the Creator of the universe: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1); similarly, "I am God, I make all things" (Isaiah 44:24). God, as Creator, is by definition separate from the physical universe and thus exists outside of space and time."
From a book review about Eastern Orthodox Christianity on Amazon.com: " Since God exists outside of time, His grace is poured out at once to us past, present, and future. Declaring salvation an "event" in time is thus a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of grace."
From Wikipedia: "Catholic Christianity's emphasis on free will and grace is often contrasted with predestination in Protestant Christianity, especially after the Counter-Reformation, but in understanding differing conceptions of free will it is just as important to understand the differing conceptions of the nature of God, focusing on the idea that God can be all-powerful and all-knowing even while people continue to exercise free will, because God does not exist in time (see the link to Catholic Encyclopedia below for more)."
From Wikipedia, the " New Church " gives the general idea... " if God is love itself, then He must love things outside of Himself; and if people do not have the freedom to choose evil, they are simply extensions of God, and He cannot love them as something outside of Himself. In addition, Swedenborg argues that if a person does not have free will to choose goodness and faith, then all of the commandments in the Bible to love God and the neighbor are worthless, since no one can choose to do them - and it is impossible that a God who is love itself and wisdom itself would give impossible commandments."
I'm not really trying to prove much, except that many liberals believe in good, but few liberals believe that evil is real, and that tough choices have to be made - the American left mainly sugar coats these choices in terms of dealing with the rise of fundamentalist Islam, as it relates to our economic security, freedom to exist - it is because God - a true understanding of God - has been cut out of the debate. This is a relatively recent phoenomenon, it comes from ignorance, but the left is currently exploiting this ignorance at the expense of the nation.
 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Is time real?

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

Whomitmayconcer wrote:
Just for the fun of it, I'll ask you again:
Is time real?
You say God is before time (as if that's not a contradiction of terms itself). then you must understand what is time. So tell us, coolshoos, is time real?

So if God exists outside time, I guess time is interesting, but I find the concept of God existing outside time to be more interesting.
Don't make it more complicated than it needs to be.
God just wants us to love God.
We get to choose love, or evil.
If you recognize that both love and evil are real, and you want to love God, you have a responsibility.
You have to decide what is love, and what is evil.
Since the American Left appears to be unwilling to draw a line, the burden is carried by the few.
This appears to be human nature. I'm just making an observation about where we stand with regard to handling the security problem of radical Islam.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

This is pretty basic stuff.
Suggestion: " Liberals " might entertain the notion that some conservatives have already thought about some of the stuff they are spewing and have decided to draw a line against the " choices " that fundamentalist Islamists want to impose upon us.
Re read your posts to me, how you assumed things about me.
Show me how I assumed things about you, or called you names, or insulted your intelligence.
This is a process, it requires trust, there is a definite conclusion, it is resolvable.

Dust Bunny's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-05-07

"...al-Qaida now views "all the world as a battlefield open in front of us."The Egyptian-born physician said that the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah and Palestinian militants would not be ended with "cease-fires or agreements.""It is a jihad (holy war) for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahri said. "We will attack everywhere."
http://haloscan.com/tb/drsanity/1447623682491303334
If we continue on the path of appeasement we will be defeated by the enemy's unrepentant ruthlessness and their endless love of death. Thomas Sowell once remarked that, "If the battle for civilization comes down to the wimps versus the barbarians, the barbarians are going to win", and he is most certainly correct

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

"Don't make it more complicated than it needs to be."
It's God! They've been working on this for 50,000+ years. Sweetheart, it's complicated!
I'm not asking you about how God relates to time. I'm asking you if time is real. That's all.
 
 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

How about this...
Can you define these three concepts? "simple" words, use them everyday.... can you, in your own words, define them?
"Is"
"Time"
and "Real"
My sense is that the answer is no. You cannot define the meaning of any of those three words.
And you want to tell me about God! Puleese!

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

You keep trying to define the debate to go off topic.
Your comment typifies current Liberal political behaviour, which is an unwillingness to bear down on the problem - in this case, it might be for you to carefully consider my points, develop a conclusion, and analyze that conclusion.
You're bright, but you are avoiding the issue.
 

