57% Of Republicans Want Christianity As National Religion

[Vazdaria]

We should have kept the 18th....

Is this really worth a threadjack Vaz?

Well I just think that Alcohol does more harm than good for society...what with all the drunken drivers....the abuse...the negative affects it has on families....I just think we'd all be better off with out it.....

[Tarsonis Survivors]

It really isn't. I would claim it is actually stronger.

Especially since I kicked his ass the last time we had a disagreement.

Yeah, sure you did.

[Mikeswill]

57% of a party that represents 25% of the Nation is 14.25% of the Nation
Whoop-de-doo

[Vazdaria]

57% of a party that represents 25% of the Nation is 14.25% of the Nation
Whoop-de-doo

Das allllllot of people though.

[Wickedly evil people]

the precedent is established by the Pro Islamist-Fascist President currently serving that the Constitution is no impediment to any Executive Action.


I guess you reap what you sow

[Sun Wukong]

It's no different:
"Or better yet, it's a tyranny. The only reason societies' God's morality is applicable to me is because they he possess[es] the force to impose it on me."

The difference being one Is a being of infinite power, Creator of the universe and all its' laws and Glory, if you believe that sort of thing.

The other is a group of beings equally as fallible as myself, and with no higher power to give credence to their authority, their judgment is meaningless so long as I can challenge them.

So no it's morality by consensus, as opposed to a true objective Morality.

You conflate power with wisdom. They are not the same. You assert "objective" morality in a clear instance of objectively subjective morality. And you seem unhealthily fixated on the degree to which you are overpowered. A meaningless distinction so long as you are overpowered.

Basically, yours is a symphony of non sequitur.

[Sun Wukong]

Especially since I kicked his ass the last time we had a disagreement.

Yeah, sure you did.

It's right there in my biography.

Unfortunately the Buddha intervened. He's a tough motherfucker.

[Vazdaria]

Yeah, sure you did.

It's right there in my biography.

Unfortunately the Buddha intervened. He's a tough motherfucker.

Didn't he fast for some 50 days or something like that?

[Tarsonis Survivors]

The difference being one Is a being of infinite power, Creator of the universe and all its' laws and Glory, if you believe that sort of thing.

The other is a group of beings equally as fallible as myself, and with no higher power to give credence to their authority, their judgment is meaningless so long as I can challenge them.

So no it's morality by consensus, as opposed to a true objective Morality.

You conflate power with wisdom. They are not the same. You assert "objective" morality in a clear instance of objectively subjective morality. And you seem unhealthily fixated on the degree to which you are overpowered. A meaningless distinction so long as you are overpowered.

Basically, yours is a symphony of non sequitur.

Because wisdom hardly matters considering morality, so long as morality is a mandate from the masses and not an objective standard. All that matters is the power to assert your morality over someone else, or the morality of the Masses to assert their power over the minority.

Morality then is essentially only a tyranny of the masses, as opposed to a high philosophical concept.

[Sun Wukong]

You conflate power with wisdom. They are not the same. You assert "objective" morality in a clear instance of objectively subjective morality. And you seem unhealthily fixated on the degree to which you are overpowered. A meaningless distinction so long as you are overpowered.

Basically, yours is a symphony of non sequitur.

Because wisdom hardly matters considering morality, so long as morality is a mandate from the masses and not an objective standard. All that matters is the power to assert your morality over someone else, or the morality of the Masses to assert their power over the minority.

Morality then is essentially only a tyranny of the masses, as opposed to a high philosophical concept.

Only if you lack all sense of nuance, a basic grasp of behavioral biology, and knowledge of Game Theory.

[Imperial Esplanade]

Hmm, I smell an attempt of slander here. The firm conducting the poll is admittingly Democratically-aligned, and it fails to state exactly the question that was stated. I'm sorry, but that just sounds very sketchy. All the while the Republicans are enjoying a majority in both houses of Congress, and are lining up for a potential 2016 run at the White House against a weak potential Democratic field. ( I mean... comon', Hillary? Really? )

Side note: there's actually a difference between a 'National Religion' and a 'Theocracy.' Even in a state that endorses a particular national religion, one may still posses the right to practice any religion they please, unless the said freedom of religion is textually, or traditionally, prohibited by law. Take Israel, for example, which endorses Judaism as a state religion, yet allows its' citizens the right of observance and practice of other religions.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Yeah, sure you did.

It's right there in my biography.

Unfortunately the Buddha intervened. He's a tough motherfucker.

I seem to recall the Buddha taking my side and holding you down, as I threw peanuts at you.

[Neutraligon]

You conflate power with wisdom. They are not the same. You assert "objective" morality in a clear instance of objectively subjective morality. And you seem unhealthily fixated on the degree to which you are overpowered. A meaningless distinction so long as you are overpowered.

Basically, yours is a symphony of non sequitur.

Because wisdom hardly matters considering morality, so long as morality is a mandate from the masses and not an objective standard. All that matters is the power to assert your morality over someone else, or the morality of the Masses to assert their power over the minority.

Morality then is essentially only a tyranny of the masses, as opposed to a high philosophical concept.

And in the case of a god morality is only tyranny of the one. Morality is in the end an opinion, whether that is the opinion of a god that is imposed by on high, or the opinion of general society imposed by the group, or the morality of the individual. Morality is nothing more or less then an opinion.

[Sun Wukong]

It's right there in my biography.

Unfortunately the Buddha intervened. He's a tough motherfucker.

I seem to recall the Buddha taking my side and holding you down, as I threw peanuts at you.

Hallucinations are often a sign of serious brain disorder. You should get that checked out.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Wow. True. Good thing that I didn't do that.

