Atheists... Your life is pointless

bump

That doesn't work in this political climate where the GOP talks about only cutting expenses without any revenue; by giving big tax benefits to the oil companies while cutting the funding for education and infrastructure.

The majority of Americans agree with the democrats balanced approach of cutting expenses and increasing tax revenues, but the GOP is deaf and dumb.

The Party of No also means they will not listen to the American people.

All they're interested in are to filibuster 95% of legislation to stop our government from working.

Americans are pretty dumb; they keep reelecting these dorks who wants to ruin this country; we deserve all of the suffering, because we're basically responsible for this mess.

It would be an uphill battle, but women could get a better deal in the workforce if they fought for one, and that includes better daycare options. Women's movements have a history of succeeding where other battles for underprivileged groups have been more like strategic retreats than anything else.

"The poor" don't have many fans, and no one sees them as an investment. (Based on what I've seen of the poor, doubters are mostly correct in their assessments). So backing their cause is indeed a losing battle. But the women I've read about recently who have to choose between kids and a career are a huge potential investment, especially given how well they do in terms of GPA throughout school.

Women have been fighting for equal rights including women's suffrage that was finally approved in 1920. Women still earn .77c to men's $1, and that battle has lasted for much longer.

More women attend college today than men, but their progress in wages and equal rights will take many decades, because of the ignorance perpetrated for so long.

The GOP even wants to take away their individual rights to privacy by enforcing women to have a vaginal inspection if they wish to have an abortion in several states.

Yes, it's going to be many more decades before women have equal rights.

The answer to Setanta's question Spade is that injustice is ineradicable. It is also unquantifiable. Communism was an "answer to it all" and inequalities of opportunity and wealth are more pronounced under communism than anywhere else.

Christianity is a way of life which might be said to try to reduce natural injustice but it is traditionally a secular organisation as well as a spiritual one and because of that it has participated in injustice in the service of reducing injustice.

Pagan societies were riddled with injustice. It was gross. Other cultures we are hardly qualified to discuss. Allegiance to them in our society is merely a style choice. An affectation.

If Christianity was dedicated to removing such wholesale injustice then it is defensible that it employs injustice to extirpate Paganism on the grounds of the greatest good for the greatest number. The reduction of injustice since Pagan times is a measure of Christianity's success in that regard but getting rid of injustice altogether, which is where the sophistry of Setanta's question comes in, is a long way off. He falls back on to an ideal state when an ideal state is not a possibility. And he also seeks to confuse you by implying that 2,000 years is a long time when it isn't in respect of the evolution of societies. Which he must know if he is any sort of historian. More than traces of Paganism can be seen all around us. Also, Setanta does not consider that what injustice there still is in the world is due to anti-Christian forces.

I am at a loss as to why you come on this thread. You provide atheists with easy point scoring opportunities and allow them to be distracted from discussions they are uncomfortable with. You are a heretic and you have admitted it. Your disobedience to the Church and your refusal to accept its authority means that you are not a Christian at all because it is either unified or it is nothing.

I'm an atheist but I am not ready to persuade people to be atheists until I am ready to see everybody be atheists. And I am certainly not ready for that.

There are no real atheists on here. There are just people who object to the Church because it condemns as error (sin) certain behaviour which they either want to engage in or are engaging in.

I agree with this.
Have you studied the ecofeminism movement at all?
The name is a bit of a misnomer as it is not so much a specific "rallying cry" for female equality. It is a debunking of "dominance and control" hierarchies.
Debunking them as being scientifically illusory, and also as being functionally impractical. The reality (in science and in societies) is shared influence.

Here again you appeal to "Justice". Justice of course depending on a Judger. Where is this perspective? I suspect you imply some sort of divine "justice", the great scorekeeper in the sky. The one who will ensure everything works out in the finish. This is escapism at it's worst. Where is the incentive to improve conditions for the "outgroup" for the acolytes of your "Judger"?
The theological necessity (for the more philosophically advanced) is to postulate a "purgatory". This is needed to reconcile a loving "God" with a judging "God". Purgatory has it's Buddhist equivalent in "reincarnation".
Without getting too much into the illogicality of defining "Christianity" as method rather than a dogma. I will point out the absurdity of the notion of "natural injustice". Justice is a concept you beg to appeal to. The naturalness of this is that it is symptomatic of a certain stage of moral development. The stage of "legalism". This was quite obviously not the message of "Christ", especially if we are going to grant canonical scripture as having any validity.
Regarding the use by you, of appealing to naturalism as having some sort of moral authority, it is of course again the straw man you attempt to make called
Social Darwinism. If you would like to defend social Darwinism scientifically go for it. It is a case I can tear to shreds (scientifically).