FreeFromJones's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-29

"It depends on what your definition of is is."

farotech's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-01-05

Alright Whomit,
We can't define anything, and everything we say is based on assumptions. Nothing and everything is true. Let's all kill ourselves like Silvia Plath.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

 
Is is.
If people lived more in the moment, things would be a lot less complicated.
If a lot of Americans took a week off, cut themselves off from the media, really thought about this whole problem ... thought for themselves ... who knows, we might survive as a nation.
Since language is imbued with emotion and conditioning and memory, we'll never get over the Clinton connotations of your remark.
What goes around comes around - Whomit's Liberal unwillness to take the issue head on is just the current vogue, who knows, in a couple of elections, maybe we'll come back politically with some resolve.
Or another terrorist incident in the U. S., God forbid. Like a billy club to the head. Nothing like fear to help define words like is.
 
 

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

farotech wrote:
Alright Whomit,
We can't define anything, and everything we say is based on assumptions. Nothing and everything is true. Let's all kill ourselves like Silvia Plath.

We have a lot of people in the media and in Congress working on that for us. All very poetic, though.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

Anyway, Whomit, for right now,  I'm just asking you to take some time off and consider the possibility that this debate, which you choose not to allow to run to a conclusion, is an example that some Liberals act like baby Gods, in that they choose to refuse to acknowledge the existence of evil, in the presence of God.
Some ninety percent of Americans "believe" in God, a much smaller percentage believes that good and bad are real, that we are continuously choosing, each moment.
The fundamentalist Islamist believe this, so do Jews and Christians, and Hindus and so on, but not the modern American Liberal.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

You first, Faro.
Coolshoos,
Darling, You are the one who is insisting that "evil' is "real". I want to know if you have the capacity to know what the eff you're talking about.
Apparently, you don't. How can you say that "Evil is real" when you can't define "real"? I can define real, but I'm not sure that my definition of real is the same as yours. I'm simply asking you to define your terms. If I were the one to bring the issue to the table, then it would be up to me to define my terms, but I'm not, you are, so it is your job to lay the ground. Define the terms.
You have defined God by referring to "Him" in anthropomorphic terms. I don't need you to define any further, I know what you mean.
You've alluded to evil and you think you have given a clear definition of what it isn't. We'll deal with that later.
You've insisted on the word Real and you pivot your political distinctions based on the belief in evil's realness. But you refuse to define real.
I use Time as a qualifier in that it shares many of the properties of religious blather without the human, emotional element. But since you are not able to take that first step and intellectualize a single concept, how can you expect to be taken seriously on something as grand and ethereal as God ?
You're a low rank novice in the realm of religious thought Coolshoos, i assumed this at the beginning and then you have gone on to prove me right with every post. From not knowing the the term is Free Will (you thought it had to do with pro choice) to not knowing the 3 O's to not knowing the difference yourself between "before time" and "outside time" it is obvious that you are new to this exciting journey. I'm happy for you, but I'm sad too because I can see from your direction that you will go no further than the pew does (and its in church all the time!).
In another time in another place I'd be glad to take you for a stroll along the path, but this is neither the right time nor place. 
 

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

I'm going to ignore your personal attacks. Where do they come from?
Wikipedia:
" In Judaism and Christianity, evil is the result of dissociating from God's will.
As Plato observed, there are relatively few ways to do good, but there are countless ways to do evil...
It is not uncommon to find people in power who are indifferent to good or evil, taking actions based solely on practicality...
Evil is sometimes defined as the opposite of good, or anything that opposes the force of life... "
Anyway, you are right, I'm a lightweight when it comes to ontological debate.
You seem angry.
 
 
 

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

In another time in another place I'd be glad to take you for a stroll along the path, but this is neither the right time nor place. 
This feels like a patronizing, liberal dismissal. I think you are making my broader point about liberal behaviour in America today.
And you still managed to avoid engaging in the broader argument, which would be the implications of turning away from the reality of evil with regards to the behaviour of fundamental Islam.
 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Personal attacks? It's not a personal attack to point out that you don't know what you're talking about.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

If you don't understand evil, how am I supposed to engage you in "broader argument".
This is the trouble with people who replace faith with thought, they want to be able to discuss "the broader" while ignoring the facts that create the broader.
It's like the notion that one might miss the forest for the trees. In this case you refuse to recognize that the forest is made of trees. The only way to recognize a given forest as a pine forest is to know what pine trees are.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

"You seem angry." CS
"...I'd be glad to take you for a stroll along the path...," WC
" ...I'm happy for you..."
".... I'm sad too ..."
Perhaps you don't know what "angry" means either.
 

