Ideological observation

[Ycarene]

To me, there is a general tone from social conservatives that your life is not your own. If you take control of your life, and work against your obstacles, you are snubbing god by taking him out of the equation. It seems that you are not only expected to take what's handed to you, but you are expected to stay where you are and not aspire to more, with the exception of aspiring to more fervently love god. Perhaps I'm seeing this wrong, and if I am, I'm sorry.

[Grimbold21]

What god?

10 chars

[CryptFiend]

Simple, God isn't real O.o

[ThePalidius]

To me, there is a general tone from social conservatives that your life is not your own. If you take control of your life, and work against your obstacles, you are snubbing god by taking him out of the equation. It seems that you are not only expected to take what's handed to you, but you are expected to stay where you are and not aspire to more, with the exception of aspiring to more fervently love god. Perhaps I'm seeing this wrong, and if I am, I'm sorry.

i think you have a misrepresentation of "social conservative" giving you the impression that said misrepresentation is the only representation for a "social conservative". i find myself to be in the social conservative mold. but i do not equate taking control of your life, attempting to hurdle obstacles, to obtain goals for the betterment of your well being as a snubbing of god. nor do i equate it as taking god out of the equation. from my understanding of god, he wants you to include him on your journey, this does not mean that by going on that journey you automatically abandon him. so whoever gave you this misrepresentation of "social conservative" is vastly misinformed. a second point i would like to make is that you dont even have to believe in god to be "socially conservative" so its fairly obvious that the person or people who made you feel this way, are highly misinformed, and dont have a proper understanding of their bible (assuming they are christian).

---------- Post added 2011-08-04 at 08:49 PM ----------

Simple, God isn't real O.o

a lack of evidence in existance, does not equate to evidence proving a lack of existance.

your logic is a fallacy. check the link in my sig to learn how to debate properly.

[CryptFiend]

i think you have a misrepresentation of "social conservative" giving you the impression that said misrepresentation is the only representation for a "social conservative". i find myself to be in the social conservative mold. but i do not equate taking control of your life, attempting to hurdle obstacles, to obtain goals for the betterment of your well being as a snubbing of god. nor do i equate it as taking god out of the equation. from my understanding of god, he wants you to include him on your journey, this does not mean that by going on that journey you automatically abandon him. so whoever gave you this misrepresentation of "social conservative" is vastly misinformed. a second point i would like to make is that you dont even have to believe in god to be "socially conservative" so its fairly obvious that the person or people who made you feel this way, are highly misinformed, and dont have a proper understanding of their bible (assuming they are christian).

---------- Post added 2011-08-04 at 08:49 PM ----------



a lack of evidence in existance, does not equate to evidence proving a lack of existance.

your logic is a fallacy. check the link in my sig to learn how to debate properly.

"The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence." While true, it still gives us no reason to believe the purported claims of existence.

[ThePalidius]

"The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence." While true, it still gives us no reason to believe the purported claims of existence.

and it also gives no reason not to believe the purported claims. it boils down to a faith based decision either way. you either place faith in said existance, or you place your faith in a lack of said existance.

logic would promote the ideology of "i would rather live like there is a god, than die and find out there isnt" when the decision is solely based on a decision of faith.

[CryptFiend]

Pascal's Wager is just as illogical as the belief in a supernatural being. It assumes that there is only one god which can be believed in, the Christian one. This is not true, since there are a plethora of gods that have been believed throughout the millennia. This would have to be applied to each and every one of those gods to be true, and this would clearly be impossible, due to the clashing natures of many of the said gods.

[ThePalidius]

Pascal's Wager is just as illogical as the belief in a supernatural being. It assumes that there is only one god which can be believed in, the Christian one. This is not true, since there are a plethora of gods that have been believed throughout the millennia. This would have to be applied to each and every one of those gods to be true, and this would clearly be impossible, due to the clashing natures of many of the said gods.

which is why you take your logic, and apply it to a personal in depth study on theology, and conclude which you would most likely believe to be true. in my modest search for education regarding the topic of god, the christian god seems most logical. but i digress, your opinion is yours alone.

i will say this though, any decision made on this topic, without a full in depth study of the topic (including original texts, matching with the history, comparing and contrasting to other options in depth, ect) would be a logical fallacy. logically you are not allowed to form a definitive opinion without first finding the facts. you could assume you know all you can about it, but that would be just illogical.

[Irisel]

If there is a God, I believe he would want me to live my life to the fullest, and religion or even spirituality in my opinion is a waste of precious life-time.

[nomorepriest]

God doesnt exist.

Same people who thought the sun was 17 miles away and the earth was flat. wrote the bible.

Noahs arch.. a 600 old man who was told to make a ship and collect 2 of every animal.. WTF how could anyone collect EVERY FUCKEN ANIMAL.. MILLIONS of Species. Sail for 40 days and 40 night.. What would those animals eat? Other fucken animals..

What about all the other people that had boats? did their boat just not work?

The ONLY come back is.." oh we have faith.."

