>> ^VoodooV:

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
So which breed promotes "citizens taking their duties seriously" the most? And what if one doesn't breed it at all?
Liberalism, Conservatism, or Libertarianism?
None of the above? All of the above?
When are we going to get it our thick skulls that narrowminded idealology like this just creates problems instead of solves them.
No one philosophy has the answers to all situations. IT NEVER WILL. A wise person recognizes the positive aspects of any and all philosophies and applies them AS THE SITUATION WARRANTS. There is nothing wrong with Conservativism/Liberalism/Libertarianism/<insert 'ism here> as long as they are used within reason. Who decides what is within reason? We all do. We practice that every day and sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn't and maybe we learn something in the process. All ideaology does is attempt to remove the burden of thinking. Sorry, not interested in that.
Nothing describes idiocy better to me than some mindless moron who always votes the party line, regardless of what party that may be.


You nailed it.

It's everything history teaches us about organized religion dressed up in a new suit. When you stop thinking and just blindly play follow the leader or follow the ideology you create a large mass of people capable of doing truly horrifying and unconscionable things. Liberalism, Libertarianism, Communism, Capitalism, Atheism, Conservatism are all capable of being treated and used exactly as the religions used throughout history's wars. The problem is no the ideologies or religions but the people that misuse them to manipulate others AND the people who use them as a crutch so they can stop thinking.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

So which breed promotes "citizens taking their duties seriously" the most? And what if one doesn't breed it at all?
Liberalism, Conservatism, or Libertarianism?

None of the above? All of the above?

When are we going to get it our thick skulls that narrowminded idealology like this just creates problems instead of solves them.

No one philosophy has the answers to all situations. IT NEVER WILL. A wise person recognizes the positive aspects of any and all philosophies and applies them AS THE SITUATION WARRANTS. There is nothing wrong with Conservativism/Liberalism/Libertarianism/<insert 'ism here> as long as they are used within reason. Who decides what is within reason? We all do. We practice that every day and sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn't and maybe we learn something in the process. All ideaology does is attempt to remove the burden of thinking. Sorry, not interested in that.

Nothing describes idiocy better to me than some mindless moron who always votes the party line, regardless of what party that may be.

It's natural that atheists proselytize, because atheism is a religion:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6034949/Atheism-Is-Protected-As-a-Religion-says-Court-

It has its own creation story:

"Thus, a century ago, [it was] Darwinism against Christian orthodoxy. To-day the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervour, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith."

Grene, Marjorie [Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, University of California, Davis], "The Faith of Darwinism," Encounter, Vol. 74, November 1959, pp.48-56, p.49

with its own miracles:

"Time is, in fact, the hero of the plot... given so much time the 'impossible' becomes possible, the possible probable and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs miracles."
George Wald, "The Origin of Life," Physics and Chemistry of Life, 1955, p. 12.

In which its adherants have total faith:

I have faith and belief myself... I believe that nothing beyond those natural laws is needed. I have no evidence for this. It is simply what I have faith in and what I believe.

Isaac Asimov
Counting the Eons P.10

I do not want to believe in God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible: spontaneous generation arising to evolution

George Wald - Harvard Professor
Nobel Laureate

They believe it even in the face of contradicting evidence

Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed but rather evolved.

Francis Crick Nobel Laureate
What Mad Pursuit p.138 1988

Much evidence can be adduced in favor of the Theory of Evolution from Biology, Biogeography, and Paleontology, but I still think that to the unprejudiced the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation.

EJH Cornor, Cambridge
Contemporary Botanical Thought p.61

It provides a comprehensive belief system:

Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideaology, a secular religion- a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with its meaning and morality...

Michael Ruse Florida State University
National Post 5/13/00

Atheists know they are right no matter what:

No evidence would be sufficient to create a change in mind; that it is not a commitment to evidence, but a commitment to naturalism. ...Because there are no alternatives, we would almost have to accept natural selection as the explanation of life on this planet even if there were no evidence for it.

Steven Pinker MIT
How the mind works p.182

Even if they have to suppress the truth to prove it:

"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

Lewontin, Richard C. [Professor of Zoology and Biology, Harvard University], "Billions and Billions of Demons", Review of "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark," by Carl Sagan, New York Review, January 9, 1997. (Emphasis in original)

"In fact the a priori reasoning is so entirely satisfactory to me that if the facts won't fit in, why so much the worse for the facts is my feeling."

