Exorcist elected to Colorado State House

Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Exorcist elected to Colorado State House

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/11/05/republican-who-performed-exorcism-on-president-obama-elected-to-colorado-state-house/

 

Every time I think you people couldn't possibly be more fucked...

 

So what's the "rational response" to shit like this ?


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  The Dems might want to

  The Dems might want to ask themselves why someone who is such an obvious right-wing wack-job still came out looking better to Colorado voters than the typical leftist candidates they could have easily voted for instead.   The Dems can blame themselves for being rejected by voters as the right wing "extremists" have always been an option.  Maybe the voters are tired of left-wing extremists ?  Kept up with mid-term election results lately ?

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Maybe

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Maybe the voters are tired of left-wing extremists ?  Kept up with mid-term election results lately ?

I have. Hence my reference to y'all being fucked.

Not sure who the exorcist was running against. I'm going to google that right now so I can finally figure out what qualifies for "left-wing extremism" these days.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
I couldn't get your link to

I couldn't get your link to work, but they guy's name is Gordon Klingenschmitt and he is a fucking quack, whack, fucked up, ignorant, con job who shouldn't be allowed to run for office.

What the fuck is wrong with the people who voted for him?


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Shit like this ceased

Shit like this ceased surprising me long ago. EVOLUTION fucked us over out of the gate. Now if you'll excuse me I'll have another beer and chase more ass while the chasing's good.

 

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
 Oh, almost forgot: fuck

 Oh, almost forgot: fuck you, I've got mine.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Shit like this

iwbiek wrote:

Shit like this ceased surprising me long ago. EVOLUTION fucked us over out of the gate. Now if you'll excuse me I'll have another beer and chase more ass while the chasing's good.

 

You cant even understand how much you actually agree with me without knowing it.

 

EVOLUTION is exactly why this happens, because our species flawed perceptions lead to our species producing bad logic and bad ideologies. This guy is yet another reason why religion needs to be treated as the poison it is. 

EVOLUTION produces flawed perceptions which in turn causes humans to concoct religion because we gap fill and mistake the success of the group as making the religion a nescessity. When the reality is that we are merely grouping for oder and opportunity at resources and more ability to create offspring. Religion is merely the reflection of our group survival. Problem is that this is the result of false perceptions. 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
 Antipatris wrote:I have.

 

Antipatris wrote:
I have. Hence my reference to y'all being fucked.

 

  Yes, things were going just swimmingly for the Democrats before the elections, right ? 

 

Don't know whether you were paying attention but most Dem candidates were too scared to publically admit they voted for Obama and his policies because they feared political back lash due to being associated with a losing brand.   Why do you  think that was ?  

 

 Was it those meanies at Faux news, "Hate" radio, and the usual rightwing scapegoats that caused the voting public to throw the Dems out on their asses ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Antipatris wrote:
Not sure who the exorcist was running against. I'm going to google that right now so I can finally figure out what qualifies for "left-wing extremism" these days.

 

    The exorcist is a nut-job, but like I just said... how BAD must the Dems have been doing to get defeated by someone like that ?  The leftists must have appeared more extreme than the extremist to get slaughtered politically like they did. 

 

  How does it feel ?  I mean losing to someone like that must be like a kick in the balls to all the Dems who thought the people stood behind them.  How humiliating.

 

       

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote: Yes,

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
 Yes, things were going just swimmingly for the Democrats before the elections, right ? 

 

Don't know whether you were paying attention but most Dem candidates were too scared to publically admit they voted for Obama and his policies because they feared political back lash due to being associated with a losing brand.   Why do you  think that was ?  

 

 Was it those meanies at Faux news, "Hate" radio, and the usual rightwing scapegoats that caused the voting public to throw the Dems out on their asses ?

Hmmm, yes....getting a minor vibe here that it might not have been totally obvious that my problem with this guy rests with his open and proud belief in fucking DEMONS, and not so much wich rival band of conservatives he claims to belong to.

 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
  The exorcist is a nut-job, but like I just said... how BAD must the Dems have been doing to get defeated by someone like that ?

Ooo, good question. Let's have a look at his opponent's manifesto and find somethng more idiotic than believing in demons.

 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
The leftists

LOL ! Sorry, but that will never stop being hilarious.

