Why are most atheists left-wing?

[Seperates]

The "social contract" stems from Enlightenment ideology, and while much of it was atheistic in nature, atheism was not the basis of the contract. And the contract works, 200 year old stable democracy is evidence of that.

Well I personally think democracy is horrific, and the social contract is mysticism.

And I personally think that you need to do some research and find a system that has worked better in centuries past.

[Ilhuikatl]

i am a conservative member of the republican party, i am an atheist.

[ZombieRothbard]

Do you think the police and their crony buddies actually give a crap?

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

Well what is the remedy? Violent revolution? Violent revolution doesn't work and is also disturbing and frankly just uncivil. You can't beat them in their our monopoly courts, so that avenue is gone. You can also practice civil disobedience, but filming officers in some places is a felony and can result in life sentences for older people. You need a public outcry and public awareness to defeat them, the only way to do that is through education.

[Seperates]

Such laws are unconstitutional, and if they try to enforce it, you have grounds for judicial remedy.

Do you think the police and their crony buddies actually give a crap?

So what? Are you going to cower in the corner like a baby? Or are you going to sue their asses like a man!

[Terra Agora]

Do you think the police and their crony buddies actually give a crap?

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

I'm not saying do nothing, that's the opposite of what I say.
I'm just pointing out that whether it's constitutional or not isn't going to help you.

[Seperates]

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

Well what is the remedy? Violent revolution? Violent revolution doesn't work and is also disturbing and frankly just uncivil. You can't beat them in their our monopoly courts, so that avenue is gone. You can also practice civil disobedience, but filming officers in some places is a felony and can result in life sentences for older people. You need a public outcry and public awareness to defeat them, the only way to do that is through education.

They have been muthafucking beaten in the courts. It is now legal to take pictures of the police. I REPEAT: It is now legal to take pictures of the police.

[Terra Agora]

Do you think the police and their crony buddies actually give a crap?

So what? Are you going to cower in the corner like a baby? Or are you going to sue their asses like a man!

Can't sue (and win) when the courts are on their side. Not to mention the trial isn't "fair" because the judge and the prosecutor both work for the state.

[Trotskylvania]

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

I'm not saying do nothing, that's the opposite of what I say.
I'm just pointing out that whether it's constitutional or not isn't going to help you.

Why not use every weapon available in your arsenal? There are plenty of people in the ACLU who would be willing to take your case pro bono should you find yourself in trouble.

[Seperates]

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

I'm not saying do nothing, that's the opposite of what I say.
I'm just pointing out that whether it's constitutional or not isn't going to help you.

Actually it helps you alot. Because if the police beat you up and confiscate your camera, you can sue their asses off in a court of law.

[ZombieRothbard]

Well I personally think democracy is horrific, and the social contract is mysticism.

And I personally think that you need to do some research and find a system that has worked better in centuries past.

Well, arguably monarchies were better to be honest. Personally I am against the state, but if you want a form of governance that has actually existed before, then at least in theory monarchies were a better form of government. Democracy is like a publicly owned state that suffers from tragedy of the commons and all the other problems that public land has. Monarchies were a privatized state where the King at least had incentive to raise the value of his property (the country) so he could sell portions of it off or pass it on to his children etc.

[Seperates]

So what? Are you going to cower in the corner like a baby? Or are you going to sue their asses like a man!

Can't sue (and win) when the courts are on their side. Not to mention the trial isn't "fair" because the judge and the prosecutor both work for the state.

Yes, it is, as A CASE WENT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT.

[ZombieRothbard]

Well what is the remedy? Violent revolution? Violent revolution doesn't work and is also disturbing and frankly just uncivil. You can't beat them in their our monopoly courts, so that avenue is gone. You can also practice civil disobedience, but filming officers in some places is a felony and can result in life sentences for older people. You need a public outcry and public awareness to defeat them, the only way to do that is through education.

They have been muthafucking beaten in the courts. It is now legal to take pictures of the police. I REPEAT: It is now legal to take pictures of the police.

Take pictures? Or film?

[Terra Agora]

I'm not saying do nothing, that's the opposite of what I say.
I'm just pointing out that whether it's constitutional or not isn't going to help you.

Actually it helps you alot. Because if the police beat you up and confiscate your camera, you can sue their asses off in a court of law.

No one mentioned them beating you yet. If that's the case then it's a no brainer to bring them to court. The odds are drastically in your favor. (especially if the ACLU tags along)

My point being, the courts aren't the answer.

[Terra Agora]

Can't sue (and win) when the courts are on their side. Not to mention the trial isn't "fair" because the judge and the prosecutor both work for the state.

Yes, it is, as A CASE WENT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT.

If your case goes to the supreme court that's a totally different story. None the less the so called fair trial you have a "right" to isn't that fair.

[Seperates]

And I personally think that you need to do some research and find a system that has worked better in centuries past.

Well, arguably monarchies were better to be honest. Personally I am against the state, but if you want a form of governance that has actually existed before, then at least in theory monarchies were a better form of government. Democracy is like a publicly owned state that suffers from tragedy of the commons and all the other problems that public land has. Monarchies were a privatized state where the King at least had incentive to raise the value of his property (the country) so he could sell portions of it off or pass it on to his children etc.