Erasmus Darwin, in a letter to his brother Charles, after reading his new book, "The Origin of Species," in Darwin, F., ed., "The Life of Charles Darwin," [1902], Senate: London, 1995, reprint, p215.

They are true believers:

of all choices, atheism requires the greatest faith, as it demands that ones limited store of human knowledge is sufficient to exclude the possibility of God.

francis collins human genome project

It won't be long before there are atheists churches and street preachers handing out tracks.

As usual, reality disagrees with QM. As usual, he contributes nothing but regurgitated talking points he knows aren't true.

Waste, fraud, and abuse are not unique to the public sector. It happens just as much, if not more it's just covered up better in the private, so you can stop pretending there isn't a double standard.

People like you, QM have no moral ground to be talking about who has moral grounds or not.

The wealthy use and depend on gov't services more, so they should be charged more. It's really as simple as that. I've heard both left and right agree that corporate loopholes should be closed. But as usual, QM misses the point. It has nothing to do with left and right. Our corporate masters have their hooks in both the left and the right so while both the left and the right will pay lip service to closing loopholes, it will never happen unless there is enough public backlash to happen.

Businesses thrived in the past with higher tax rates. They will continue to do so.

Ideaology is worthless. History and countless evidence has shown that higher taxes are not job killers and that the 1 percent are just fear-mongering and attempting to hold the country hostage so they can be even more rich than they already are. You want to fight terrorism? There it is.

Rationality and reason, not ideaology and myth will always win in the end.

He takes a phone call in the middle of that?? What a douchebag!

Grover G?? WTF??

It's just mind blowing how Grover rewrites history in his mind. So many of the things we enjoy as a society now are because of government funding and the mentality that some things are more important than profit margins.

There is utterly no sense of rationality or that this guy operates in good faith. He's selling ideaology, he's selling an agenda. If this ideaology fit reality AT ALL he wouldn't have to attempt to "convince" so many people. It would be self evident. He wouldn't have to "sell" anything. The evidence would be there, but he doesn't present evidence, he presents rhetoric and wraps himself in the flag of freedom when it has absolutely ZERO to do with freedom.

This notion that wealthy people are having their freedoms infringed upon is a fantasy at best, outright deceitful at worst.

Ok ok, I get that Islam is as fragmented into as many factions as Christianity is, but the simple truth remains; Islam is evolving into a death cult. Never mind the original tennets of peace and goodwill the Islam was founded on. They are just becoming the biggest bully on the playground that can't take criticism or have thier territories or ideas impugned in any way. There are way too many Muslims that subscribe to the return of the Mahdi theory and that it can be sped along by creating chaos and death in the world. They also believe that they will be not held accountable for the suffering and even rewarded for the death of non-believers. Even one Muslim who subscribes to this thinking is too many, and free nations need to take as stand against the hate bred by "the truth of Sharia law" as this man puts it. All nations ought to be standing against any hate bred by inflamed ideaologies in order to serve thier neighbors and protect their hard won common good. Europe is being overrun by this aggressiveness and The US is quaking in it's boots over it (just look at the security paranoia in airports if you don't believe me) and censors remove TV shows that hint at even a mall displeasure that the faith that has such contempt for the west (ie. Southpark), removing the right to speak out against such ideals. I say wake up free nations and be strong against such wantonly hateful ideals. They are a crime and deserve no equivocation.

I completely agree with you - man creates all of these problems. Religion is one of the tools which man uses to shape cultures and ideaologies around the world.

This leaves us with incompatible religions which are all incompatible with modern rationalism, leaving us with conflict between all the world cultures.

Religion is responsible for a much wider change in a believer's perception of reality than a simple following of the teachings of Jesus/Mohammed/Buddha. It is an ideaology which creates boundaries with other conflicting ideaologies.

The irony is that Jesus/Mohammed/Buddha and every other great thinker of the last 3000 years has been preaching the dissolving of boundaries and hierarchy.

The felt presence of a higher reality or an inner intent to all of nature is at the heart of ancient religion and shamanism. This is not what modern religion is. What modern religion is needs to be finished with.