 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
must have appeared more extreme than the extremist to get slaughtered politically like they did.

Gee, it's almost as if something can be made to appear scary and extreme, even when it isn't.

 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
How does it feel ?  I mean losing to someone like that must be like a kick in the balls to all the Dems who thought the people stood behind them.  How humiliating.

Oh please, "Dems" don't have balls.

 

    


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
The thing I can't figure out

The thing I can't figure out is that how can the government keep doing what it is doing with out being kicked out? I mean, look at how fucked up both parties are? The Repub's are complete assholes. The Demos are complete douches. Do we need another party? The Common Sense party? The Party of Free Thinkers?

How much further is the GOP going to go right? Are they already beyond democracy?


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Question now is, will

Question now is, will Grandma Hillary ride the backlash to victory in '16?


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote:Ooo, good

Antipatris wrote:

Ooo, good question. Let's have a look at his opponent's manifesto and find somethng more idiotic than believing in demons.

 

   It is idiotic to believe in demons.  Yes, fucking yes !   ...and apparently you still miss the god damn point.

 

Antipatris wrote:

LOL ! Sorry, but that ( left wing ) will never stop being hilarious.

 

      really.....is it as hilarious as losing an election to a right wing nut job ?

 

 

Antipartis wrote:
Gee, it's almost as if something can be made to appear scary and extreme, even when it isn't.

 

     

        And yet for all their ( democrat®, liberal®, progressive® ) alleged mainstream appeal they still couldn't get their candidate elected, even when faced with a fucking excorcist for an opponent.   I bet you still fail to grasp the significance.

 

       

 

Antipartis wrote:

Oh please, "Dems" don't have balls.

 

    

 

       What Democrats also don't have is a majority the House and Senate. 

 

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
https://www.youtube.com/watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mlxMndnlzw#t=162

Now compared to far to much of the east as you will see in that link, you can say all you want that that "not all" think like that, but just like the Colorado nutjob, it only takes enough causing a problem, and both the nut from Colorado and the nuts in this video, use the same sources to justify their bad ideology as those who use those holy books to justify compassion.

Until liberals accept that they are the same source you will not be able to manage the harm that they can do.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote: How

digitalbeachbum wrote:
How much further is the GOP going to go right? Are they already beyond democracy?

 

                         OMFG !!!  Who's paranoid now ?   Alarmist much ?

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:It is

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
It is idiotic to believe in demons.  Yes, fucking yes !   ...and apparently you still miss the god damn point.

If his opponent had something even more idiotic going for her, then you would have your "god damn point".

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
really.....is it as hilarious as losing an election to a right wing nut job ?

Not sure how you're getting "hilarious" from "you people couldn't possibly be more fucked". 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
And yet for all their ( democrat®, liberal®, progressive® ) alleged mainstream appeal they still couldn't get their candidate elected, even when faced with a fucking excorcist for an opponent.  I bet you still fail to grasp the significance.

 I'll grasp all the significance you like, as soon as you show me something more idiotic than a belief in demons from his opponent.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
      What Democrats also don't have is a majority the House and Senate. 

Apparently at least one of them has something that's waaay dumber than a guy who performs an exorcism on the president of the us.

Would love to hear just exactly what that might be.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:
How much further is the GOP going to go right? Are they already beyond democracy?

 

                         OMFG !!!  Who's paranoid now ?   Alarmist much ?

No paranoia. I'm asking a question.

When Jeb Bush is talking about running in the election for 2016, the "experts" are saying he isn't far enough right to win Florida? I'm stunned? Former Governor of Florida not right enough? Who is coming up with this stuff? I live in Florida and I can not believe we are a tea bag state, in fact, all the tea baggers in my area lost. How right do you need to go to win the GOP nod?


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote: If his

Antipatris wrote:

 

If his opponent had something even more idiotic going for her, then you would have your "god damn point".

 

    Hmmmm, yes but more significant is WHY did the voters run away from your less "idiotic"  candidate ? 

     WHY ?

 

 

Antipartis wrote:

Not sure how you're getting "hilarious" from "you people couldn't possibly be more fucked".

 

   It's "hilarious" ...to use your choice of words...because by voting for MR. EXCORCIST the "people" have shown they were even more tired of being "fucked" by democrat®, liberal®, progressive® policies. 

