The religion of atheists is socialism

[ding]

What's the religion of agnostics like me?

Humanism

 

[ding]

Socialism starts with a social Contract.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It is the "gospel Truth" for the Militia of the United States.

Of all the superpowers who have ever existed I dare say the US has been the least militaristic or imperialistic.

 

[ding]

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.

the right wing is too cognitively dissonant to be anything more than, fantastical.

y'all are just a bunch of communists and don't know it; some on the left are trying to be poets, and know it.

And the left who fanatically defend socialism without openly admitting that they are defending socialism have already lost the battle because their own shame convicts them.

shame about what? we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

That you defend socialism without openly admitting that you are for socialism. That shame.

capitalism lost in 1929. we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. The fervor is almost nazi like.

 

[ding]

First, liberals, depending of course on your definition, could easily include half the US population. So well over a hundred million individuals. Those individuals are all unique. Claiming that characterizations such as you provide here accurately describe all of them is simple bigotry.

Second, your use of broad terms which you do not define: liberalism, socialism, morality, good and evil, makes this diatribe nearly worthless. Or, so vague as to be impossible to address, which seems more likely to have been your aim. Let's start out getting some definitions for "liberalism":

a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual,parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.

Most liberals already have the same beliefs you claim: that Jesus of Nazareth was the son of Jahweh and that he died for our sins. You state that socialism worships big government and social policy. Obviously, socialism doesn't worship anything. Let's see what it is and if it's attached to either:

a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

While I don't see any antipathies there, I don't see any overlap. Liberalism seems most concerned about the rights and well being of the individual. Socialism sits in opposition to free market capitalism, assuming that the benefit from the government's operation of production and distribution in a non-profit and customer-centric modality outweigh the costs in inefficiency likely to take place with the elimination of competition. So, there's nothing preventing a liberal from also advocating socialist, capitalism, communism or anarchy if he or she thought that would provide maximum individual freedoms, unrestricted human development and the strongest protection of individual rights and liberties.

The rule of law can be made to serve several different goals. Laws may be written to control the populace or laws may be written to free the populace. They are both social policy. I personally find the latter preferable but the former the goal of most conservatives. By their rejection of humanism, they assume all humans are tarnished by innate evil that must be controlled by an external authority. Thus we get laws that "crack down" on crime. Same sex marriage and elective abortion are banned.

A government that controls all production and distribution is going to be larger than one that doesn't. No question. One that provides free medical care and free education for all its citizens will also be larger. But I, personally, wouldn't mind. I can't think of two more valuable things a government could do with our tax money than educate us and maintain our health

It certainly shares several tenets with simple humanism, but that is not the deification of man (unless you're one of those folks that thinks humanism defies the church). It most certainly is not based on atheism. The majority of liberals are Christians. Many are Jewish, some are Hindus, Muslims and a small percent are atheists. I'm sure more liberals are atheists than conservatives, but it is not all of them by any means. Why does their religion matter so much to you?

The advocation of the use of individual freedoms, unrestricted human development and the free exercise of individual rights and civil liberties put the lie to that idea

This was well written and balanced. I agree with much of this. There is a distribution for almost everything. I don't agree that my critique is bigoted. It is intended to be a critical examination of socialism. I use broad terms because there is no real socialism of socialism. It is not the terms that matter though, it is the behaviors.

 

[ding]

They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality.

Really? I have to assume that this stems from your belief that all liberals are atheists. And you believe that it's impossible to have morals without a god to give them to you. That's pretty sad. Morals are simply the rules that allow us to live together in peace - to form societies and cultures. They don't come from god. There are no absolute morals. And the picture you try to paint is seriously flawed. To suggest that half the US population can't tell the difference between good and evil, have no values and are completely amoral is beyond absurd. But you had to add that little extra - "save pleasure" - to make the picture as ugly as you could. Of course, valuing pleasure is to assign "good" to that sensation. And the absence of pleasure becomes "bad" and you've tossed your own argument on the trash (where it belonged in any case).

I am not saying all liberals are atheists, but it is closer to the rule rather than it is to the exception. He's already given us His morals. We are born with an innate ability to know wrong from right. So, no, I am not saying they are without morals, I am saying they are relative rather than absolute. As such they will always be subject to the whims of the mob rather than the highest possible standard.