Pagan times? What does that even mean? Do you mean the Pagan religions popular among the educated classes of Roman society at the time of "Christianity's" invention?
Speaking of heretics.
Roman Catholicism as practiced in many monastic communities is practically indistinguishable from "Pagan mystery religions".

What on Earth is a "real atheist"?
I find this last comment to be of course insulting.
Perhaps you could demonstrate the behavior I am trying to rationalize by not conforming to "Church" teachings.

I don't want shared influence Matt. I want women to take over. I don't want any influence. And I don't understand why anybody else does.

I would like to see the dominant stream of science as a projection of women's values and women in control of the determination of what scientific knowledge should consist of.

It's a lousy job taking all the responsibility and having to look serious about it all the time and taking harsh decisions and not being able to wear frilly underclothing and high-heel shoes and spending hours in beautification salons. I'm fed up with boots, and gnarled hands and functional workwear and us living a few years less than women is a serious pisser.

Not under the cosh by any chance are you? Bring back the Venus of Willendorf. Put an end to financial crises, utility services, wars, and shifts in the foundries and months of trawling in arctic waters.

Our patriarchal science has got everything on push buttons and hydraulic levers. What are they waiting for? They hold all the aces don't they? Nancy Pelosi for President!!.

I am going to assume this is your attempt at satire.
Rather than simply a mistaken notion of what science and politics is, in reality.

Here again you appeal to your misreading. I have never appealed to "Justice" in my entire life mainly because it is a waste of time. There's no such thing.

If God visits retribution on the perps of injustice there will only be the Kalihari bush tribes left.

No, but Wiki says that Vandana Shiva is one of its main contributors, so I suppose it has some promise. I read a book by her in college -- exhaustive and important, albeit depressing -- on the subject of how the West is destroying the environment in the Third World.

Also, kudos on your Vegan campaign, trying to set a trend by telling people about it and hoping they follow your lead. (That argument that a pound of beef requires more water than a year of showers is particularly compelling given the coming global water shortage.) As a former Econ major, I never would have thought a lead-by-example campaign like the Vegans are on would work as well as the method of ending corn subsidies or the method of making livestock production a less efficient venture by regulating factory-style cattle ranches into oblivion, but Veganism really seems to be gathering steam.

As far as my "studies" go, I mainly look at data-oriented things which I flatter myself I may eventually hope to understand, like whether economic stimulus or fiscal austerity now would be better for America's economy in the long run. I don't expect to convince anyone I'm right on that issue; I'd settle for convincing myself on the benefits of one thing or the other.

When they set their minds on making stuff happen, stuff happens. When they sit and wait for stuff to happen, things stagnate. If they wait too long, they'll end up moving backwards.

As far as the wage gap goes, here's a critical detail everyone should acquaint themselves with:



http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/the-mommy-penalty-around-the-world/

If you compare the pay of women-without-kids to men's pay, the wage gap is now about 6% or 7% in OECD nations. Most of the gap seems to come from the fact that working mothers are paid less.

Not when there's a split in the political arena. Even some women support vaginal intrusion to a pregnant woman who wants an abortion.

You wrote,

Most women are involved politically and socially at ever increasing rates; what are you talking about?

Thanks for the compliments. I don't really self-identify with veganism in the sense of belonging to some vegan tribe. It is quite simply the notion of boycott. I have no vested interest in converting others to become Vegan. I would be quite satisfied with a reduction of the factory farming of animals. I have my ethical/economic/health/psychological justifications for this view.

