Freeligion

"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate -- look at his character. It is alleged by men of loose principles, or defective views of the subject, that religion and morality are not necessary or important qualifications for political stations. But the scriptures teach a different doctrine. They direct that rulers should be men who rule in the fear of God, men of truth, hating covetousness. It is to the neglect of this rule that we must ascribe the multiplied frauds, breaches of trust, speculations and embezzlements of public property which astonish even ourselves; which tarnish the character of our country and which disgrace our government. When a citizen gives his vote to a man of known immorality, he abuses his civic responsibility; he not only sacrifices his own responsibility; he sacrifices not only his own interest, but that of his neighbor; he betrays the interest of his country."
Noah Webster
 
So that's not what you did when you first said I was embarrassing myself?
Correct, it isn't. It's no kind of victory for me when you say stupid shit. When the drunk uncle embarrasses himself at the wedding, nobody wins, really.
 
So that's not what you did when you first said I was embarrassing myself?
Correct, it isn't. It's no kind of victory for me when you say stupid shit. When the drunk uncle embarrasses himself at the wedding, nobody wins, really.
Then it was no victory for me either.

Logic doesn't appear to be your strong suit.

What level of education do you have?
 
Then it was no victory for me either.

Logic doesn't appear to be your strong suit.
this makes no sense, as someone embarrassing himself is obviously quantitatively different than someone being embarrassed by someone else.

Ding, you are a pseudo-intellectual charlatan, through and through.
 
Then it was no victory for me either.

Logic doesn't appear to be your strong suit.
this makes no sense, as someone embarrassing himself is obviously quantitatively different than someone being embarrassed by someone else.

Ding, you are a pseudo-intellectual charlatan, through and through.
But you are telling someone else that they are embarrassing themselves, which is no different than me saying I am embarrassing you.
 
"The only foundation for... a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments."
Benjamin Rush
 
So by sharing the beliefs of our Founding Fathers, I am embarrassing myself?

That sounds like an argument a communist would make.
 
It's obvious that ding does not like the idea behind Howlerism.

He's obviously a bit crazy, so I suggest to listen to what he says, and do somewhat of the opposite!

Maybe he can give us ideas, even if we reverse them... :)
 
So to start, will there be an afterlife?

Gotta use howler monkeys as an example. Do they have an afterlife?
 
Hopefully to the point that we can all get along again and make this world a better place.

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"


He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"


He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"


Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

-- Emo Phillips
Thanks! I have always loved Emo Phillips
 
It's obvious that ding does not like the idea behind Howlerism.

He's obviously a bit crazy, so I suggest to listen to what he says, and do somewhat of the opposite!

Maybe he can give us ideas, even if we reverse them... :)
I couldn't be happier that you found something that makes you happy, RWS.

After all, the dogma of atheism is based on materialism, primitive instincts and the deification of man.

What better way to satisfy your primitive instinct than to mock religion, amirite?

What you don't realize is that what you intend for evil, God is using for the good of those who love him. So in effect, you are doing God's work and I owe you a great big thank you for that.
 
I don't intend anything for evil. I intend things for a better good. Even if it means making a new nonsensical religion that promotes better values.

Let's hug though... :2up:

I think you want to be good. You're just a little caught up in the dogma and not seeing reality.
 
I don't intend anything for evil. I intend things for a better good. Even if it means making a new nonsensical religion that promotes better values.

Let's hug though... :2up:

I think you want to be good. You're just a little caught up in the dogma and not seeing reality.
That sounds like a rationalization to me, bro.

You want a hug? Sure, c'mon, let's hug it out.

Your problem is that you can't be objective when it comes to religion or atheism.
 
That's the thing. I'm very objective. I'm not subjective at all...

I have reasons to think the way I do. And I make decisions based on that.

I can't let lies that are told to me from birth, affect my reality about this world...
 
Ding intentionally denies examination because ding is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of ding. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. ding assumes superiority through birthright and gender. ding has an extraordinary ability to be incited and inflamed by social movements. Ding dismisses his defeats and ignores his incongruities. Ding desires a society where he can continue to be the dominatinig bully he wants to be. Ding is a religion. The religious nature of ding explains his hostility towards non-believers, which makes him believe they are inherently evil. Ding's dogma is based on worshipping stuff he was born into, and has no idea of the origins of his religion. Ding sees no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Ding practices moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, genocidal behavior, cultural hatred and intolerance of deviance. Ding worships science but is the first to reject it when it suits his purpose. Ding can be identified by a need to take control and profess his religion. His religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of other religions and equality via submission and death. Ding practices critical theory which is the Christian belief that he doesn't have to examine anything outside of his scripture. Ding confuses critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something he never does.
That is freaking awesome.
 

Forum List

Back
Top