It's the consequences...Dammit!

[NewGuy]

I think it is incredibly funny to see self proclaimed know-it-alls regarding anything religious to call a relationship with Christ "metaphysical" and dismiss it.

Equally funny are those who claim that it is only truth for the individuals in the practice of it.

1. Even "scientists" do not call anything truth or fiction without experiential experiments. The people who engage in the mental masturbation of "knowing" "metaphysical" information and discarding Christ as truth are going off of THEORY by definition and nothing else. It clearly, by all logic is THEY who have no fact and no truth. This makes their view irrational.

2. To even DO so would claim that there IS moral relativism, as nearly every thread regarding religious perspective on this board would prove. There can only BE one truth, otherwise the truth would and could NOT be truth. This again, makes the naysayer view completely illogical.

3. The Bible proves beyond any doubt WHATSOEVER with prophecy to any skeptic willing to look, that it IS the devine word of God which cannot be denied. If one IGNORES, that is different.

Seeing that those who deny the validity of Christ are doing so by way of being irrational, illogical, and through ignoring reality, it is clearly humorous. -Yet it is sad at the same time.

It is that kind of thinking which will condemn Christians in the end, and cause those who condemn to be mislead into believing the coming peacemaker because he WILL BE influential and so decieving that all non-Christians will not have the capacity to deny him. He WILL be under the direct influence of satan.

By the contrast with Hitler, this guy will make Hitler look like Harry Potter.

I would hope some actually realize the situation and at least do investigation without blindly following the next "theory" floating across their path.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
No, that socialist utopias always result in misery for the many, with the few in power deriving the benfit is a given. Something socialists failed to realize, is that equal distribution of wealth in and of itself will do nothing to cure social and economic ills, unless accompanied by moral progress.

Freedom and individual liberty are very much preferable to a socialist utopia-cum-nightmare. However, no sane, healthy society can exist with total disregard for the individuals who are its constituents any more than individuals can meaningfully exist in total disregard for the society in which they live. For them to have any sort of meaningful existence, the rights and needs of the individual <b>and</b> must exist in a dynamic equilibrium, with neither sacrificed in the name of the other. This latter is a point missed by socialists and capitalists alike.

That's just it. Lefties DON'T value individuals. They consider a fixation on individual rights to be a cultlike fixation.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29119

The war on individualism
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 1, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern

©_2002_WorldNetDaily.com

We begin with two quotations. No attribution yet. Just the two quotes. You need to ponder over these while you read on.

Quote 1. "We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all."

Quote 2. "We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what's best for society."

Any guesses? The surprise comes later. You need to hold on a few more moments while we discuss the war against individuality.

Yes, a war – a war against the individual. A war that has been waged by the American left for decades.

Why, you might ask, would anyone want to fight the concept of individuality? Good question. Simple answer. Individualism must be fought and suppressed because the concept of the individual is completely incompatible with basic liberal doctrine.

Here's the rub. If you recognize the existence of the individual, it then follows that you must also recognize the concept of individual rights. Among those individual rights are such pesky little nuances as – dare we say it – property rights! Among those property rights would be what our founding fathers might call the right to the fruit of your labors, or what we in our less flowery age would call the money you earn by busting your buns 60 hours a week.

If, then, there is any recognition that you, as a real flesh and blood individual human being, have any right to the money you work for, what sort of excuse can the left come up with to seize those earnings for their wonderful vote-buying schemes?

So, you think I'm going a bit overboard here? Well, while you sit down and grip the arms of your chair for stability, let me tell you that a California congresswoman (Democrat, natch!) recently opined that all wages really belong to the federal government. How's that for individual property rights?

Not convinced? You still don't believe that there's a full-blown war on individuality raging around you? Well then, allow me to invoke the name of one of Washington's premier class warlords, none other than the Senate's Prince of Bloviation, Ted Kennedy. The unlikely event that brought forth this Kennedy gem was the New England Patriots' Super Bowl win earlier this year. Naturally, Kennedy wanted a part in the celebration, so he pushed his way to the television cameras to extol the value of teamwork. Amazingly, Kennedy tells the nation that the Patriots set a wonderful example for us all to follow at a time when we, in America, are engaged in a "war against the individual." His words, not mine. Go plow through The Boston Globe on the Monday following that Super Bowl win to find out for yourself. Do it! You need the research practice.

Driving the point home just a bit more, what do you think this whole "diversity" thing is all about? Diversity committees – diversity seminars – diversity directors. What's behind this sudden love of "diversity"? Easy enough. Diversity identity is group identity. Attention paid to diversity is attention paid to someone's group status, not their individual identity. When you are identified according to group status, any claim to individual rights, or worth, for that matter, fade into meaninglessness.

OK, before I run out of my word allotment, let's go back through history to see, other than Teddy Kennedy, just who we have out there blasting the concept of the individual. It's a rough ride. Hold on.

"There is the great, silent, continuous struggle: the struggle between the State and the Individual; between the State, which demands, and the individual, who attempts to evade such demands."