 

[ding]

Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality.

Did your parents feed you this bullshit? Can you give us some examples of liberals attempting to abolish private property, families, religion and equality? How would you go about doing that? Buy land and put it in the public domain? Kidnap random individuals and relocate them across the country? Burn down churches? Get elected on the basis of discriminating against Muslims, Mexicans and women?

No, my parents did not fee me this "bullshit." Socialism seeks to replace loyalty of family, country and God with loyalty to state. They do so with various tactics.

 

[danielpalos]

Socialism starts with a social Contract.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It is the "gospel Truth" for the Militia of the United States.

Would the government regulating prices, wages and profits best serve the general welfare of the people?

Only for the general warfare, not the general welfare. now you know what the problem is.

No. I don't know what the problem is. Other than you seem to be promoting socialism without coming right out and promoting socialism. Why can't you people be up front and actually make a case for socialism?

dear; you have nothing but appeals to emotion regarding socialism. along with appeals to ignorance of socialism, as well.

we have a mixed market economy; part socialism and part capitalism.

capitalism died in 1929.

 

[danielpalos]

Socialism starts with a social Contract.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It is the "gospel Truth" for the Militia of the United States.

Of all the superpowers who have ever existed I dare say the US has been the least militaristic or imperialistic.

We have a warfare-State economy not a welfare-State economy. I am just glad, our Founding Fathers did such an Excellent job with our Constitution.

 

[danielpalos]

the right wing is too cognitively dissonant to be anything more than, fantastical.

y'all are just a bunch of communists and don't know it; some on the left are trying to be poets, and know it.

And the left who fanatically defend socialism without openly admitting that they are defending socialism have already lost the battle because their own shame convicts them.

shame about what? we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

That you defend socialism without openly admitting that you are for socialism. That shame.

capitalism lost in 1929. we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. The fervor is almost nazi like.

only in right wing fantasy.

capitalism died in 1929 and socialism has been bailing it out, ever since. We even have a Central Bank.

 

[ding]

Socialism starts with a social Contract.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It is the "gospel Truth" for the Militia of the United States.

Would the government regulating prices, wages and profits best serve the general welfare of the people?

Only for the general warfare, not the general welfare. now you know what the problem is.

No. I don't know what the problem is. Other than you seem to be promoting socialism without coming right out and promoting socialism. Why can't you people be up front and actually make a case for socialism?

dear; you have nothing but appeals to emotion regarding socialism. along with appeals to ignorance of socialism, as well.

we have a mixed market economy; part socialism and part capitalism.

capitalism died in 1929.

No, I have more than that. I have more than that. Socialism behaves like a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

 

[ding]

Socialism starts with a social Contract.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It is the "gospel Truth" for the Militia of the United States.

Of all the superpowers who have ever existed I dare say the US has been the least militaristic or imperialistic.

We have a warfare-State economy not a welfare-State economy. I am just glad, our Founding Fathers did such an Excellent job with our Constitution.

I too am glad we had such wise Founding Fathers. They brought liberty and freedom to the world. Of all the superpowers who have ever existed the US has been the least militaristic or imperialistic and has been the greatest force for good in the history of mankind.

 

[ding]

And the left who fanatically defend socialism without openly admitting that they are defending socialism have already lost the battle because their own shame convicts them.

shame about what? we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

That you defend socialism without openly admitting that you are for socialism. That shame.

capitalism lost in 1929. we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. The fervor is almost nazi like.

only in right wing fantasy.

capitalism died in 1929 and socialism has been bailing it out, ever since. We even have a Central Bank.

No, not in fantasy. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. Socialism intentionally denies examination. There is no formal defined dogma. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something noble and good, of equality, communal ownership, and justice: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. World socialism as a whole, and all the figures associated with it, are shrouded in legend; its contradictions are forgotten or concealed; it does not respond to arguments but continually ignores them--all this stems from the mist of irrationality that surrounds socialism and from its instinctive aversion to scientific analysis. Socialism dismisses its defeats and ignores its incongruities. Socialism seeks to reduce human personality to its most primitive levels and to extinguish the highest, most complex, and "God-like" aspects of human individuality. And even equality itself, that powerful appeal and great promise of socialists throughout the ages, turns out to signify not equality of rights, of opportunities, and of external conditions, but equality qua identity, equality seen as the movement of variety toward uniformity.