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

  You're a low rank novice in the realm of religious thought Coolshoos, i assumed this at the beginning ... I'm happy for you, but I'm sad too because I can see from your direction that you will go no further than the pew does (and its in church all the time!).
Talk about schadenfreude.
Now we are really getting somewhere.
You want to define time, but think the stuff in bold is not meant to be insulting?
Admit it, you are avoiding the issue. I didn't expect you to come 'round...
Not a reasonable word of logical refutation, or creative synthesis, or validation or reasonable negation ... are you feeling exposed and do you represent your liberal viewpoint eloquently?

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

This is the trouble with people who replace faith with thought, they want to be able to discuss "the broader" while ignoring the facts that create the broader.
Please clarify your attack, do you mean I am replacing thought with faith, it's not what you said. These are terms we can discuss.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

On second thought, forget it. I learned a lot here about one liberal mind. I'm awe struck. Good luck to you in your spiritual quest and political quest, whomit.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Good luck to you coolshoos, in your quest to bring concepts you have grasp of into some focus and structure.
Apparently, Shadenfreude is another of the many many many words you don't know what means.
Thank you for the copycheck, you are right, I would have been more correct if I had said 'Faith for thought" or "thought with Faith".
You can go try to convert someone else now, I suggest you start with someone young, bring chocolate bars, you're likely to need them! 
 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

"Admit it, you are avoiding the issue...."
No, if you ever learn how to define the issue, I'll be glad to join you on the next step.
You remind me of the joke...
Stosh is in church, he's praying "God please God, let me win the lottery! I'm good God, you know that! God let me prove to you thatI'm good, let me show you how good I'll be with that money!
"I'll give 10, no 20% to the church in thithing, I'll give money to the orphans, I'll send my children to Catholic School, I'll even be good to my wife, but please God, let me win the lottery, just this once!
'God, you know I ask the same thing every week. Every week god I'm here in church, God, praying and praying for just this one thing. Please God this one ime, Do not foresake me.
I ask this through Jesus Christ your son our lord, amen."
And a voice comes down.."Stosh! Meet me halfway; buy a ticket!"

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

Allright, then, kick my a** out the door with some more patronizing remarks. I'm staggered at the assumptions you made about me and my intent. I'm sure if we were sitting around a summer campfire with a drink, there would be a lot more respect. 
Shadenfreude was a joke, you were happy for me and insulted me in the same sentence. :). You're a pretty serious fellow.
I like you. You don't have to try to destroy people who don't agree with you. Maybe that is not your intent, but you come across that way and lower your own respectability.
 

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

( My previous post was put up before I saw your joke - I see that you feel bad.)

Oldproducer's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-05-14

coolshoos wrote:I'm not really trying to prove much, except that many liberals believe in good, but few liberals believe that evil is real, and that tough choices have to be made - the American left mainly sugar coats these choices in terms of dealing with the rise of fundamentalist Islam, as it relates to our economic security, freedom to exist - it is because God - a true understanding of God - has been cut out of the debate. This is a relatively recent phoenomenon, it comes from ignorance, but the left is currently exploiting this ignorance at the expense of the nation.

Of course liberals believe in evil. Sure, liberals don't "believe in George W," but they believe that he exists. Not just W, but all of the "Higher than Thou" "Right." Does this pre-judgemental group/killing group/sodomitic activity group not reek of evil? It sure doesn't mind the basic commandment of God or the new Book.

Get over it. You are not God, you are not like God (like the Mormans claim to be), you are only a piddling human who has a choice in the decisions that you make concerning your beliefs, how you treat others, your interpretations of God/heaven/"right"/etc. What makes you different than the liberals is that you give the impression that you can never be wrong. Sorry, you are human. A basically evil being who only is good or does good because of the fear of God. Get over it and welcome to the human race.

Goodness, no wonder Hillary/Obama/?? is going to be elected. It will be "your" people voting him/her in! They are tired of it, too.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

I don't see where you understand my point. What does Bush have to do with it?
 

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

What makes you different than the liberals is that you give the impression that you can never be wrong. Sorry, you are human.
Of course I am a piddling human. I'm sorry if you have the impression that I think I can do no wrong. If I'm not claiming to be God, which I am not, why would you have that impression?

Oldproducer's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-05-14

coolshoos wrote: I don't see where you understand my point. What does Bush have to do with it?
 

Bush = EVIL

(That ought to get them going. Okay, all of you homosexual conservatives, respond to this post!)