That gem is from our friend, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini.

"The main plank in the National Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute for them the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood."

The National Socialist bit should be your clue. Nazi was the acronym for Germany's national socialist party. That quote is from Adolf Hitler.

Now for the two quotes at the beginning of the column.

"We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." I left out the first word of this quote. That word is "Comrades!" This from the lips of none other than Nikita Khrushchev.

"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society."

Ahh. The best for last. The person who uttered those words is none other than the Democratic Party candidate for president in the year 2008. Our very own champion of socialized medicine, Hillary Clinton.

One more quote. A quickie from Ayn Rand: "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."

Can I get an Amen?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by NewGuy
I think it is incredibly funny to see self proclaimed know-it-alls regarding anything religious to call a relationship with Christ "metaphysical" and dismiss it.

Equally funny are those who claim that it is only truth for the individuals in the practice of it.

1. Even "scientists" do not call anything truth or fiction without experiential experiments. The people whoi engage in the mental masturbation of "knowing" "metaphysical" information and discarding Christ as truth are going off of THEORY by definition and nothing else. It clearly, by all logic is THEY who have no fact and no truth. This makes their view irrational.

2. To even DO so would claim that there IS moral relativism, as nearly every thread regarding religious perspective on this board would prove. There can only BE one truth, otherwise the truth would and could NOT be truth. This again, makes the naysayer view completely illogical.

3. The Bible proves beyond any doubt WHATSOEVER with prophecy to any skeptic willing to look, that it IS the devine word of God which cannot be denied. If one IGNORES, that is different.

Seeing that those who deny the validity of Christ are doing so by way of being irrational, illogical, and through ignoring reality, it is clearly humorous. -Yet it is sad at the same time.

It is that kind of thinking which will condemn Christians in the end, and cause those who condemn to be mislead into believing the coming peacemaker because he WILL BE influential and so decieving that all non-Christians will not have the capacity to deny him. He WILL be under the direct influence of satan.

By the contrast with Hitler, this guy will make Hitler look like Harry Potter.

I would hope some actually realize the situation and at least do investigation without blindly following the next "theory" floating across their path.

And your proof is where?

 

[eric]

Actually, much of what I am writing about has its roots in the "Mulamadyamikakarika" by Nargarjuna.

See you have totally missed the point. You have my pity !

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
And your proof is where?

Reading my posts regarding anything, when I state where the proof is, is really quite refreshing for me to see.

As usual, you have not been refreshing.

Read the post.

While you are at it, re-read yours too. It keeps you linear in conversation.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
That's just it. Lefties DON'T value individuals. They consider a fixation on individual rights to be a cultlike fixation.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29119

No society can meaningfully exist without the efforts of the individuals who are its constituents. No individual can have anything more than a marginal existence in the absence of society. The needs of each must exist in balance with the other, with neither sacrificed for the sake of the other.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by NewGuy
Reading my posts regarding anything, when I state where the proof is, is really quite refreshing for me to see.

As usual, you have not been refreshing.

Read the post.

While you are at it, re-read yours too. It keeps you linear in conversation.

I'm sorry, but I read your post carefully several times, and it still made no sense. Your logic remains circular, and your arguments collapse upon themselves.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by eric
See you have totally missed the point. You have my pity !

Are you really so certain?

 

[eric]

Yes, actually I am ! I know of no other Buddhist who mocks the beliefs of another, and rest assured I have met quite a few.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
No society can meaningfully exist without the efforts of the individuals who are its constituents. No individual can have anything more than a marginal existence in the absence of society. The needs of each must exist in balance with the other, with neither sacrificed for the sake of the other.

Yes, but liberals want to subjugate the individual completely to the state. They're out of balance.

Go rock yourself in the corner and repeat your glittering generalities over and over.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Yes, but liberals want to subjugate the individual completely to the state. They're out of balance.

Go rock yourself in the corner and repeat your glittering generalities over and over.

Liberals and conservatives are both out of balance. As I've stated before, Liberals have no more idea of what they are trying to liberate than conservatives have of what they are trying to conserve.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by eric
Yes, actually I am ! I know of no other Buddhist who mocks the beliefs of another, and rest assured I have met quite a few.

It's a carryover from my pre-Buddhist days...That being to heap scorn and ridicule on silly notions. And the more tightly one clings to such notions, the more likely they are to be offended by that scorn and ridicule.

I did, however, throw a bone to the PC crowd.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Liberals and conservatives are both out of balance. As I've stated before, Liberals have no more idea of what they are trying to liberate than conservatives have of what they are trying to conserve.

Your simplistic and wrong definitions above are easy to dismiss because they ARE simplistice and wrong. That's a nice sound bite though.


In the context of history, individual rights are the revolutionary idea. State worship is the oldest meme there is, hence libs are actually trying to "conserve" time honored traditions, in my opinion. Again, your shit ain't on straight.

Liberals are hugely out of touch with the founding principles of THIS country. They're out of touch with the sensible values their party used to embrace.