 

 

 

 

Antipartis wrote:
I'll grasp all the significance you like, as soon as you show me something more idiotic than a belief in demons from his opponent.

 

  Yoo-hoo, let me spell it out for you: 

The democrats defeated themselves,

the democrats defeated themselves,

the democrats defeated themselves

   ...across the entire nation.

 

  Derp !  An obvious repudiation of leftist ( liberal®, democrat®, progressive® ) policies by the voting masses. Your right, nothing to see here, move along.

 

Antipartis wrote:

Apparently at least one of them has something that's waaay dumber than a guy who performs an exorcism on the president of the us.

Would love to hear just exactly what that might be.

 

       Hmmmmm, how about leftist ( liberal®, democrat®, progressive® ) govermental policies that people are really, really fed up with ?  ...but that could never happen, could it ?  Americans love the Dems 'cause they're for the "people" and shit.

 

 

 

 

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:No

digitalbeachbum wrote:

No paranoia. I'm asking a question.

When Jeb Bush is talking about running in the election for 2016, the "experts" are saying he isn't far enough right to win Florida? I'm stunned? Former Governor of Florida not right enough? Who is coming up with this stuff? I live in Florida and I can not believe we are a tea bag state, in fact, all the tea baggers in my area lost. How right do you need to go to win the GOP nod?

 

               I was referring to your "are they already beyond democracy ?" statement unless you were simply being facetious.  Right or Left politics aside, democracy isn't going away in this country.

 

                   Do you personally consider Jeb Bush to be a right wing "extremist" ?  I'm conservative and right wing as hell but there's stuff about him that turns me off, too.

 

                  Here's a good link:   www.ontheissues.org/Jeb_Bush.htm

 

    

 

  

 

   

 

 

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 What is 'rational' about

 What is 'rational' about judging an election based on a irrelevent beliefs of the victor? This was a local election and the voters weren't voting on exorcisms. They were voting on issues like fracking, mining and schools. The first page on his opponents website is anti fracking and anti mining- in an area of the country where a very large pecentage of people work directly or indirectly for fossil fuel companies, that is probably a really bad choice of issues to focus on.

Are you saying it is irrational to vote for the candidate who doesn't support making your main source of income illegal just because he as some batshit crazy views on exorcisms? It isn't like any exorcism laws are going to be voted on.

 Probably the only big issue with this bigot and might actually be voted on, is his anti gay stances, but the reality is that for most voters, their personal ability to feed and care for their family is more important than idealism. There is nothing irrational about a person voting to support their immediate personal interest (their livlihood) over an ideal that doesn't directly affect them.

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

No paranoia. I'm asking a question.

When Jeb Bush is talking about running in the election for 2016, the "experts" are saying he isn't far enough right to win Florida? I'm stunned? Former Governor of Florida not right enough? Who is coming up with this stuff? I live in Florida and I can not believe we are a tea bag state, in fact, all the tea baggers in my area lost. How right do you need to go to win the GOP nod?

 

               I was referring to your "are they already beyond democracy ?" statement unless you were simply being facetious.  Right or Left politics aside, democracy isn't going away in this country.

 

                   Do you personally consider Jeb Bush to be a right wing "extremist" ?  I'm conservative and right wing as hell but there's stuff about him that turns me off, too.

 

                  Here's a good link:   www.ontheissues.org/Jeb_Bush.htm

 

    

 

  

 

   

 

 

Jeb is too left wing for me.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
http://www.huffingtonpost.com

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/05/paraguay-witch-burned-alive_n_6108646.htm

Where are they getting their source of justification from to commit these barbaric acts?

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Antipatris wrote:

 

If his opponent had something even more idiotic going for her, then you would have your "god damn point".

 

    Hmmmm, yes but more significant is WHY did the voters run away from your less "idiotic"  candidate ? 

     WHY ?

 

Antipartis wrote:

Not sure how you're getting "hilarious" from "you people couldn't possibly be more fucked".

 

   It's "hilarious" ...to use your choice of words...because by voting for MR. EXCORCIST the "people" have shown they were even more tired of being "fucked" by democrat®, liberal®, progressive® policies. 

 

Antipartis wrote:
I'll grasp all the significance you like, as soon as you show me something more idiotic than a belief in demons from his opponent.