Oldproducer's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-05-14

coolshoos wrote: What makes you different than the liberals is that you give the impression that you can never be wrong. Sorry, you are human.
Of course I am a piddling human. I'm sorry if you have the impression that I think I can do no wrong. If I'm not claiming to be God, which I am not, why would you have that impression?

It appears that you are questioning other's beliefs, implying that beliefs that are not yours are mistaken/wrong, and basically, I perceive a "holier-than-thou" attitude from you. I apologize if I am mistaken, but I can only express what I see in your posts.

Oldproducer's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-05-14

Correction - not what I see in your posts, but what I perceive in your posts.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

Not at all. I thought we were way beyond that. Whomit proclaims that I am a neophyte at ontological discussion, which is what this is, but he does not know my qualifications or experience or even my political affiliation. Like I said, his assumptions about me blew me away.
I think the holier than thou perception might be left over from a bad experience at Sunday school, or a bad experience with conservatives?

Oldproducer's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-05-14

coolshoos wrote: I think the holier than thou perception might be left over from a bad experience at Sunday school, or a bad experience with conservatives?

And what was your bad Sunday school experience and/or bad experience with conservatives that causes you to give the impression of being "holier-than-thou"? Feel free to open up, since there are only a few on this board who know who we really are.

Have a good weekend.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

Like I said, I don't think I'm more holy than anyone here.
I think you might be projecting, in case that was not clear.
If you can't prove that I think I better than you, why make the assumption?
If you just want to be pissed off and snitty, just be pissed off and snitty.