How would john kerry fare in the Cuban Missile Crisis? Kennedy believed in tax cuts to stimulate economic growth. The socialists in your party today are 100% against that line of fascist reasoning.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Your simplistic and wrong definitions above are easy to dismiss because they ARE simplistice and wrong. That's a nice sound bite though.


In the context of history, individual rights are the revolutionary idea. State worship is the oldest meme there is, hence libs are actually trying to "conserve" time honored traditions, in my opinion. Again, your shit ain't on straight.

Liberals are hugely out of touch with the founding principles of THIS country. They're out of touch with the sensible values their party used to embrace.



How would john kerry fare in the Cuban Missile Crisis? Kennedy believed in tax cuts to stimulate economic growth. The socialists in your party today are 100% against that line of fascist reasoning.

Indeed, the most recent iteration of state worship in the form of communism has failed utterly and miserably. Whilst they go about the task of "conserving" the ideals upon which America was founded upon, they seem intent on sacrificing large portions of those ideals in the effort to preserve the state. They, and liberals, have failed to realize, or chosen to ignore, that a society is a dynamic entity which must change and adapt to changes in the world around it, or it will die.

I put it to you that <b>both</b> liberals and conservatives are out of touch with the principles upon which this nation was founded. Both have become so enamoured with their narrow, concretized world views that they cannot look up from them. Neither are willing to look to the consequences of their stances beyond the next election.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Indeed, the most recent iteration of state worship in the form of communism has failed utterly and miserably. Whilst they go about the task of "conserving" the ideals upon which America was founded upon, they seem intent on sacrificing large portions of those ideals in the effort to preserve the state. They, and liberals, have failed to realize, or chosen to ignore, that a society is a dynamic entity which must change and adapt to changes in the world around it, or it will die.

I put it to you that <b>both</b> liberals and conservatives are out of touch with the principles upon which this nation was founded. Both have become so enamoured with their narrow, concretized world views that they cannot look up from them. Neither are willing to look to the consequences of their stances beyond the next election.

Your exaggerating the extent of rights sacrificed to preserve the state. I do have a few probs with the patriot act, but your making much more out of it. Funny how libs care about individual rights if it helps them erode national security. I know you want the U.S. to fall, us normal americans don't.

The consequences of the American stance on global terrorism will affect the future of all our children. The liberals strategy of appeasement has been proven ineffective by the facts of history. How far would you go to preserve the state? Wait, you think we should be a fluid society and become either more like the eurosocialists or be destroyed. Fluid society my ass, that's code for "more socialist".

Conservatives are much more on base. Liberals today are just living in an upside down world where they give the benefit of the doubt to Saddam Hussein.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Your exaggerating the extent of rights sacrificed to preserve the state. I do have a few probs with the patriot act, but your making much more out of it. Funny how libs care about individual rights if it helps them erode national security. I know you want the U.S. to fall, us normal americans don't.

The consequences of the American stance on global terrorism will affect the future of all our children. The liberals strategy of appeasement has been proven ineffective by the facts of history. How far would you go to preserve the state? Wait, you think we should be a fluid society and become either more like the eurosocialists or be destroyed. Fluid society my ass, that's code for "more socialist".

Conservatives are much more on base. Liberals today are just living in an upside down world where they give the benefit of the doubt to Saddam Hussein.

You know nothing. The liberal and conservative movements are morally bankrupt, and couldn't find their collective asses in the dark with both hands. Your statements are the proof of that pudding.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
You know nothing. The liberal and conservative movements are morally bankrupt, and couldn't find their collective asses in the dark with both hands. Your statements are the proof of that pudding.

I know more than you. I know your "both parties are ignorant" outlook is just a thin cover for your lack of moral compass and the resulting apathy. To look at modern day libs and modern day cons and see no real difference is to look at the ocean and fail to see water.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
I'm sorry, but I read your post carefully several times, and it still made no sense. Your logic remains circular, and your arguments collapse upon themselves.

Since simplicity in context and logic are not your strong suit, how about telling me WHERE the logic is circular, and we can go through it like pablum in a spoon for ya.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I know more than you. I know your "both parties are ignorant" outlook is just a thin cover for your lack of moral compass and the resulting apathy. To look at modern day libs and modern day cons and see no real difference is to look at the ocean and fail to see water.

Sorry, but my 'moral compass' is just fine, And apathy has no place in my life. Republicans and Democrats, Liberals and conservatives...they're merely opposite sides of the same debased coin.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by NewGuy
Since simplicity in context and logic are not your strong suit, how about telling me WHERE the logic is circular, and we can go through it like pablum in a spoon for ya.

Your arguments are rooted in faith...There is no objective, independently and repeatably verifiable evidence to support them. The deductive reasoning used to arrive at your conclusions, while leading to a formally valid conclusion, can be either true or false, and thus gives us no genuinely useful conclusions. They fall within the realm of mere speculation, at best, and flights of fancy at worst.

Go back to your pablum.