 

[danielpalos]

Socialism starts with a social Contract.

It is the "gospel Truth" for the Militia of the United States.

Would the government regulating prices, wages and profits best serve the general welfare of the people?

Only for the general warfare, not the general welfare. now you know what the problem is.

No. I don't know what the problem is. Other than you seem to be promoting socialism without coming right out and promoting socialism. Why can't you people be up front and actually make a case for socialism?

dear; you have nothing but appeals to emotion regarding socialism. along with appeals to ignorance of socialism, as well.

we have a mixed market economy; part socialism and part capitalism.

capitalism died in 1929.

No, I have more than that. I have more than that. Socialism behaves like a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

Our form of socialism starts with our social Contract and Constitution.

 

[danielpalos]

shame about what? we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

That you defend socialism without openly admitting that you are for socialism. That shame.

capitalism lost in 1929. we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. The fervor is almost nazi like.

only in right wing fantasy.

capitalism died in 1929 and socialism has been bailing it out, ever since. We even have a Central Bank.

No, not in fantasy. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. Socialism intentionally denies examination. There is no formal defined dogma. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something noble and good, of equality, communal ownership, and justice: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. World socialism as a whole, and all the figures associated with it, are shrouded in legend; its contradictions are forgotten or concealed; it does not respond to arguments but continually ignores them--all this stems from the mist of irrationality that surrounds socialism and from its instinctive aversion to scientific analysis. Socialism dismisses its defeats and ignores its incongruities. Socialism seeks to reduce human personality to its most primitive levels and to extinguish the highest, most complex, and "God-like" aspects of human individuality. And even equality itself, that powerful appeal and great promise of socialists throughout the ages, turns out to signify not equality of rights, of opportunities, and of external conditions, but equality qua identity, equality seen as the movement of variety toward uniformity.

of course i can; true capitalism doesn't work beyond the third world.

 

[ding]

Would the government regulating prices, wages and profits best serve the general welfare of the people?

Only for the general warfare, not the general welfare. now you know what the problem is.

No. I don't know what the problem is. Other than you seem to be promoting socialism without coming right out and promoting socialism. Why can't you people be up front and actually make a case for socialism?

dear; you have nothing but appeals to emotion regarding socialism. along with appeals to ignorance of socialism, as well.

we have a mixed market economy; part socialism and part capitalism.

capitalism died in 1929.

No, I have more than that. I have more than that. Socialism behaves like a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

Our form of socialism starts with our social Contract and Constitution.

You keep saying that but when I press you on on the extent or magnitude, you run away from the logical conclusion. Thus proving that your beliefs deny examination. If it is really in the general public welfare for government to control pricing, wages and profits then if they don't do those things they are not meeting your understanding of the social contract.

 

[ding]

That you defend socialism without openly admitting that you are for socialism. That shame.

capitalism lost in 1929. we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. The fervor is almost nazi like.

only in right wing fantasy.

capitalism died in 1929 and socialism has been bailing it out, ever since. We even have a Central Bank.

No, not in fantasy. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. Socialism intentionally denies examination. There is no formal defined dogma. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something noble and good, of equality, communal ownership, and justice: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. World socialism as a whole, and all the figures associated with it, are shrouded in legend; its contradictions are forgotten or concealed; it does not respond to arguments but continually ignores them--all this stems from the mist of irrationality that surrounds socialism and from its instinctive aversion to scientific analysis. Socialism dismisses its defeats and ignores its incongruities. Socialism seeks to reduce human personality to its most primitive levels and to extinguish the highest, most complex, and "God-like" aspects of human individuality. And even equality itself, that powerful appeal and great promise of socialists throughout the ages, turns out to signify not equality of rights, of opportunities, and of external conditions, but equality qua identity, equality seen as the movement of variety toward uniformity.

of course i can; true capitalism doesn't work beyond the third world.

Free enterprise is Darwinian and has proven to not only work but to raise everyone up. Socialism is not Darwinian in nature and seeks equality via uniformity. You'd rather the poor be poor as long as the rich were less rich.