Thanks for your comment

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
Hitler was an atheist, Stalin was an atheist. Martin Luther King was a Christian. The problem isn't religion, the problem is man (imo). In other words, if god isn't real, then there is only man. And then that makes religion a man made institute. Thus, its man that is the problem, not religion. Depends on what you mean by religion as well. If you are saying that following Christ's rule of the golden rule, do onto others as you would have them do onto you is a bad thing that causes evil I would have to say what is good then? If you are saying that men corrupt the heart of what that religious body stands for and then uses his power to distort all that he has influence over, then yes, I would agree that is a problem. But the problem still lays with man at that point, not religion.

I don't mean to be adversarial or anything, just trying to stress a point.

But on the topic of the video, I don't agree with his sentements that the only good trooper is a Christian one, lots of people of different faiths and non-faiths have died for this country.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
Religion is one of the most powerful recruting tools available to the US military.


Why else could it be that they so badly want to have creationism taught in schools?
Why else could it be that Commander in Chief must be a christian?
Why else is it that the illegal invasion of Iraq is seeping with religious overtones?

9/11 was a huge message to the world that the problem of religion really must be addressed.

With Christo-Judaism religion as an ideaology which has been guiding western humanity for the last 1500 years, it absolutely must be open to the kind of scrutiny and truth telling that thankfully we've been seeing these last few years.

Science and materialism also have to be examined and questioned as ideaologies guiding global cultures.

Major religions are not only incompatible with each other, they are also incompatible with science and rationalism. So whichever school of thought you happen to follow, you will automatically be in conflict with all the others.

Truth is, nobody has a fucking clue what's going on. Not religion, not scientists, not our leaders, not mystics, none of these people can tell you what's really going on or guide you in any better direction than you can guide yourself.

We can disagree about Al Jazeera. They've improved in the last year or two, but they lost my trust a while ago and will have to do a lot to regain it.

I certainly agree that big Corporations (international and domestic) need to be hacked up a bit. They have far to much power and influence. I do NOT however buy that they control whether the US goes to war or not. I do NOT believe Iraq was about oil. We haven't seen a drop of it and it has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars, a tremendous amount of lives, and more popularity and international influence. Anti-war activists and leftists love to say oil oil oil as much as they can to make those that supported the war look like evil corporate sell-outs. It's a very common political partisan warfare technique VERY often utilized by the left. (The right has its own devious techniques, but the left has mastered this particular one.) Anyway, arguing Iraq is a dead stalemate every time, so it's pointless to go on about it. Bottom line, corps have too much power, but not all the power, AND not all corporations are run by demons bent on greed at all costs. You need a certain breed of board members for that sort of heartlessness.

"Ordinary People" don't want war. That is true. But they do want certain things to be and others not to be and they don't want to be the ones responsible for what it takes to make those things be or not be. For example. The west (primarily America at this point) sees the sudden rise and dominance of staunch Islamic culture in western Europe and does not like what it sees. America is all for religious freedom--heck, we were founded on the concept--but America also values secular governing as well as some level of assimilation of immigrants. In other words, come to America, but if you don't want to be an American, if you want to be a somewhere-else-ian living in America trying to impose somewhere-else-ia's laws, please stay in somewhere-else-ia. Makes sense. America has a set of values, laws, and traditions it holds dear. Seeing sections of western European nations suddenly under a pseudo-official Sharia Law makes most Americans cringe and worry about their rights and their culture. Americans say, "we don't want that in our nation" but they don't want to be responsible for preventing it (or other things). People love to protest things while reaping their benefits. Sad state of affairs. (I'm not saying that example was a war-related one, but it fits otherwise.) One of the major functions of governments and leaders is to make unpopular decisions that are necessary. They lose popularity and even become demonized by some, but the job is done and the public can benefit and still feel innocent about it.

As for the US and S Ossentia? 1%. That is the amount of western oil that comes through that pipeline. We don't need it. We wouldn't START a fight over it, but we would defend it against an aggressor as it is in fact of western interest. We didn't need to fight over it as it was in no danger and we were in no way in danger of losing it. America has no vested interest in S Ossentia. A 1% loss in supply is barely a hick-up, especially as oil demand is now decreasing here at a record pace.

