Atheism and Thanksgiving

[Klash]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Sorry i should have worded the question this way, how far do you allow laissez faire ideals infringe upon personal rights? A little easier to tackle now! lol

Thanks for the summarized version.

I thought I smelt a little Marxism or Kantianism in there!

But seriously, I don't think Capitalism is correlated with infringing personal rights. I think it is the exact opposite actually. You cannot have any rights without the realization of property rights. Property is the manifestation of your past production that was dependent on the skills and ideas acquired prior to your ownership of that property. Once you have the government dictating to people what they can have rights too, you don't have property rights; it would be more accurate to put forward that you have leased rights from the state and this is where we are today. The government tells us what we can and cannot do even with our own bodies (implying we don't have ownership); our property is taxed (in many states) as if we were renting it and if we don't pay rent we can be evicted (implying we don't have ownership); our income is taken from our production to give to people (including nations) we don't even know and possibly oppose on many different levels.

Anything but Capitalism requires the initiation of force by government (other people) on individuals. Statism (fascism, socialism, communism) IMO, is another form of faith. It doesn't make rational since; it is contradicting and it is implemented through force. Yet many different forms of statism is supported and this is where statism is similar to religion.

I believe that freedom and reason are correlated and opposed to that is faith (and its synonyms) and force, which are also correlated. Those who rely on faith cannot persuade the rational; persuasion is only possible if someone submits to reason. The result is the faithful must resort to force, whether this is to enforce their morality that abortion or homosexuality is a sin or whether it is to enforce their morality that material accumulation is immoral.

[PL456]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Well, regarding human logic and reasoning. This is not to be relied on too much. You guys' own political arguments about the current President (a human) and his apparent glowing errors are one example. There are myriad examples in medicine--didnt the best doctors at the time bleed George Washington to death, believing this was a way to relieve his body of various malicious "humors"?
Wasnt it Plato or Aristotle (I dont care to google it presently) the one who posited the earth was at the center of the universe? These are examples of "great minds" of the time. Humans are fallible, feeble, and totally have totally no control over life. Human opinion and our body of knowledge constantly change, things are modified, removed, adapted. A belief in God, and a living relationship with Him will strengthen you beyond belief. This base does not change. So-called "rational" people demand answers and proof. Faith is just that--belief in something that you cannot prove. There are, however, many examples of miracles in the Bible. Jesus appeared to many after His death. He performed many miracles prior to His death. How can these be explained? I believe this is a challenge to many who are non believers. They cannot, will not relinquish their falsely-held belief that they are in control of their lives. Having faith means you admit you are not in control, and you need help and strength from God. We all need this.

Now, people make the mistake of looking at what others do in the name of religion, what humans do, that are often-times incorrect and self-motivated. People look at the actions of these people who claim to be religious, and therefore, are assumed to be living exactly by the book. When people that are non believers see someone that is spiritual make an error, it is easy to jump in and say--See! I knew that religion was no good!!! This is, IMO, a form of self-assurance. They are trying to tell themselves they are right, and assuage their own insecurities. Remember, people do things and people are fallible. People make mistakes--God doesnt. Dont look at the person--look at God. Just listen to what people say and go read the Book and see for yourself. Dont think all the televanglists and others are speaking directly from God. We are taught to compare what they say with the scripture. Remember friends, in the Book it does state that sooner or later, every knee shall bow. Sooner or later, you will call on God. This is a fact.

[BIGMOFO]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

No offense PL, I'm a firm believer in God, Christ and the Holy Spirit, but anyone can be thankful for the things they have experienced in life. Even a dog is thankful for a good owner. I can tell by the way my dog acts towards me after I take time to spend with her and when I don't. So, people don't have to believe to be thankful. Many people believe they are in complete control of what happens. Where as guys like you and I believe that we have free will to choose and we have free will to set goals and set out on a path, the difference is, we (you and I) know that even though we may set the path, God controls our footsteps.

AMEN my brotha preach on!

[daved150]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL!!!


man, pull my boy klash's string and watch him go!! even if or when you agree with him he points and counter points your agreement!!

[mandarb11]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Ya I think this discussion has moved far away from the original subject, usually does though! lol

[a-bomb83]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

wow, you all are way over analyzing thanksgiving,lol.

[mandarb11]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Sorry i should have worded the question this way, how far do you allow laissez faire ideals infringe upon personal rights? A little easier to tackle now! lol

[mandarb11]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Haha too true. Well you definately have an education, a diploma means very little.