 

  Yoo-hoo, let me spell it out for you: 

The democrats defeated themselves,

the democrats defeated themselves,

the democrats defeated themselves

   ...across the entire nation.

 

  Derp !  An obvious repudiation of leftist ( liberal®, democrat®, progressive® ) policies by the voting masses. Your right, nothing to see here, move along.

 

Antipartis wrote:

Apparently at least one of them has something that's waaay dumber than a guy who performs an exorcism on the president of the us.

Would love to hear just exactly what that might be.

 

       Hmmmmm, how about leftist (  ) govermental policies that people are really, really fed up with ?  ...but that could never happen, could it ?  Americans love the Dems 'cause they're for the "people" and shit.

 

Yikes. So many angry attempts at sarcasm.

Well, at least I got an answer out of you. Way dumber than a guy who performs exorcisms are..."liberal, democrat, progressive govermental policies that people are really, really fed up with."

 

That's kinda vague, but I would still strongly disagree with that.

 


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: What

Beyond Saving wrote:

 What is 'rational' about judging an election based on a irrelevent beliefs of the victor? This was a local election and the voters weren't voting on exorcisms. They were voting on issues like fracking, mining and schools. The first page on his opponents website is anti fracking and anti mining- in an area of the country where a very large pecentage of people work directly or indirectly for fossil fuel companies, that is probably a really bad choice of issues to focus on.

Are you saying it is irrational to vote for the candidate who doesn't support making your main source of income illegal just because he as some batshit crazy views on exorcisms? It isn't like any exorcism laws are going to be voted on.

 Probably the only big issue with this bigot and might actually be voted on, is his anti gay stances, but the reality is that for most voters, their personal ability to feed and care for their family is more important than idealism. There is nothing irrational about a person voting to support their immediate personal interest (their livlihood) over an ideal that doesn't directly affect them.

 

 

I've really been trying very hard to understand how a person who honestly believes in malevolent supernatural creatures that influence human behaviour can even be considered sane, let alone fit for any kind of office.

So yes, I would say it's not very rational to vote for a guy who's openly and proudly insane. And sure, let's all hope there won't be any faith healing laws to vote on.

 


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

No paranoia. I'm asking a question.

When Jeb Bush is talking about running in the election for 2016, the "experts" are saying he isn't far enough right to win Florida? I'm stunned? Former Governor of Florida not right enough? Who is coming up with this stuff? I live in Florida and I can not believe we are a tea bag state, in fact, all the tea baggers in my area lost. How right do you need to go to win the GOP nod?

 

               I was referring to your "are they already beyond democracy ?" statement unless you were simply being facetious.  Right or Left politics aside, democracy isn't going away in this country.

 

                   Do you personally consider Jeb Bush to be a right wing "extremist" ?  I'm conservative and right wing as hell but there's stuff about him that turns me off, too.

 

                  Here's a good link:   www.ontheissues.org/Jeb_Bush.htm

 

I was joking.

As for Jeb, I'm from Florida. I know all about the fucker.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote:  Yikes.

Antipatris wrote:

 

 

Yikes. So many angry attempts at sarcasm.

 

  Thank you.  I was expecting you to accuse me of "hate speech", instead.

 

 

Antipatris wrote:
That's kinda vague, but I would still strongly disagree with that.

 

 

     At this point it doesn't really matter whether you agree or not.   The post election results are final and the political implications are anything but vague.  Cheers.

 

 

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:  I

digitalbeachbum wrote:

 

 

I was joking.

As for Jeb, I'm from Florida. I know all about the fucker.

 

   Ah, okay then, it's sometimes hard to to decipher shades of meaning when just reading words. My bad.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote:I've really

Antipatris wrote:
I've really been trying very hard to understand how a person who honestly believes in malevolent supernatural creatures that influence human behaviour can even be considered sane, let alone fit for any kind of office.

So yes, I would say it's not very rational to vote for a guy who's openly and proudly insane. And sure, let's all hope there won't be any faith healing laws to vote on.

 If a sufficient portion of the voters themselves believe in supernatural creatures, it should come as no surprise such a candidate can be elected.  Remember this is the state where Ted Haggard ran his multi-million dollar church of pyrotechnics.

 

At least if it was in Florida, maybe they could have demanded a recount.