As for America moving ships closer to Iran? GOOD!! Iran has repeated threatened to shut down a HUGE tanker route. Since Israel is scared to death (and rightly so) that they might get nuked in the next couple years, which fits with Ahmadinejad's 12th Imam religious views, they might wind up attacking Iran's uranium enrichment plants. It will CERTAINLY happen if Iran tests a nuclear weapon as N.Korea recently did. If that happens, we still need that route open. If Iran shuts it down, that's a major problem for us here, even if we don't drop a single bomb in that country. This is an almost inevitable confrontation. The USA MUST not fire any first shots though. Not this time. Not ever again. However, did we start this devastating war in Georgia to move our ships? No. That idea REQUIRES that you believe that all those with power in the US are truly evil mass-murders, plain and simple, purely literally. It is fine to think that we may have taken advantage of the situation to make a tactical move, but starting it for that end is a little off the charts. Having forces in an allied nation is not surprising. That does NOT by any means mean we started it or encouraged it in any way shape or form. That leap is loaded with fallacies.

I am far too long winded.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
Al Jazeera is an excellent source of news, many BBC journalists work with them and two British journos I know speak very highly to their integrity.

I do indeed distrust the US government as much as I distrust the British government, and I have lived through a 30 year conflict with the British that has opened my eyes to the propaganda regarding international affairs in British news, including the BBC.

It's not a case of me buying into any particular news story. The US has a military presence there to protect oil interests - that's a plain fact. That's what rings the alarm bells for me when suddenly there's a conflict.

It's not about assigning blame, I'm not interested in trying to show where blame lies. That's a childish game and a distraction. Bush is not the emperor at all, I do not believe for a second that Bush is in control of anything whatsoever, the idea that the man is a statesman running a country is plainly ridiculous. He is as much a puppet of corporate America as the Shah in Iran was before the people rose up and put him out of power.

It's all about perception - *why* do you think it is that the same people who think that America blew up the towers to start a war are the people who believe America is behind this conflict? What is at the heart of that perception? It's because the official version of events doesn't ring true to people who have lived through propaganda in their own country.

What is happening in Russia is part of the wider global conflict involving the superpowers, and it's all over resources and investments on a scale that ordinary people can barely comprehend. Russia, China and America/UK are slowly hardening their military and strategic positions around the world.

I don't know the reason why, it could be the beginning of the merging of the 4 big monetary unions into a global economy and central bank/government, it could be that each of them wants greater regional control of the planet, it could be that they are all working together toward a single goal, it could be that they are preparing to go up against each other.

Ordinary people do not want war, the only people who benefit are the super rich and the powerful. Russia rolled mini battlefield nukes into S Ossetia last night, and while the masses of the planet including you and me debate about what is really going on and who is at fault, people are getting slaughtered.

Maybe it's time we put our time and efforts into really trying to get people to talk about peace. Enough really is enough.

Thanks for your message




In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
Taking the last part first, I disagree. That aside, I get news from quite a few sources. I am painfully aware of the bias on both sides of these sources. However, based on study, I trust some more than others. For example, Al Jazeera... black listed, "opinion journalists"... suspect, Al Franken and Sean Hanity... grudge match? That's entertainment. My statement that a need for loathing was required to buy this new story 3 days after the war suddenly and almost inexplicably begain was not meant to offend but merely to exaggerate the point that people who tend to distrust the US tend to blame everything in the world on them, even when the coals aren't even ready for burgers. These are the same people who think we detonated our own buildings to start a war over oil, when neither of those clauses is true.

News on this current struggle is so mired in propaganda and selective publication right now, it is hard to make heads or tails of who is at fault, but blaming the US and namely the Bush Admin. is so predictable a cop-out it's cliche anymore. Bush is not the Emperor Palpatine and America is not the Galactic Empire. heh.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It seems they are outing America anyway, Osettians are claiming that the 'west' is behind the Georgian attacks - being reported now on BBC and international news. Of course there is no way for you or I to know one way or the other.

Why do I have to assume a hatred and loathing of America? I'm not claiming anything, and I'm not narrow minded or naive enough to only post news clips which I happen to believe or which happen to fit my own personal ideaology. No need to be defensive. It's not people like us who are making these things happen, we are mere bystanders.

I'm trying to get all the news I can as it rolls in, watching it unfold on the news in different countries gives you a much wider picture rather than sticking to one single news source. The *way* it's being reported in different countries is *as* interesting, if not *more* interesting than the content of the reports.

You aren't convinced by this because you have a preconceived notion that it is 'ludicrous'. That's your culture talking, not you.