In connection to ecofeminism, the subjugation of any group requires (psychologically) an de-personalizing of the subjugated. Humans find it quite difficult to dominate and control without first doing this. We don't **** women, we **** bitches. We don't eat pigs, we eat pork. We don't kill people, we kill sand-niggers. The euphemisms betray the psychological torment involved. The worst rates of domestic violence are among the workers of slaughter houses and intensive factory farms. It is a lot to expect of a person to go about killing/torturing 8-12 hours/day, building up the emotional and psychological calusses required of the job, and then expect the person to be a normal well functioning member of society. Not that some aren't, but statistically it is certainly evident demographically, that there is a problem. We even see the cross-over of the euphemisms involved. Women are a hot piece of ass. Segmenting women into various aspects of their anatomy. Treating them like a pieces of meat... as the adage goes.

There are no real atheists on here.

Of course it is still nice to have a pretty piece of meat like Justin Timberlake in your corner.

Women treat us like a spanner. You've really got the college girls spooked.


Where's your father?

I will be completely honest with you here mate...It is because based upon who I can read Jesus was...and what I believe a savior to be...It does not do me any good at all, to add hot coals to their kindling if this is the way it is going to be...I think that a God of compassion best exemplifies a savior, much more than judgments and threats of condemnations do...Now based upon the Bible, or what Christians, Catholics...etc...say, am I doing the correct thing? There is absolutely no doubt that according to what they say I am not...But even if it is incorrect for me to do...I try to see things in the ways that I think that Jesus Christ himself would...and I do not concern myself in as much as what prophets, prophetesses, apostles had to say...because at the end of the day...they surly got things wrong just like we all do...Or it is once again the scenario of Adam being like God-like all over again...and then what is the point to the savior? Does one believe that the savior died to condemn in the end? Or to redeem us all in the end? That's it...

I am not concerned if it is an easy point scoring chance for atheists or not...I come here to try to help people and be an inspiration as much as I can be...To best signify what I think that God himself explains to me, and why he does...Now if one purposely prays upon me for this because they see it as a weakness, and not honesty, genuineness, compassion, mercy, love, peace, acceptance...etc ...then shame on them, but I will try my best to refrain from the...well you are going to be condemned if you do not change...Because I am sure that they all have heard it, and know it already...I try to get them to see things from a different side that most do not preach...where you are getting them to rationalize...Do you want to be saved? Well, but it is, you see...No, no, no...Do you want to be saved? That's it...appreciate what a savior is...and what he can actually do...and what one preaches he has and is going to do...not what may be for others, and may be for me as well...If anyone wants to believe then they can, and can find Jesus...I do not think that people need to be turned away because of the threats of wrath and condemnations...because if this is to happen...It is never fully known what will lead us there, or save us from it from an incomprehensible beings thinking...And I simply refuse to pretend that I know all the answers concerning that...and I will explain again...I think that if one preaches judgment, then the judgment is also placed upon them as well...and they are subject to lose their own grace...and I also follow whatever you give in Jesus name...you will reap 100 fold in this life...And do you want to know what I would like to reap back in 100 fold? You guessed it, forgiveness, empathy, compassion, mercy, acceptance, patience, etc...I simply do not wish to give bold judgments in Jesus name...because I believe I will reap that in 100 fold...

That is your opinion mate...and I am glad that you have said it to me if this is how you actually feel about me...I simply disagree with you on that...I think it has to do with how much one actually wants to emulate Jesus Christ as much as they can...and their desire to actually do so...Then it ever had to do with a foundation...and what rituals there are...I think if one believes Jesus exists...It is all about being honest to God...because he can see, and knows everything...and I can not lie to God and pretend that my faith is complete by taking that path you described...but actually having a willingness to be like I think Jesus would be...and always trying to validate to God and others that half the goal is all in the intentions, and obedience itself...like you have said I am disobedient...I simply think our views of obedience are completely different...but I am not an enemy of yours...and never will be...those who are not against us, are with us...

New International Version (©2011)

Luke 9:50

"Do not stop him," Jesus said, "for whoever is not against you is for you."

http://bible.cc/luke/9-50.htm

I never make the claim that I could not be wrong, because I know I can be...And that is how one knows it is genuine...and what I think people who are looking want to hear...and why I do not hold back what I believe in anyway...

Oh poor baby. Does that make you feel "used"?
The victim/victor framing is primarily due to your unrealistic assumptions regarding sexuality.

Doubtful.
However, I don't seem to have much trouble finding love among members of the opposite sex.

Biologically or theologically?