NationStates

Menassa wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
No, i'm saying that if going to church on sunday because you believe in the teachings without evidence is a lifestyle, then in what sense is a fascist rally any different and not a lifestyle.
I'm not equating them morally. I'm equating them practically.
The fact is, the IDEOLOGY is abhorrent.

Then you've a problem against the lack of evidence... so don't be Anti Theist... be Anti-lack-of-evidence... it doesn't have a nice ring to it but it's still better to be true.

If I were to say I was Anti Atheist... we would (or should) be having an argument over objective morality.

I am anti-lack of evidence. For that reason, I am anti-theist, anti-racist, etc. All of those things fall under that category.
You may as well say "I am pro-lack of evidence!" instead of saying you are a theist. When we are talking about a specific issue, it is acceptable to use specific labels.

There is no such thing as a values system independent of evaluators, and it is utterly absurd to argue otherwise. Even if god were the source of morality, he would be a subject, and thus the morality is subjective. The entire idea of Objective morality is as incoherrent as an "Unvalued valuable object."

Aleckandor wrote:

The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace wrote:Lets just say I'm being a devout member of the Church of Ass on that post.

I've considered converting.

Is it like Buddhism or Confucianism, more of a philosophical thing than a religion, compatible with other religions? If so, I want to become a high priest. Maybe a Bishop, one day.

Aleckandor wrote:

The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace wrote:Lets just say I'm being a devout member of the Church of Ass on that post.

I've considered converting.

We shall expand like the buttcheeks of old!

Huzzah!

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

Aleckandor wrote:
I've considered converting.

Is it like Buddhism or Confucianism, more of a philosophical thing than a religion, compatible with other religions? If so, I want to become a high priest. Maybe a Bishop, one day.

You deserve to be Archdeacon.

The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace wrote:

Aleckandor wrote:
I've considered converting.

We shall expand like the buttcheeks of old!

Huzzah!

Indeed. *Bites Into Bacon Taco*

Reggae Magmia wrote:

Libertarian California wrote:Apatheist


Although, I've toyed with the idea of making up my own religion. Of course, I'll have no way to prove my deity exists, considering I will have made him/her up. Still, it seems like an interesting idea. Should I do it?

Even if you don't choose to follow it, it's quite interesting. I did it when I was younger but never "converted".

It was a religion based on the four elements. The four corners of the world are divided into tribes, each corner having its own element, and a god to represent the element. There would be eternal war until one element god and its tribe conquers the rest.
I never developed it past that but now I think I'm going to start it up again, just for the hell of it.

I would say you should, just for the fun of it, or take it seriously if you wish. But the process is interesting.

My religion would include a deity who is mostly apathetic and doesn't do much. It would not be worshiped, but it would be acknowledge instead. It would be a religion based upon objective truths, natural rights, and voluntary associate. Basically, a "live and let live" religion.

And no, it's not affiliated with Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Even though I'm a right-wing libertarian, I do not care for Rand.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Menassa wrote:Then you've a problem against the lack of evidence... so don't be Anti Theist... be Anti-lack-of-evidence... it doesn't have a nice ring to it but it's still better to be true.

If I were to say I was Anti Atheist... we would (or should) be having an argument over objective morality.

I am anti-lack of evidence. For that reason, I am anti-theist, anti-racist, etc. All of those things fall under that category.

There is no such thing as a values system independent of evaluators, and it is utterly absurd to argue otherwise. Even if god were the source of morality, he would be a subject, and thus the morality is subjective. The entire idea of Objective morality is as incoherrent as an "Unvalued valuable object."

So we are finished then:
I do not want to incur the wrath of the Mods we can continue this argument elsewhere... the evidence for a god.

A Deity that defines morality would not be subject because it is a deity... the humans.... and I know this may sting... would be subject... because they are humans.

What does the church of ass entail?

Ostroeuropa wrote:What does the church of ass entail?

Posteriors or donkeys, or possibly both.

Menassa wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
I am anti-lack of evidence. For that reason, I am anti-theist, anti-racist, etc. All of those things fall under that category.

There is no such thing as a values system independent of evaluators, and it is utterly absurd to argue otherwise. Even if god were the source of morality, he would be a subject, and thus the morality is subjective. The entire idea of Objective morality is as incoherrent as an "Unvalued valuable object."

So we are finished then:
I do not want to incur the wrath of the Mods we can continue this argument elsewhere... the evidence for a god.

A Deity that defines morality would not be subject because it is a deity... the humans.... and I know this may sting... would be subject... because they are humans.

You are not using the correct definitions of subject and object.
Is god an object?

Libertarian California wrote:

Reggae Magmia wrote:Even if you don't choose to follow it, it's quite interesting. I did it when I was younger but never "converted".

It was a religion based on the four elements. The four corners of the world are divided into tribes, each corner having its own element, and a god to represent the element. There would be eternal war until one element god and its tribe conquers the rest.
I never developed it past that but now I think I'm going to start it up again, just for the hell of it.

I would say you should, just for the fun of it, or take it seriously if you wish. But the process is interesting.

My religion would include a deity who is mostly apathetic and doesn't do much. It would not be worshiped, but it would be acknowledge instead. It would be a religion based upon objective truths, natural rights, and voluntary associate. Basically, a "live and let live" religion.

And no, it's not affiliated with Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Even though I'm a right-wing libertarian, I do not care for Rand.

You TRAITOR!