[ThePalidius]

If there is a God, I believe he would want me to live my life to the fullest, and religion or even spirituality in my opinion is a waste of precious life-time.

obviously you have deemed finding God (or if there is a God) as a waste of time. because you cant presume to know God or what he would have you do, until you spent the time (which you deemed a waste) to actually study it for yourself in full. smh....

[Skelington]

So tempted to give my mind here...

A lock seems the greatest solution! What with the anti-deity talk and all.

[apepi]

Only thing I will say is that you never know, and you can never know, all hail Socrates!

[ThePalidius]

God doesnt exist.

Same people who thought the sun was 17 miles away and the earth was flat. wrote the bible.

Noahs arch.. a 600 old man who was told to make a ship and collect 2 of every animal.. WTF how could anyone collect EVERY FUCKEN ANIMAL.. MILLIONS of Species. Sail for 40 days and 40 night.. What would those animals eat? Other fucken animals..

What about all the other people that had boats? did their boat just not work?

The ONLY come back is.." oh we have faith.."

God doesnt exist.

Same people who thought the sun was 17 miles away and the earth was flat. wrote the bible.

Noahs arch.. a 600 old man who was told to make a ship and collect 2 of every animal.. WTF how could anyone collect EVERY FUCKEN ANIMAL.. MILLIONS of Species. Sail for 40 days and 40 night.. What would those animals eat? Other fucken animals..

What about all the other people that had boats? did their boat just not work?

everything i bolded in your quote is a logical fallacy.

A.) God doesnt exist. - because a lack of evidence proving existance, does not prove evidence for a lack of existance.
B.) Same people who thought the sun was 17 miles away and the earth was flat. wrote the bible. - also a fallacy for multiple reasons. 1. being wrong 1 time does not constitute being wrong multiple times. 2. you are wrong in your statement by grouping the authors of the bible (who are numerous and span over thousands of years) all thought the sun was "17 miles away and the earth was flat". when in fact the sumarians, and egyptians, and even the myans, had a much greater knowledge of astronomy than any other time in history up until modern science era.
C.) Noahs arch.. a 600 year old man - Noah was not 600 years old, that was a miscalculation of age by the original translators. the translators calculated time differently than the people who authored the book of genesis. he in fact lived to be in his 80's this has been proven, but obviously you have not yet studied the summarian people (aka noah's time frame) or the ancient egyptians, or any other culture of that time period in depth.
D.)WTF how could anyone collect EVERY FUCKEN ANIMAL.. MILLIONS of Species. Sail for 40 days and 40 night.. What should those animals eat? Other fucken animals.. - you have multiple logical fallacies in this statement. 1. its a mystery as to how anyone could collect all the animals but based on the exact description of the boat in measurements it is assumed possible as far as space for said animals goes. but a lack of evidence of it happening does not prove evidence for it not happening. 2. not all animals are carnivores, and just because there isnt evidence proving or disproving that provisions were made for the carnivore only animals i digress.
E.)What about all the other people that had boats? did their boat just not work? - you assume that in the middle of the dessert that people actually had boats? lol wow. if you do your research on the history and geographical location of the story of noah, you would realize the misstep you made here. although there were people by the ocean and rivers, you have to think if they could survive say a meteor strike, or multiple meteor strikes causing an explosion of water into the atmosphere and tsunamis, which is a common theory as to how it rained and nobody survived the flood (of the kingdom of summaria) which would be all the people who wrote about it would have knowledge of. your logic is wrong because you think of ancient times in the same manner as you do current times. you have to actually think like an ancient person seeing what they wrote to understand what they wrote.

so if you care to research about the history of the bible i can point you in a few directions. but if your cool with being misinformed 90% of the time when speaking about the bible thats cool too.

[CryptFiend]

which is why you take your logic, and apply it to a personal in depth study on theology, and conclude which you would most likely believe to be true. in my modest search for education regarding the topic of god, the christian god seems most logical. but i digress, your opinion is yours alone.

i will say this though, any decision made on this topic, without a full in depth study of the topic (including original texts, matching with the history, comparing and contrasting to other options in depth, ect) would be a logical fallacy. logically you are not allowed to form a definitive opinion without first finding the facts. you could assume you know all you can about it, but that would be just illogical.

Mind stating sources for all this evidence for god? And please for the love of Jebus do not say Faith...

[Kalyyn]

There might be a god. Even if there isn't, we as a species should play it safe and put effort into emulating his powers. That way, if such a being were ever to turn against us, we could combat it on equal ground.

And yes, I just suggested an arms race against god.

[CryptFiend]

There might be a god. Even if there isn't, we as a species should play it safe and put effort into emulating his powers. That way, if such a being were ever to turn against us, we could combat it on equal ground.

And yes, I just suggested an arms race against god.

Lmfao.....

[Mezzolith]

This is why I can't stand any form of religion. It's a disease of the mind; restraining us from advancing culturally, morally, and technologically, all by having a hold on some of the most influential people.

[apepi]

I am god, worship me!Their is your proof:}.

[Idrinkwhiterussians]

Ill take a quote from the Hitchhiker's Guide Trilogy -

"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened."


Or another -

"Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.' `But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't."