coolshoos's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-19

Happy trails, everyone.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

The red words are my contemporaneous thoughts from when I first read the thread.
coolshoos wrote:  ... We can hold "all Muslims" accountable without destroying our own humanity, that is the imperative, and in a loving manner, like the attempt in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq, (HUH? Murder in a loving manner, what is this person nuts?) but for most liberals that is incompatible with their own concept of individual liberty. (Liberals, where does she get off talking about Liberals? She doesn’t know about Liberals) <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
coolshoos wrote: That is why we have to take leadership and use force (Iraq is our attempt) in a loving manner. (Uh, that’s pretty crazy, that there) This is the language of (Christian Judaic) love that will be understood, not necessarily liked, but understood.(WWJD? Bomb their asses?) It is a religious problem, backed up with loving military solution, and many liberals don't understand it because it requires faith and conviction. (I wonder if a Liberal would be insulted by that?) All of us may be consumed by our own hate, or lack of faith, this is a constant danger - but liberals (yeah, that’s pretty insulting all right.) being cynical about this having anything to do with God is really ironic, almost to the point of being comical.
coolshoos wrote: Whomit: (Ah gee, she’s talking to me now, do I haveta?)
You appear to conclude that trying to influence "conservatives" is hopeless. (No, I know lots of smart Conservatives that ...who am I kidding, no I don’t, all the conservatives I know are boneheads, just like these guys.)  
… please allow yourself the intellectual freedom to make a leap and consider my next point. (Uh yi yi, when they start off with this crap, you know where it’s going.)
Many believe in God (something like 90% of Americans) (straight from the buereau of made up statistics, it’s around 70%, and even at that it’s a matter of speculation.). Many less believe in the existence of good and evil - interesting - a much, much lower percentage. (Much much lower many is an accurate estimation) The pervert who repeatedly sexually abuses little girls and murders, the dead dictator of Iraq - many believe these humans have not been corrupted to become evil itself (Evil itself, I like the concept of “itself” I guess I’ll give this person the benefit of the doubt and assume she knows what “itself” means), rather, their behaviour is corrupted, or they are sociopathic - but not evil. (Uhhh, what the hell did she say? People don’t believe that sociopaths are evil? But the much much fewer many  don’t believe in evil.)
The absolutism of the concept of evil is not a very " intellectual "( what’s with the “” around intellectual, is there something wrong with being intellectual?) treatment of certain observable human behaviours. In the West, believing that evil exists as an absolute is suspect - certainly not a word that could be mentioned at the Democratic National Convention.(Translation, everybody in the west, especially Democrats,are wrong and my political party and I are right about evil, and the loving bombs we tuck it in at night with. I wonder if that is insulting to western thinkers and Democrats in particular?)
It appears to me that many liberals - not all, by any measure, believe that freedom comes from nature. (Yeah, damn those Founding Fathers! Is it too soon to label this woman a nutjob?)
Many who believe in God believe that freedom - freedom to choose between good and evil - is our most basic gift from God. (The 90%. “Gift from God” huh? Well there’s no denying it, this is a religious screwball!)
Not to say that some humans are born as sociopaths - perhaps by nature, they can't " choose ", and become good or evil, and deserve compassion (as do those who choose evil). (With a big o dose of New Age nutjobitis too!)
The intellectual distinction I would make here, is not that the Christian Judeo model is good and radical Islam is evil, rather, those who would repress free choice - between good and evil - these folks are evil. (Free choice? What the hell is “free choice” must be something that stuck in her head from her trip to the grocery store or something.)
Guess what, there are intelligent, caring, loving people who have already thought through your distinctions and chosen to process the entire issue of how we handle radical Islam at a higher level (Oh boy, you mean I don’t have to do anymore of that pesky “thinking for myself” anymore? Joy to the world!) - meaning the use of loving force in Iraq to handle what is basically a human behavioural issue. (And they’re loving people too, as long as you don’t mind defining love as blowing some little kid’s brains outs. The ends must justify the means, why not love annihilate an entire village to cure a behavioral issue? Like the way she used a u though, very brit! This person doesn’t seem to be able to make up her mind whether she thinks evil exists as an “itself” or not. I think she’s a little loupie!)
But if you break it down, we have liberal leadership in this country ( What? We do? George Bush is a Liberal? ) that is in denial of the basics - 90% of folks believe in God (SO?) ( is that only a sweet God (Chocolate Jesus?), or does it include the angry God of our collective Old Testament (Apparently this person thinks that everybody thinks that there is only one God. I was right, she’s a religious screwball who doesn’t even grasp that a large number of people view the concept of God completely differently from the dude with the beard. Uh yi yi, what have I gotten myself into?), many are in denial of Satan (smirk, smirk, let's go get a latte and talk about something important), and most of all, many believe freedom comes from nature, that it is natural, and there is no moral imperative to dig deep into our spiritual natures to find sensible responsible duty in response to the " God-inspired " behaviour of those radical Muslims who would force their interpretation of our God given gift of free choice. (There’s that free choice again. I can only assume that the “denial of Satan’s lactose intolerance” line means that this person figures that Satan is the god of evil. Nice to see the Pagan religions being represented! I won’t even bother wondering if this person knows where this mythology comes from. I love it that these people will laugh at the old religions. Like theirs is somehow different.)
I don't expect you to understand this, because it is faith and experience based (Oh, so someone who doesn’t know f**kall about me is sure that I don’t know about faith and experience. I wonde if I should be insulted by that?) We should have compassion with each other, and meditate (Oh a little TM on the New Age old timey religion. This one is a fruit cake, heavy on the nuts!) on the possibility that each of us or both of us need to have a little bigger perception of the Truth( oooh the capital T truth, the truth itself, God’s spoken Truth! Somebody who hasn’t a firm grasp on reality wants to lecture me on the Truth.), certainly in my humanity I offer this as only a starting point.
coolshoos wrote:
1. God (uncreated, before time and eternal). (Ooh Before time, how cute. I remember that one from first grade catechism. I’ll bet this one doesn’t even know “when” “before time” “is”. I love talking about time. I love talking about religion. I love talking about religion with people who know more about it than I do, I love getting lost in spirituality. Too bad this person doesn’t qualify.)
2. People who " fear " God and evil, who respect free choice for all. Affirm good and evil.  (Conservative.) (Fear, fear is good “yea though I walk … I fear no evil” Free choice and a chicken in every pot!)
3. People who fear God and evil, who interpret choices for others. (Radical Muslim.)(Where does she come up with this stuff?)
3. People who fear God, who respect free choice. (Liberal.)(Why do I get the feeling she doesn’t mean this? Oh yeah, that’s right because of the “Liberal Leadership” that was denying the 90% of the country blah blah blah. This one’s got real consistency issues not to mention the consistency problem!)
Liberals see themselves as reasonable moderators between conservatives and radicals. They do not recognize evil,(I see, so Liberals are dangerous idiots, I wonder if Liberals might find that offensive? Well if they’re offended by the truth, it just goes to show how much evil has crept into their eternal souls!) rather, through positive affirmations(So a positive is a negative thing, I love when they play George orwell on me!)(mainly just thinking) they create their own reality. From the perspective of both conservatives and radicals, they have become " baby Gods ", since liberals negative half of the basic tenet of free choice(Free WILL you moron it’s Free WILL! It’s a basic tenet could you please know the name of the basic tenet before you try to lecture me about it??) (they don't believe evil really exists). (well, if much much lower many people think so, maybe you ought to consider that maybe they know something you don’t.)
There is no logical end to this debate - their is only faith and behavioural affirmation, and human thought. (Thank God that one’s over)
Whomitmayconcer wrote: Coolshoos,
Let me get this straight, you want to talk religion with me? (I know the answer is yes, but please say no! Please say no!)
Have I given you some sort of signal that I need saving? (Please say no please say no!)
Have you given me some sort of signal that your views on religion are somehow redemptive? (Redemptive, that’s a good word, that’ll confuse her, she won’t be able to resist it!)
Religion is a very deep place for me. Religion is personal and I don't trust you enough to discuss it with you. (True THAT! When go spirit, I go fricken all the way, and you are not a person that could keep up! Not to mention, I’m not 100% sure you’re not a guy!)
Suffice it to say that you seem to wear your religion like a badge of righteousness, and that by itself is enough to make me want to puke on your shoes! (“Puke on your shoes”, good one whom! ‘Conseravtive are this and Liberals are that and God is a Conservative.’  Politcs is a bad discussion, religion is a bad discussion, religiopolitics is only for professionals. Religiopolitics with a wizzbing is insanity.
coolshoos wrote:
Honestly, I expected a more intellectual response. (I didn’t get the impression that anything was a better policy than honesty. I thought I was letting you down easy.)
Instead, you attack me, and infer that I attacked you or am trying to school you. (”We got a bleeder here!” Attack? This person lays out insult after insult which I leave alone, I make a gentle observation and she says I attacked her? Abort Abort! End discussion! You sit there and lecture me about God how Liberals are wrong and conservative are right with the lord and I’m not supposed to think you’re trying to preach/teach?)
This is disappointing, but like I said, I believe that the conservative and fundamental views do run outside of logic. (That makes no effin sense! That’s nonsense that’s not just “Outside of logic”.)
With regards to debate, take an honest look at your response to my comments. Your response is anti intellectual. I'm sorry for you. (WOOOHOOO! It worked! She’s dropping it!)
coolshoos wrote:
Liberals are Godless. (Thus spake Bobby Hull)
When you take this comment in the Ann Coulter sense, it is a very mean comment - and also strictly true. (Awsh*t, and she was going to drop it too! I wonder if Liberals might find this comment by Coolshoos insulting. I won’t even bother to wondeer what Coolshoos knows about Liberalism and the Church, I’m sure she read Utopia NOT!)
- In the sense, as just proved by Whomit, when you take God out of the debate, the liberal point of view is Godless. (I didn’t put God into the debate, because I didn’t want to get into a debate with someone who has no idea what she’s talking about!)
Which is kind of interesting, considering the definition of Jiihad, and such. (Yeah, I’ll grant you that, real interesting! Yup, reeeeaaal innerestin’!)
But the real issue here has about as much to do with logic as does the persecution of registered reps by other interests in this industry. (I was just thinking the same thing!)
coolshoos wrote:
(Ranting.)
[ Whomit, the self proclaimed purveyor of the wide ranging, all embracing and compassionate and reasonable liberal viewpoint (Did I do that? I don’t think so. I spend half my time trying to point out that my opinions are my own and not those of any other party. If it so happens that my opinions are in concert with someone else’s all the better for them. That whole routine about the Catholic priests ought to have put the lie to this line of baloney.) , refuses to discuss " religion " (actually, it's the existence of good and evil, and whether that topic has any bearing on the fundamentalist Muslim problem as it threatens our economic well being.] (No, it’s actually religion I refuse to discuss, and it’s that I refuse to discuss it with the likes of you in particular. This nutzo bitch is trying to call me out!)
Who gets to define the playing field, then? (What? Which playing field, the playing field that I play on? I get to choose which playing field I play on, it’s ah its called Free choice!) By taking certain issues off the table, (Wait? Is it a field or is it a table. Are we playing on the table? Is it ping pong? Or pool? In either case, stop bustin my balls, I don’t want to have this discussion with you, because you don’t know what you’re talking about!) we have three distinct playing fields - liberal, conservative, and fundamentalist. (So now the Conservative is the moderate eh?Whatever sweetheart, you’re ranting.)
Who will come play over here, who gets dragged over to that field.
Hence, the comment, Liberals are Godless. 9The comment is only meant to inflame the Liberals and get them to “Play”, I see. I wonder if Liberals might find that insulting? Do they find it insulting tht they were insulted, or do they find it insulting that they were insulted just to get them to jumd, or is it that they find it insulting that this moron thinks that Liberals are too stupid to know what she’s doing? It’s pretty insulting, but I’m not gonna bother trying to explain why. I’ll just let it slide.)
A phrase that recognizes the apparently inevitable conclusion: through a single phrase, the conservative position is to institutionalize the position of liberals and move on.
Still, the liberals should have a gnawing thought in the back of their minds at night, what is evil is real... could it be possible? (Is she actually admitting that she doesn’t know Liberals after all? I wonder if a liberal might find this statement insulting?)