In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
I'm not convinced. It still appears to me to be conspiracy theory hogwash. In my eyes, it would require a SERIOUS loathing of America to assume such a thing is true on a whim. America did not "orchestrate" any Georgian action. That's just ludicrous. They would out us since they're being obliterated at the moment, since we're not helping. You have to assume that America is EVIL in order to assume these things. If a naval move is made at the same time, than it is because America is taking the opportunity that has been laid before them. Prime time for easy action.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It sounds like it, but it isn't...

http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&q=warships%20gulf&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn



In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
>> ^Memorare:
read an article today suggesting the aggressive move by Georgia was orchestrated by the US as a strategic diversion to keep Russia busy during a naval blockade of Iran. shrug


Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crap to me. Propaganda.

Taking the last part first, I disagree. That aside, I get news from quite a few sources. I am painfully aware of the bias on both sides of these sources. However, based on study, I trust some more than others. For example, Al Jazeera... black listed, "opinion journalists"... suspect, Al Franken and Sean Hanity... grudge match? That's entertainment. My statement that a need for loathing was required to buy this new story 3 days after the war suddenly and almost inexplicably begain was not meant to offend but merely to exaggerate the point that people who tend to distrust the US tend to blame everything in the world on them, even when the coals aren't even ready for burgers. These are the same people who think we detonated our own buildings to start a war over oil, when neither of those clauses is true.

News on this current struggle is so mired in propaganda and selective publication right now, it is hard to make heads or tails of who is at fault, but blaming the US and namely the Bush Admin. is so predictable a cop-out it's cliche anymore. Bush is not the Emperor Palpatine and America is not the Galactic Empire. heh.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It seems they are outing America anyway, Osettians are claiming that the 'west' is behind the Georgian attacks - being reported now on BBC and international news. Of course there is no way for you or I to know one way or the other.

Why do I have to assume a hatred and loathing of America? I'm not claiming anything, and I'm not narrow minded or naive enough to only post news clips which I happen to believe or which happen to fit my own personal ideaology. No need to be defensive. It's not people like us who are making these things happen, we are mere bystanders.

I'm trying to get all the news I can as it rolls in, watching it unfold on the news in different countries gives you a much wider picture rather than sticking to one single news source. The *way* it's being reported in different countries is *as* interesting, if not *more* interesting than the content of the reports.

You aren't convinced by this because you have a preconceived notion that it is 'ludicrous'. That's your culture talking, not you.

In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
I'm not convinced. It still appears to me to be conspiracy theory hogwash. In my eyes, it would require a SERIOUS loathing of America to assume such a thing is true on a whim. America did not "orchestrate" any Georgian action. That's just ludicrous. They would out us since they're being obliterated at the moment, since we're not helping. You have to assume that America is EVIL in order to assume these things. If a naval move is made at the same time, than it is because America is taking the opportunity that has been laid before them. Prime time for easy action.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It sounds like it, but it isn't...

http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&q=warships%20gulf&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn



In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
>> ^Memorare:
read an article today suggesting the aggressive move by Georgia was orchestrated by the US as a strategic diversion to keep Russia busy during a naval blockade of Iran. shrug


Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crap to me. Propaganda.

This is ideaology, culture and religion in politics. Pay close attention America.

I really hope this guy is teaching a room full of ten year olds, because that clip is an embarassment to educators everywhere.

I have never heard this period of history so badly and so wrongly taught.

Bush isn't Hitler. However as Bush's ideaology unfolds day by day and year by year it's seems to become frighteningly close to Hitler's.

Small changes, that's how the Nazis did it. Each change stands on its merit, hardly warranting closer inspection - it's the ability to forsee the endpoint that is the key. Michael Badnarik tries to explain this in the clip, albeit in a clumsy, vocabulary starved, childlike manner.

Anyway, I'd say 8 years is plenty of time......

All ideaology is your enemy.

Wow, I got an upvote from BillOreilly ! who'da thunk it. comedy really can bring people of opposite ideaologies together:-) Ha, next thing ya know good ol Choggie will be voting for my sift !
yea, I dislike the slow clap cliche also.

I still don't understand why the world's most developed and richest country can only afford a 2 party system of political discourse, while even the most backward countries of the world managed to have multiparty alliances.

The way things are going there is never going to be a moderate field of politics anymore, everything is so easily labeled Red or Blue, Left or Right. Funny it will be if we move from racism of color to racism of ideaology.