And this fell apart. Not before stifling public knowledge and intellectual development for 800 years or so. Democracy works because it allows for people to participate. The reason our's doesn't work as well as it could is because 50% of our population are considered to be "idiotes" by greek standards.

[Seperates]

Yes, it is, as A CASE WENT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT.

If your case goes to the supreme court that's a totally different story. None the less the so called fair trial you have a "right" to isn't that fair.

Courts must set a precedent. If not, I'm sure the ACLU would be glad to appeal it up there and provide funding.

[Trotskylvania]

And I personally think that you need to do some research and find a system that has worked better in centuries past.

Well, arguably monarchies were better to be honest. Personally I am against the state, but if you want a form of governance that has actually existed before, then at least in theory monarchies were a better form of government. Democracy is like a publicly owned state that suffers from tragedy of the commons and all the other problems that public land has. Monarchies were a privatized state where the King at least had incentive to raise the value of his property (the country) so he could sell portions of it off or pass it on to his children etc.

No, they weren't, but that's a different topic.

[Seperates]

Actually it helps you alot. Because if the police beat you up and confiscate your camera, you can sue their asses off in a court of law.

No one mentioned them beating you yet. If that's the case then it's a no brainer to bring them to court. The odds are drastically in your favor. (especially if the ACLU tags along)

My point being, the courts aren't the answer.

Actually they are. They are the civil answer.

[Seperates]

They have been muthafucking beaten in the courts. It is now legal to take pictures of the police. I REPEAT: It is now legal to take pictures of the police.

Take pictures? Or film?

Both.

[Soviet Engineers]

I dunno...why do most people who believe their God is a guy who said rich men aren't exactly the bee's knees align themselves with the right-wing?

[Terra Agora]

No one mentioned them beating you yet. If that's the case then it's a no brainer to bring them to court. The odds are drastically in your favor. (especially if the ACLU tags along)

My point being, the courts aren't the answer.

Actually they are. They are the civil answer.

If they were then why do we still have unconstitutional laws.
Courts aren't the answer, reform isn't the answer, direct action is the answer.

[ZombieRothbard]

Well, arguably monarchies were better to be honest. Personally I am against the state, but if you want a form of governance that has actually existed before, then at least in theory monarchies were a better form of government. Democracy is like a publicly owned state that suffers from tragedy of the commons and all the other problems that public land has. Monarchies were a privatized state where the King at least had incentive to raise the value of his property (the country) so he could sell portions of it off or pass it on to his children etc.

And this fell apart. Not before stifling public knowledge and intellectual development for 800 years or so. Democracy works because it allows for people to participate. The reason our's doesn't work as well as it could is because 50% of our population are considered to be "idiotes" by greek standards.

I don't like blaming the people for anything, because it isn't the people who have changed. Ancient people were the same as people today, people haven't gotten DUMBER in that they haven't devolved. The problem isn't the people, its the system they live under. Our society is full of idiots in my opinion because of the public education system and this perpetual state mysticism that has been passed down from generation to generation. Us being a part of the government is the problem, because it creates all sorts of populist/nationalist/jingoist war fervors (that also existed under monarchies, but still exist today). Basically, democracy just lulls us into believing we are in control, and as a result we are all implicated in the states crimes against humanity. Now the blood is on all our hands instead of just the King.

[Lacadaemon]

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone.

[Seperates]

And this fell apart. Not before stifling public knowledge and intellectual development for 800 years or so. Democracy works because it allows for people to participate. The reason our's doesn't work as well as it could is because 50% of our population are considered to be "idiotes" by greek standards.

I don't like blaming the people for anything, because it isn't the people who have changed. Ancient people were the same as people today, people haven't gotten DUMBER in that they haven't devolved. The problem isn't the people, its the system they live under. Our society is full of idiots in my opinion because of the public education system and this perpetual state mysticism that has been passed down from generation to generation. Us being a part of the government is the problem, because it creates all sorts of populist/nationalist/jingoist war fervors (that also existed under monarchies, but still exist today). Basically, democracy just lulls us into believing we are in control, and as a result we are all implicated in the states crimes against humanity. Now the blood is on all our hands instead of just the King.

You are calling me an idiot because I go to public school, you realize that right? When I say "idiotes" I mean one who doesn't pay attention to politics, or political matters. Certaintly someone as knowledgable as you would know that. And no, at least in my Gov course they made no allusions to the "people being in control" in fact they expliticitly stated that "the population has direct control over few state matters and very few federal matters". The rest is based on representatives that, even though we elect them, do not always share our opinions on everything and may not actaully vote in the majority of his districts opinion.

Every system will have it's "populist/nationalist/jingoist war fervors" but at least in a democracy they aren't the only one's represented because the canidates NEED moderate votes to have a chance to win. We are not lulled into anything, it's just that we choose not to participate, we choose to ignore the process and the system.

[Seperates]

Actually they are. They are the civil answer.

If they were then why do we still have unconstitutional laws.
Courts aren't the answer, reform isn't the answer, direct action is the answer.

Because change is slow. If it isn't slow the population will not accept it. There will always be unconstitutional laws, but they will all be eventually repealed and/or replaced.

If we gave up because the process was slow, we'd have given up science a long time ago.