So I will pose this question. Through vast accumulation the logical sequence is for a few to get the most, this will in the end start to infringe upon peoples personal rights, that is the right to fee choice. When one is economically deficient it limits ones choices for how one lives life. This is one of the reasons why lower socio-economic areas have the highest crime rates (although of course not the only one). The people have little chance of success through regualar means and hence turn to crime to aquire that which they could not gain otherwise! Greed leads to few having the majority while the vast populace has little. This leads to what marx would call class conflict. Now what happens for the most part is that the lower populace is subjugated and placated with illusions of material wealth. I have my big screen tv so even though I can't afford a Mercedes I feel like I have a piece of the pie so I allow the social discrepency to continue. Also the powers that be love to use as role models people that started poor and became rich, this give us all the illusion that we can all be there. These icons again help to placate us. It is interesting stuff to think about!

[Klash]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Is that not the unlitimate conclusion of greed, violence?

No, I don't think greed (or a great desire for material abundance) and violence are correlated. I think they can be when the government endorses it. When the government has the power to take from someone and give to someone else - greed will definitely lead to what most of us call theft; it's just legal theft. I too oppose the theft of property, even if it legal but I don't associate that with the motivation for abundance; it is infringing another's rights, the motivation only displays the lack of the perpetrators morality not that it is correlated with force/fraud.

If left unchecked it can only lead to conflict, as I said as people get more successful at accumulation they aquire more power and are able to aquire more. Look at bill gates as an example. Because of his success he was able to buy out or push out any up and comers. Was he not brought into court by the american goverment for such practices?

The American government can essentially take any business to court with the anti-trust laws.

This joke is an exaggeration but displays the irrationality of the American System.

Three guys are in a jail cell. They start to talking and find out that they're all gas station owners.

The first one says, "I set my prices at a couple of cents higher than my competitors. I'm in here for price-gouging."

The second one says "I set my prices at a couple of cents lower than my competitors. I'm in here for predatory practices."

The third one says "I set my prices at the same price as my competitors. I'm in here for collusion!

[Klash]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Is that not the unlitimate conclusion of greed, violence? If left unchecked it can only lead to conflict, as I said as people get more successful at accumulation they aquire more power and are able to aquire more. Look at bill gates as an example. Because of his success he was able to buy out or push out any up and comers. Was he not brought into court by the american goverment for such practices?

Also the idea of zero-sum is too simplistic, but in essence there is some truth to it, it is relative. Yes during the industrial revolution new wealth was created but if you studied history it also needed the existance of a subservant class by which the middle class used to make their money. Now it is great if you are one of the guys on top, but to be the vast majority at the bottom....as Borat would say, "not so much". Also the zero sum theory does apply somewhat in that the aristocracy (basically the landowners) were largly surplanted by the emergent middle class. Wealth itself was basically redistributed to this emergent class at the expense of the previous elite (as during the French revolution). To sum up any situation into a simplistic theory will never work, i have read almost all political science ideas and none of them fit the bill 100% so to speak, but there is a basis of truth in all of them.

Also excess is again a relative idea, if everyone has a tv, a car, shelter, food etc then that is the norm. Anything in excess of this could then be labelled greed.

I do not ascribe to any one political theory as they all have faults. Unrestricted capitalism is just as dangerous as complete socialism. All life is about balance the Chinese idea of Ying and yen sums that up nicely. all nature needs checks and balances, if the wolves get to successful then they will eventually starve, so too with man made organizations. All societal inventions are inexistance to place balances on people, if the survival of the fittest was the way we all lived there would be no one left. This is where ideas like social mores come into play.

Anyways good discussion bro. What is your background acade,ically if you don't mind me asking, you sound like you have studied some political science before?

I don't have a formal academic background. I just read a lot on philosophy, religion, politics and economics; or I use to before I had kids.

[mandarb11]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Is that not the unlitimate conclusion of greed, violence? If left unchecked it can only lead to conflict, as I said as people get more successful at accumulation they aquire more power and are able to aquire more. Look at bill gates as an example. Because of his success he was able to buy out or push out any up and comers. Was he not brought into court by the american goverment for such practices?

Also the idea of zero-sum is too simplistic, but in essence there is some truth to it, it is relative. Yes during the industrial revolution new wealth was created but if you studied history it also needed the existance of a subservant class by which the middle class used to make their money. Now it is great if you are one of the guys on top, but to be the vast majority at the bottom....as Borat would say, "not so much". Also the zero sum theory does apply somewhat in that the aristocracy (basically the landowners) were largly surplanted by the emergent middle class. Wealth itself was basically redistributed to this emergent class at the expense of the previous elite (as during the French revolution). To sum up any situation into a simplistic theory will never work, i have read almost all political science ideas and none of them fit the bill 100% so to speak, but there is a basis of truth in all of them.

Also excess is again a relative idea, if everyone has a tv, a car, shelter, food etc then that is the norm. Anything in excess of this could then be labelled greed.