I'd like to see Hillary, or Obama, even have the guts to utter the word evil in public.
Godless. (You mean Gutless, don’tcha? I wonder if I was wrong about this person? Maybe I should debate her after all, she seems reasonable!)
coolshoos wrote:  (oh look, she’s saying nasty things to Oldproducer now)
Another example of not listening and responding to what I said.
If you respond to the basic question of whether evil is real, and whether it has any bearing on the viewpoint of liberals, you are debating.
Saying I said that liberals are Godless, which is not my precise point, is anti-intellectual - you have twisted and ducked.
If you're not following the debate, or if you are just avoiding the question, it is obvious.
By the way, do you believe evil is real, (Here we go with the “real’ thing again, I mean, what does she think that there is a force, the Dark Side that just waits for a rose’s stem not to be looking and then it jumps thorns all over it? ) or is it just an intellectual construct ( You gotta love that when they say “Just’ and intellectual construct, cause it goes to show the value those people put on intellect. I wonder if intellectuals find that insulting, I know they say “consider the sourse” I don’t ask if it is an insult that hurts, I just wonder if they find it to be an insult? YES)? Do you understand the importance of this question with regard to current events? 
coolshoos wrote:
Fundamentalist Muslims believe that evil is real - this is the first premise upon which their behaviour is based.
American conservatives believe that evil is real - this is the first premise upon which their behaviour is based.
American liberals - perhaps the majority - believe that evil is an intellectual construct. They believe freedom comes from nature, because they do not recognize that free choice, the choice between good, which is real, and evil, which is real - that free choice comes from God.( which is why the 90% number is really probably not as important as it might seem.)
Because we are made in the image of God,(I’m supposed to accept this as axiomatic, I know, “… Then if we’re dumb then God is dumb, and maybe een a little bit ugly on the side!” this is embarrassing, this woman is in melt down) all of us have the potential to become Saints. Think about it, you could quit your worldly concerns and retreat to the spiritual life and become more like God. You can't do it by thinking, (all those monk been wasting their effin time!) you have to recognize the definition (Definitions, gotta have definitions!) of God.
The point is, evil is real, and must be dealt with as such. (By laying some loving bomb on they asses!)
I challenge anyone on this forum who is a "liberal", and who believes evil is real, to go forward in debate with regards to how to handle the radical Islam question. (We’ll get right on that there coolshoos!)
I seriously doubt this will happen. But since the recognition of good and evil is important to recognizing God, the refusal to acknowledge this point or to take it off the table as being " religious discussion" makes the discussion Godless, which apparently is a characteristic of many liberals here. End of discussion? (God I hope so!)
coolshoos wrote: (Apparently not!)
Oldproducer wrote:Liberals are Godless. And conservatives are God? Many of those who appear to be conservatives on this board are definately not Christian - placing judgement, desiring to kill, acting as gods themselves. One who believes they can do no wrong is not a Christian. George W is the first person who comes to mind here. Maybe he is "God" with all of you sheep accepting his every word, however illiteriate it might be, as gospel. I hope you sleep well tonight. I know I will, right after I pray for you and W.
If you re read everything I said above, consider making an apology. This type of muddling is intellectual terrorism. Are you drinking or just being emotional?
Whomitmayconcer wrote:
Coolshoos,
I get to choose whom I speak with about what. I am solely responsible for what I say and I hold personal responsibility in very high regard. (I’ll say “Personal responsibility” that’ll drive the rightie’s whitey tighties right up their butt cracks! Heheheheh.)
You want to know if I believe that evil is a real thing? You mean a real thing like air? (Air’s real, can’t see it, but it’s real!)You mean a real thing like rocks?(Rocks are real, you can see em they can be used for good and bad!) You mean a real thing like gravity (Gravity, there’s a good one! Is evil a force, like gravity is? Always working on stuuf, trying to make things bunk into each other, you can’t stop gravity, and it’s the one force that we know of that we really don’t know anything about!). Or do you mean a real thing like time. (Ha ha ha heyyyy. I love “time” Time ties science and religion together. Science has to deal with the same “before” question as the God folks. You want to pretend you understand science, you got to understand time , which you do not! Oh boy do I love discussing time! I love chopping up Scientismists and deists with time. I’ll ask her about that one.)
Do you mean a real thing like God (If God can do anything, can he make a sentence so loaded that even He can answr it without getting himself in trouble?)? Do you mean as in "the power of Satan?" (I know this is the one she’s really taking about.0
What do you mean by "real"?
If you are going to ask me questions about my beliefs you'd better be sure that you  know what you're asking. You'd better know that the path for here to your enlightenment is long, hard and f**king wierd!
I have spent a big part of my life contemplating these issues and they can't be tied up in neat little bundles. Considering the crowd that gathers at this watering hole, this is not a discussion that would benefit either of us. (That ought to scare her off. She don’t know crap about any of it and if she’s smart she’ll see that she’s dealing with a genuine nutcase when it comes to this stuff.)
You mention "Free Will' as if its a throwaway line, as if its the easy answer to all our problems, understand "Free Will" and understand everything. That tells me that you have a perfunctory acquaintance with the concept at best. (At least I get to tell her that it’s free will, not free choice, this is serious stuff, not some game show! If she’s smart, she’ll be embarrassed and go away!)
If you can show me that I've underestimated you, more power to ya' but I have to tell you, not yet! (I had good reason to estimate you as I did!)
coolshoos wrote:
I guess that answers my question. (Good, she’s leaving!)
Like I said, think about it, and if you want to progress one inch in this debate, stop defining the playing field to exclude God. (Exclude God, I didn’t exclude God you ditz! I said God is real!  Didn’t you see that? Go back and read again! It’s not God I’m trying to exclude, its YOU! Me and God, we’re fine! It’s you that we have a problem with! I don’t need a Muslem, but a muzzle would be good!)
Kind of ironic, isn't it, that the fundamentalist Islam which threatens our economic security and peace of mind does not neatly exclude God. (whatever! Can you go now?)
But I respect your right to decline the question. (No you don’t, you conservative Christians are always lying!)
Just don't paint me as some pandering kid seeking enlightenment, that is unfair. (Proselytizing, not pandering proselytizing. As to seeking enlightenment, you ought to!)
 