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Menassa wrote:So we are finished then:
I do not want to incur the wrath of the Mods we can continue this argument elsewhere... the evidence for a god.

A Deity that defines morality would not be subject because it is a deity... the humans.... and I know this may sting... would be subject... because they are humans.

You are not using the correct definitions of subject and object.
Is god an object?

If you would like to continue this debate my inbox is open.... however we're stopping here.

North Stradia wrote:

Libertarian California wrote:
My religion would include a deity who is mostly apathetic and doesn't do much. It would not be worshiped, but it would be acknowledge instead. It would be a religion based upon objective truths, natural rights, and voluntary associate. Basically, a "live and let live" religion.

And no, it's not affiliated with Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Even though I'm a right-wing libertarian, I do not care for Rand.

You TRAITOR!

I'm sorry. While I like voluntary association, and free-market capitalism, I still think Rand is annoying.

Menassa wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
You are not using the correct definitions of subject and object.
Is god an object?

If you would like to continue this debate my inbox is open.... however we're stopping here.

Then I await your reply

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

North Stradia wrote:In my ten days on NSG I've met more fascists (about 20) than I have in all my life (about 2).

Technically, I am a Falangist — Falangism is a conservative, more capitalistic (non-Fascist, really) version of Fascism.

Reggae Magmia wrote:

He is referring to the “Christian” Dark Ages, which set humanity back in the sciences big-time.

Yeah, Falangism is para-fascist or quasi-fascist. My personal ideology is in the same boat (quasi-fascist).

The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace wrote:

Aleckandor wrote:
I've considered converting.

We shall expand like the buttcheeks of old!

Huzzah!

Oh Jah, here we go again with another NS Cult.

Libertarian California wrote:My religion would include a deity who is mostly apathetic and doesn't do much. It would not be worshiped, but it would be acknowledge instead. It would be a religion based upon objective truths, natural rights, and voluntary associate. Basically, a "live and let live" religion.

And no, it's not affiliated with Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Even though I'm a right-wing libertarian, I do not care for Rand.

That actually sounds pretty good.

Maybe I should make a thread on this. "If you could create a religion..."
It would be interesting to see the responses.

Ostroeuropa wrote:What does the church of ass entail?

Tax exempt status and a liking for snark.

It's like an congregation of trickster deities except we aren't HUGE assholes, just moderate assholes.

The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:What does the church of ass entail?

Tax exempt status and a liking for snark.

It's like an congregation of trickster deities except we aren't HUGE assholes, just moderate assholes.

Clearly we need a schism.

Reggae Magmia wrote:

The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace wrote:
We shall expand like the buttcheeks of old!

Huzzah!

Oh Jah, here we go again with another NS Cult.

Libertarian California wrote:My religion would include a deity who is mostly apathetic and doesn't do much. It would not be worshiped, but it would be acknowledge instead. It would be a religion based upon objective truths, natural rights, and voluntary associate. Basically, a "live and let live" religion.

And no, it's not affiliated with Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Even though I'm a right-wing libertarian, I do not care for Rand.

That actually sounds pretty good.

Maybe I should make a thread on this. "If you could create a religion..."
It would be interesting to see the responses.

Do it.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Menassa wrote:If you would like to continue this debate my inbox is open.... however we're stopping here.

Then I await your reply

Now we must argue here about how you have to reiterate your argument in my inbox

But your next post, whatever it may be... I will not respond to here... no offense to be taken

I am an Islamic Christian Hindu Catholic Buddhist but sometimes I lean towards Deism.

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:

Aleckandor wrote:
I've considered converting.

Is it like Buddhism or Confucianism, more of a philosophical thing than a religion, compatible with other religions? If so, I want to become a high priest. Maybe a Bishop, one day.

We shall form a Church of Ass.

Mighty it shall be, upon a rock of snark shall it be founded.

Sarcasm shall be our sword, and red-herrings our shield.

For we shall united in the love of hatred.

For in the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was schadenfreude.

It's more of a thing that's tax-deductible, therefore good.

If you believe in being inappropriately sarcastic, and would at least consider blowing out a blind kids birthday candles just for the lulz (not officially chan related), you qualify like everybody else who's on this site.

Reggae Magmia wrote:

Libertarian California wrote:My religion would include a deity who is mostly apathetic and doesn't do much. It would not be worshiped, but it would be acknowledge instead. It would be a religion based upon objective truths, natural rights, and voluntary associate. Basically, a "live and let live" religion.

And no, it's not affiliated with Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Even though I'm a right-wing libertarian, I do not care for Rand.

That actually sounds pretty good.

Maybe I should make a thread on this. "If you could create a religion..."
It would be interesting to see the responses.

Yes, if you want to.

North Stradia wrote:Do it.

I shall, in a few minutes.

Demen 2 wrote:I am an Islamic Christian Hindu Catholic Buddhist but sometimes I lean towards Deism.

...wut?

Ostroeuropa wrote:

The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace wrote:Tax exempt status and a liking for snark.

It's like an congregation of trickster deities except we aren't HUGE assholes, just moderate assholes.

Clearly we need a schism.

That would be the Church of Assholes of which we don't talk to anymore, they egged my house.

They must therefore die.

Reggae Magmia wrote:

North Stradia wrote:Do it.

I shall, in a few minutes.

Demen 2 wrote:I am an Islamic Christian Hindu Catholic Buddhist but sometimes I lean towards Deism.

...wut?

STOP CONDEMNING MY RELIGION YOU LIBERAL HIPPIE GUN HATER