But you did, you said shared values can be important to maintaining a society. I'd go one further and say its imperative to maintaining a society.

But holding that up the argument, means morality itself doesn't actually matter. The Aztecs sacrificed their most beautiful citizens for a good harvest. IS it immoral? No because it was useful to society, and by their shared values it was perfectly moral.

Cannibals on the Congo find no immorality in their practices because they are shared values.


(Godwin be damned) The Nazi's saw exterminating undesirables not only as moral but a moral imperative. So did communists in China.

I stated that shared values can be important in maintaining a society. I did not define morality solely as that which is useful to a society.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Because wisdom hardly matters considering morality, so long as morality is a mandate from the masses and not an objective standard. All that matters is the power to assert your morality over someone else, or the morality of the Masses to assert their power over the minority.

Morality then is essentially only a tyranny of the masses, as opposed to a high philosophical concept.

Only if you lack all sense of nuance, a basic grasp of behavioral biology, and knowledge of Game Theory.

On the contrary, behavioral psychology supports my assertion as can be seen, from the SPE, and well history.

[ImperialistSalvia]

It's fucked but on the bright side, they didn't single one denomination out (Church of America, here we come)

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Hmm, I smell an attempt of slander here. The firm conducting the poll is admittingly Democratically-aligned, and it fails to state exactly the question that was stated. I'm sorry, but that just sounds very sketchy. All the while the Republicans are enjoying a majority in both houses of Congress, and are lining up for a potential 2016 run at the White House against a weak potential Democratic field. ( I mean... comon', Hillary? Really? )

Side note: there's actually a difference between a 'National Religion' and a 'Theocracy.' Even in a state that endorses a particular national religion, one may still posses the right to practice any religion they please, unless the said freedom of religion is textually, or traditionally, prohibited by law. Take Israel, for example, which endorses Judaism as a state religion, yet allows its' citizens the right of observance and practice of other religions.

They actually did state the question asked, and I even linked it in the OP (Q17 for "Question 17").

If you could show some polls that paint Hillary Clinton as a weak candidate against any of the most likely GOP candidates, I'd like to see them.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Hmm, I smell an attempt of slander here. The firm conducting the poll is admittingly Democratically-aligned, and it fails to state exactly the question that was stated. I'm sorry, but that just sounds very sketchy. All the while the Republicans are enjoying a majority in both houses of Congress, and are lining up for a potential 2016 run at the White House against a weak potential Democratic field. ( I mean... comon', Hillary? Really? )

Side note: there's actually a difference between a 'National Religion' and a 'Theocracy.' Even in a state that endorses a particular national religion, one may still posses the right to practice any religion they please, unless the said freedom of religion is textually, or traditionally, prohibited by law. Take Israel, for example, which endorses Judaism as a state religion, yet allows its' citizens the right of observance and practice of other religions.

They actually did state the question asked, and I even linked it in the OP (Q17 for "Question 17".

If you could show some polls that paint Hillary Clinton as a weak candidate against any of the most likely GOP candidates, I'd like to see them.

She's no stronger than any 1 GOP candidate, or Dem Candidate for that matter. But those of us looking down the road, see the Dems have no winner in the on deck circle.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

I seem to recall the Buddha taking my side and holding you down, as I threw peanuts at you.

Hallucinations are often a sign of serious brain disorder. You should get that checked out.

Thanks to Obamacare I can't afford it.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

They actually did state the question asked, and I even linked it in the OP (Q17 for "Question 17").

If you could show some polls that paint Hillary Clinton as a weak candidate against any of the most likely GOP candidates, I'd like to see them.

She's no stronger than any 1 GOP candidate, or Dem Candidate for that matter. But those of us looking down the road, see the Dems have no winner in the on deck circle.

If you could show some polls that paint Hillary Clinton as a weak candidate against any of the most likely GOP candidates, I'd like to see them.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Because wisdom hardly matters considering morality, so long as morality is a mandate from the masses and not an objective standard. All that matters is the power to assert your morality over someone else, or the morality of the Masses to assert their power over the minority.

Morality then is essentially only a tyranny of the masses, as opposed to a high philosophical concept.

And in the case of a god morality is only tyranny of the one. Morality is in the end an opinion, whether that is the opinion of a god that is imposed by on high, or the opinion of general society imposed by the group, or the morality of the individual. Morality is nothing more or less then an opinion.

Yes but the tyranny of a "God" is much more justifiable than tyranny of "people"

[Sun Wukong]

And in the case of a god morality is only tyranny of the one. Morality is in the end an opinion, whether that is the opinion of a god that is imposed by on high, or the opinion of general society imposed by the group, or the morality of the individual. Morality is nothing more or less then an opinion.

Yes but the tyranny of a "God" is much more justifiable than tyranny of "people"

Not remotely. If anything his greater power makes it more petulant.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

She's no stronger than any 1 GOP candidate, or Dem Candidate for that matter. But those of us looking down the road, see the Dems have no winner in the on deck circle.

If you could show some polls that paint Hillary Clinton as a weak candidate against any of the most likely GOP candidates, I'd like to see them.

Okay let me say it again. She (Currently) is no stronger or weaker really than any other candidate in the field. But those of us who are looking down the road, can see that the Dems don't have a candidate that can win the General Election. That's not a question of polls but of seeing how the campaigns will go.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

And in the case of a god morality is only tyranny of the one. Morality is in the end an opinion, whether that is the opinion of a god that is imposed by on high, or the opinion of general society imposed by the group, or the morality of the individual. Morality is nothing more or less then an opinion.

Yes but the tyranny of a "God" is much more justifiable than tyranny of "people"

I can argue with people. I can educate people. I can possibly sway the opinions of people.

I don't know where I'd begin to try to do any of these things with a God.