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Thank

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Thank you.  I was expecting you to accuse me of "hate speech", instead.

Sucks when people don't follow the script, doesn't it ? 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
At this point it doesn't really matter whether you agree or not.   The post election results are final and the political implications are anything but vague.  Cheers.

I was disagreeing with your answer, not the election results.

And yeah, the implications are clear. We just disagree on what they might be.


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote: If a

zarathustra wrote:
 If a sufficient portion of the voters themselves believe in supernatural creatures, it should come as no surprise such a candidate can be elected. 

I guess at this point I'm just intrigued by what type of insanity is acceptable to these voters, and what isn't.

I mean, would they vote for an actual monkey in a suit if it ticked all their political boxes ? I'm guessing they wouldn't.

How about a guy who ended all his sentences with the word "wibble' ? Probably not.

But a guy who believes in demons ? Hell yes, no problem.

 

Seems like stark raving insanity is just fine and dandy, as long as you dip it in religion first.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote:Beyond

Antipatris wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

 What is 'rational' about judging an election based on a irrelevent beliefs of the victor? This was a local election and the voters weren't voting on exorcisms. They were voting on issues like fracking, mining and schools. The first page on his opponents website is anti fracking and anti mining- in an area of the country where a very large pecentage of people work directly or indirectly for fossil fuel companies, that is probably a really bad choice of issues to focus on.

Are you saying it is irrational to vote for the candidate who doesn't support making your main source of income illegal just because he as some batshit crazy views on exorcisms? It isn't like any exorcism laws are going to be voted on.

 Probably the only big issue with this bigot and might actually be voted on, is his anti gay stances, but the reality is that for most voters, their personal ability to feed and care for their family is more important than idealism. There is nothing irrational about a person voting to support their immediate personal interest (their livlihood) over an ideal that doesn't directly affect them.

 

 

I've really been trying very hard to understand how a person who honestly believes in malevolent supernatural creatures that influence human behaviour can even be considered sane, let alone fit for any kind of office.

So yes, I would say it's not very rational to vote for a guy who's openly and proudly insane. And sure, let's all hope there won't be any faith healing laws to vote on.

 

An insane person who isn't going to destroy your way of life is a hell of a lot better choice than a sane person who proudly proclaims they want you to lose your job. Sane people can be very dangerous and cause a shit ton of damage. Insane people are often harmless. I would pay a lot of money for a group of politicians bent on exorizing demons from their office over the group that comes up with shit like Obamacare, banning fracking, banning feeding the homeless, banning gmos and banning guns. That shit actually affects my life immediately and directly. Believing in demons doesn't even though the belief is crazy. And face it, believing in demons isn't any more crazy than believing in god, there is precisely the same amount of evidence for both, his opponent believes in god so they were both insane. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 No Beyond, once again just

 No Beyond, once again just like Che supporters you think your personal economic views constitute the totality of reality. You are merely the theocratic version of economics with the same faulty logic.

You do not get to decide in a diverse society for everyone else how business is conducted. All you have argued is it works when you get what you want and robbery when others compete at the voting booth. I agree with your attitude we would lose jobs, not becuase we have to, but crybabies like you act exactly like theists in a game of chess, when you don't get what you want you knock over the peices and declair victory. You are merely masking blackmail as ethics. 

 

For the past 30 years the GOP has controled the conversation, it has deregulated and dispite even with a buble every decade and 3 that caused our ressession, the entire time wages have not kept up with the cost of living dispite productivity and encreased profits.  And somehow you think magically removing even more relulations will get business to behave itself when it is clear it does not. 

You are the Pat Robertson of economics. You know damned well there is more than one economic view in the world. And just like you can point out kind motifs in all religions, it still does not make religion itself the source of morality.  We are a diverse species in a politically diverse society, and as such you don't get to decide for all of us how business is conducted.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: No Beyond,

Brian37 wrote:

 No Beyond, once again just like Che supporters you think your personal economic views constitute the totality of reality. You are merely the theocratic version of economics with the same faulty logic.

You do not get to decide in a diverse society for everyone else how business is conducted. All you have argued is it works when you get what you want and robbery when others compete at the voting booth. I agree with your attitude we would lose jobs, not becuase we have to, but crybabies like you act exactly like theists in a game of chess, when you don't get what you want you knock over the peices and declair victory. You are merely masking blackmail as ethics. 

