The real meaning of Xmas. Slaughter of children

[Dave Lane]

Holy shit if Obama had said this they would be lining up to tar and feather him, Como would have a deport him thread and everything!@@!!1!!

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by listopencil

That doesn't naturally follow from the remarks in the video. The narrator openly admits that not only is life not fair, but that injustice is done regardless of government intervention. It would be more correct to say that the man is expressing the belief that, if anything, you are your own god.

It applies to Dave Lane's politics though. That was my point.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

It applies to Dave Lane's politics though. That was my point.

I am unaware of Dave Lane's political views, but I don't think you can deconstruct a person's every opinion based on their political affiliation. People are (usually) more complicated than that.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by listopencil

I am unaware of Dave Lane's political views, but I don't think you can deconstruct a person's every opinion based on their political affiliation. People are (usually) more complicated than that.

I've seen Dave Lane's position enough to know. And to know who his god is. It's the god of Progressives.
Whether, you still disagree with it or not, my post #226 was still just clarifying what I meant.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I've seen Dave Lane's position enough to know. And to know who his god is. It's the god of Progressives.
Whether, you still disagree with it or not, my post #226 was still just clarifying what I meant.

I can't really defend Dave's political views. I don't know what they are, and even if I did I might not share them. I will say that I agree with the narrator of the video and that I don't think his remarks were political.

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

God wills it!

Only the creator of this thread, who happens to be an atheist. You are your own god..take it ez on the children.

[stevieray]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

Have you gotten a lot funnier lately or are you just growing on me?

still got nothing, huh...?

shocked.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

Umm because there is zero proof or evidence of your idea.

Did Carl Sagan have an answer to my questions or just ask me to trust science?

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Brock

Theories in science are designed to make sense to critical thinking.

What i really dont understand is your comment about stem cell research.

One could take a view of stem cell research as a creator (us), manipulating them to create life. At a very basic level of course but who is to say everything reality lets us observe isn't created by an outside source manipulating it?

Mind you this theory doesn't mean man was created with a specific purpose in mind. Our universe might just be an experiment in some petri dish.

Critical thinking is only possible if you can understand all factors, which we don't. All of our science could be so primitive we can't begin to understand all the factors involved.

I always fall back to the reality we observe, like the universe and what would replace it if it didn't exist. Something started the chain reaction. If everything in our reality was created by the big bang, where did the elements that allowed it to happen come from?

I'm definitely not trying to change anyone's mind since I don't know. I just don't understand the need to mock a belief that can't be proven doesn't exist.

[Dave Lane]

Originally Posted by listopencil

I am unaware of Dave Lane's political views, but I don't think you can deconstruct a person's every opinion based on their political affiliation. People are (usually) more complicated than that.

You do realize that BEP thinks anything other than full on anarchy is leftist elite commies. I think government can have a place to level the playing field and help those that cannot help themselves. Almost christ-like. To that I plead guilty.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

You do realize that BEP thinks anything other than full on anarchy is leftist elite commies. I think government can have a place to level the playing field and help those that cannot help themselves. Almost christ-like. To that I plead guilty.

Complete misrepresentation of my stands. A STRAWMAN. This simply shows how far left you are that limited govt as envisioned by our Founders when you call my stands "full on anarchy." You're a left-wing progressive—you are not for a level playing field. I am more for that than you.

Obamacare, spending our way out of a recession—NONE of these are for a level playing field. They're control ideologies. One that calls for govt controlling, steering an economy and the other using the force and violence of govt to subsidize a service for all based on each according to their need and ability to pay.

Furthermore, I support more govt than even listopencil who labels himself as a libertarian which is less govt than myself. It's referred to as mini-anarchism. And you're talking to him in a manner that denounces anarchy. LOL. That's the logic of a progressive mind.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

You do realize that BEP thinks anything other than full on anarchy is leftist elite commies. I think government can have a place to level the playing field and help those that cannot help themselves. Almost christ-like. To that I plead guilty.

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Furthermore, I support more govt than even listopencil who labels himself as a libertarian which is less govt than myself. It's referred to as mini-anarchism. And you're talking to him in a manner that denounces anarchy. LOL. That's the logic of a progressive mind.

I do identify myself as a Libertarian because that's the party that most closely represents my views. Notice that there is a capital "L" at the beginning of that word. That means that I tend to agree with more of the Libertarian platform than I do of the platforms of other political parties. There are some points on their platform that I disagree with. BEP, you found one recently regarding the mentally ill. I don't agree with it.

There are also points that I disagree with in libertarianism in general. I hold socialist beliefs on a handful of issues. Those are mostly issues regarding citizens who, through no fault of their own, are incapable of helping themselves. Children, the mentally handicapped, the physically handicapped, etc. They also include issues that I feel need to be handled by a federal (and sometimes state) government. At one point I jotted off a quick list in a different thread. It's not necessarily complete, but it's a good starting point:

Originally Posted by listopencil

1) fight a war on foreign soil

2) repel a substantial military invasion

3) provide an appropriate setting for settling legal disputes

4) establish/enforce a system of laws

5) keep records of official documents

Lastly, libertarianism isn't anarchy. It's not even "mini-anarchy" just because someone chooses to refer to it as such. It's about putting power in the hands of citizens, the individual, as much as is possible while still maintaining a functioning government. People who call themselves "libertarians" will disagree with how much power the state should keep, how much socialism should be allowed and several other issues. I prefer to use the Constitution as my rulebook, and my morals as my guide. I happen to think that everyone should.