 

[danielpalos]

Only for the general warfare, not the general welfare. now you know what the problem is.

No. I don't know what the problem is. Other than you seem to be promoting socialism without coming right out and promoting socialism. Why can't you people be up front and actually make a case for socialism?

dear; you have nothing but appeals to emotion regarding socialism. along with appeals to ignorance of socialism, as well.

we have a mixed market economy; part socialism and part capitalism.

capitalism died in 1929.

No, I have more than that. I have more than that. Socialism behaves like a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

Our form of socialism starts with our social Contract and Constitution.

You keep saying that but when I press you on on the extent or magnitude, you run away from the logical conclusion. Thus proving that your beliefs deny examination. If it is really in the general public welfare for government to control pricing, wages and profits then if they don't do those things they are not meeting your understanding of the social contract.

dear, you have nothing but fallacy. begging the question is a fallacy.

our form of Socialism is limited by our Social Contract.

 

[ding]

No. I don't know what the problem is. Other than you seem to be promoting socialism without coming right out and promoting socialism. Why can't you people be up front and actually make a case for socialism?

dear; you have nothing but appeals to emotion regarding socialism. along with appeals to ignorance of socialism, as well.

we have a mixed market economy; part socialism and part capitalism.

capitalism died in 1929.

No, I have more than that. I have more than that. Socialism behaves like a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

Our form of socialism starts with our social Contract and Constitution.

You keep saying that but when I press you on on the extent or magnitude, you run away from the logical conclusion. Thus proving that your beliefs deny examination. If it is really in the general public welfare for government to control pricing, wages and profits then if they don't do those things they are not meeting your understanding of the social contract.

dear, you have nothing but fallacy. begging the question is a fallacy.

our form of Socialism is limited by our Social Contract.

You'd rather the poor be poor as long as the rich were less rich.

 

[danielpalos]

capitalism lost in 1929. we have a mixed market, First World economy due to socialism, not capitalism.

Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. The fervor is almost nazi like.

only in right wing fantasy.

capitalism died in 1929 and socialism has been bailing it out, ever since. We even have a Central Bank.

No, not in fantasy. You can't make the argument for socialism because there is no consistent socialism other than vague rosy notions of goodness of an idealized utopia which is ridiculously fantasized with a heavy handed government. Socialism intentionally denies examination. There is no formal defined dogma. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something noble and good, of equality, communal ownership, and justice: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. World socialism as a whole, and all the figures associated with it, are shrouded in legend; its contradictions are forgotten or concealed; it does not respond to arguments but continually ignores them--all this stems from the mist of irrationality that surrounds socialism and from its instinctive aversion to scientific analysis. Socialism dismisses its defeats and ignores its incongruities. Socialism seeks to reduce human personality to its most primitive levels and to extinguish the highest, most complex, and "God-like" aspects of human individuality. And even equality itself, that powerful appeal and great promise of socialists throughout the ages, turns out to signify not equality of rights, of opportunities, and of external conditions, but equality qua identity, equality seen as the movement of variety toward uniformity.

of course i can; true capitalism doesn't work beyond the third world.

Free enterprise is Darwinian and has proven to not only work but to raise everyone up. Socialism is not Darwinian in nature and seeks equality via uniformity. You'd rather the poor be poor as long as the rich were less rich.

there are no True AnCaps, it is Only theory. There are truer forms of communism in actual practice, today.

 

[danielpalos]

dear; you have nothing but appeals to emotion regarding socialism. along with appeals to ignorance of socialism, as well.

we have a mixed market economy; part socialism and part capitalism.

capitalism died in 1929.

No, I have more than that. I have more than that. Socialism behaves like a religion which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

Our form of socialism starts with our social Contract and Constitution.

You keep saying that but when I press you on on the extent or magnitude, you run away from the logical conclusion. Thus proving that your beliefs deny examination. If it is really in the general public welfare for government to control pricing, wages and profits then if they don't do those things they are not meeting your understanding of the social contract.

dear, you have nothing but fallacy. begging the question is a fallacy.

our form of Socialism is limited by our Social Contract.

You'd rather the poor be poor as long as the rich were less rich.

poor is a relative term. so is rich. we have a First World economy.

Socialism may try to help fools and horses, not Have to work. that is all.