I do not ascribe to any one political theory as they all have faults. Unrestricted capitalism is just as dangerous as complete socialism. All life is about balance the Chinese idea of Ying and yen sums that up nicely. all nature needs checks and balances, if the wolves get to successful then they will eventually starve, so too with man made organizations. All societal inventions are inexistance to place balances on people, if the survival of the fittest was the way we all lived there would be no one left. This is where ideas like social mores come into play.

Anyways good discussion bro. What is your background acade,ically if you don't mind me asking, you sound like you have studied some political science before?

[Klash]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Haha your preaching to the coir here klash! Yes all such terms are subjective and therefore open to individual interpretation. For me it is wanting in excess of what you need, pretty simple really. Survival mechanisms have instilled into us the need to accumulate more than what we need in hope that in times of famine, we have enought to survive where as one without "extra" dies out. This does ot make it right.

Do you not want in excess of what your survival requires? T.v, stereo, computer, etc. we could probably even throw bed in there. Would that not make you greedy by your own standards?

See the one thing that distinguishes us from the other animals are morals. Morals are social ideas of conduct and it can be argued that as we are social animals they give us order to allow us to live together. if everyone followed the idea of accumulation of more than we need it would lead to continual conflict (which it has and does) some of it is your right based upon jeleousy. Others are based upon the eventuallity that while the successful accumulate more and more they will eventually infringe upon others that are less succesful ability to have what they need. This leads to conflict. If one followed "greed" to its eventual end it would see a small group of people having everything while the majority have none. That is what I talk about when I say greed. Taking more than what you need to the detriment of others. Again it al comes back to subjectivity.

So your idea of greed is based on the belief that life is a zero-sum situation, i.e. the more some people acquire the less other people can acquire. If we go back 2000 years and apply your philosophy people should have summed out before the industrial revolution - yet more people in the 19th century had more than the monarchs of antiquity. Because of the motivation of profit that is a result of meeting not only peoples survival needs but peoples wants and desires; and for the first time people had the freedom to tap into that potential. "Greed" is a benefit to humanity as long as force is not introduced. Someone that quenches their desire of "greed" with force or fraud is when the desires of greed do harm.

[mandarb11]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Haha your preaching to the coir here klash! Yes all such terms are subjective and therefore open to individual interpretation. For me it is wanting in excess of what you need, pretty simple really. Survival mechanisms have instilled into us the need to accumulate more than what we need in hope that in times of famine, we have enought to survive where as one without "extra" dies out. This does ot make it right. See the one thing that distinguishes us from the other animals are morals. Morals are social ideas of conduct and it can be argued that as we are social animals they give us order to allow us to live together. if everyone followed the idea of accumulation of more than we need it would lead to continual conflict (which it has and does) some of it is your right based upon jeleousy. Others are based upon the eventuallity that while the successful accumulate more and more they will eventually infringe upon others that are less succesful ability to have what they need. This leads to conflict. If one followed "greed" to its eventual end it would see a small group of people having everything while the majority have none. That is what I talk about when I say greed. Taking more than what you need to the detriment of others. Again it al comes back to subjectivity.

[Klash]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

reminds me of a quote I've heard several times from the bible. something to the tune of, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Rich is a relative term as well. But then again, I don't believe to many men are even close to God's level spiritually so of coarse we aren't going to be side by side with God just because we made it through a life on earth.

So in other words it is impossible for a "rich" man to get into heaven but like you said the term "rich" is relative. So when Bill Gates gets to heaven god says: "you poor bastard, get in here."

So depending on the character of your god; everyone or no one could be going to heaven. And that verse doesn't' really help us with the criteria to get there; unless "rich" is defined. I like the "needle's eye" interpretation better. There is a gate called "Needle's Eye" and for a camel to enter the gate it had to kneel to get through; it also seems to fit the Christian doctrine - implying humbleness.

[horsepwr]

Re: Atheism and Thanksgiving

Greed; defined by who and based on what standard? Success is a degree of survival; greed is a term used by those who are jealous or envious of others who have more than they believe is necessary - yet those same people who accuse the "wealthy" of greed could be regarded as greedy by people who have less than they do. In other words, there is no such thing as greed. The term greed will tell you more about the person that uses the term than the person they are applying it to.

Atheism is a position a rational person maintains or returns to, because we are all born atheists. However most of us are brainwashed as children to believe in the supernatural and even though most of us develop our own beliefs as to the character of the supernatural; most never challenge the mere existence of the supernatural.

I do not think emotions are destructive; they offer guidance. They are potentially destructive only if acted upon without introspection.

reminds me of a quote I've heard several times from the bible. something to the tune of, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Rich is a relative term as well. But then again, I don't believe to many men are even close to God's level spiritually so of coarse we aren't going to be side by side with God just because we made it through a life on earth.