coolshoos wrote:
You want to know if I believe that evil is a real thing? You mean a real thing like air? You mean a real thing like rocks? You mean a real thing like gravity. Or do you mean a real thing like time.
Do you mean a real thing like God? Do you mean as in "the power of Satan?"
Maybe this will help: can you see the fundamentalist Islamists wrestling with this question? (Oh I’m so lucky, my Socratic method teacher is giving me clues instead of answering my direct questions that was supposed to show her that I already knew more about this whole issue than she does.Great!)
This question of the reality of evil defines everything. If you are being honest, trust me with your answer and I will show you. (How many times did I tell you that I don’t trust you? Did I tell you today that I don’t trust you? I’m not going to change my mind because you insulted me severalteen times in the meanwhile.) This is a fair question, if you care about the outcome of our debate. (Just a tad dense aren’t we?)

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

I will admit I don't know much about politics but I know this...Bush is an eyesore to look at. I hope Americans roll with Obama. I would love to see him on TV daily. Eyecandy!

Lakers's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-05

Democrats all suffer from a birth defect of not being born with a common sense gene. Problem is there are so many of them. It is fruitless to debate them as they do not have the capacity to understand common sense.

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-06

Lakers - thanks for proving that you're a kook. It was the 'all', btw.

Check out these stories - Each suggesting that the stock market does better(or at least not worse) under Democrat presidents than Republican. If Dem's were missing a common sense gene, how is this possible?

http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/futureinvest/3022
http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/21/markets/election_demsvreps/
http://www.slate.com/id/2071929/
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/2005-12-02-presidents_x.htm
http://www.frbsf.org/econrsrch/wklyltr/wklyltr98/el98-19.html

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×