 

For the past 30 years the GOP has controled the conversation, it has deregulated and dispite even with a buble every decade and 3 that caused our ressession, the entire time wages have not kept up with the cost of living dispite productivity and encreased profits.  And somehow you think magically removing even more relulations will get business to behave itself when it is clear it does not. 

You are the Pat Robertson of economics. You know damned well there is more than one economic view in the world. And just like you can point out kind motifs in all religions, it still does not make religion itself the source of morality.  We are a diverse species in a politically diverse society, and as such you don't get to decide for all of us how business is conducted.

Oh please, show me one thread where I have "cried" over losing elections. And guess what, you don't get to choose either. Your boys and gals got their asses handed to them in no small part because of economic issues.

No doubt you will be crying about it until next election, throwing your pathetic little fits and wanting courts to come in and force things to be the way you want. Because your response to every problem is to attempt to force everyone to live the way you think they should.  

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37

The same source as everyone else. Their family, colleagues and the people they socialize with. Your idea that morality is in the confines of religion is absurd. Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality. Moral norms stem from culture and are always changing, religion changes with society's morals.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37

The same source as everyone else. Their family, colleagues and the people they socialize with. Your idea that morality is in the confines of religion is absurd. Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality. Moral norms stem from culture and are always changing, religion changes with society's morals.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
http://tribune.com.pk/story/7

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

The same source as everyone else. Their family, colleagues and the people they socialize with. Your idea that morality is in the confines of religion is absurd. Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality. Moral norms stem from culture and are always changing, religion changes with society's morals.

Get your head out of your ass. Just like economics, you stupidly think that any objection to your POV means "Getting rid of"

 

No one is talking about or should talk about ridding the world of religion, as if it would work any better than Isis claiming they could take over the world. Just like your stupid attitude about economics that any objection to how business is currently conducted means somehow I want to rob you or rid the world of the private sector. 

 

Religion is poison for all the reasons I stated countless times  and links posted  in this thread, just like being dogmatic about your own religion(my way or the highway economics). 

 

It isn't a matter of "getting rid" of anything, it is a matter of better management . You do not fix a problem by pretending the source of it doesn't cause the problem itself. Just like you will never get rid of a volcano, but only a fool pretends it will always stay dormant. 

 

And if you think I don't apply this to atheists as well you'd be wrong. I certainly don't agree with you so I also would not blindly support someone because they claim that label either. 

 

You treat religion like a poison because evolution produces false perceptions and you don't let those false perceptions go unchecked even if you cannot completely get rid of them.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:An

Beyond Saving wrote:

An insane person who isn't going to destroy your way of life is a hell of a lot better choice than a sane person who proudly proclaims they want you to lose your job. Sane people can be very dangerous and cause a shit ton of damage. Insane people are often harmless. I would pay a lot of money for a group of politicians bent on exorizing demons from their office over the group that comes up with shit like Obamacare, banning fracking, banning feeding the homeless, banning gmos and banning guns. That shit actually affects my life immediately and directly. Believing in demons doesn't even though the belief is crazy. And face it, believing in demons isn't any more crazy than believing in god, there is precisely the same amount of evidence for both, his opponent believes in god so they were both insane. 

Going by that logic, your chosen political party might as well start recruiting straight from the insane asylum. I remain convinced that that might not be a good idea. 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote:Beyond

Antipatris wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

An insane person who isn't going to destroy your way of life is a hell of a lot better choice than a sane person who proudly proclaims they want you to lose your job. Sane people can be very dangerous and cause a shit ton of damage. Insane people are often harmless. I would pay a lot of money for a group of politicians bent on exorizing demons from their office over the group that comes up with shit like Obamacare, banning fracking, banning feeding the homeless, banning gmos and banning guns. That shit actually affects my life immediately and directly. Believing in demons doesn't even though the belief is crazy. And face it, believing in demons isn't any more crazy than believing in god, there is precisely the same amount of evidence for both, his opponent believes in god so they were both insane. 

Going by that logic, your chosen political party might as well start recruiting straight from the insane asylum. I remain convinced that that might not be a good idea. 

They aren't my chosen political party. Nobody in my chosen political party won anywhere. I was just explaining why a rational person might vote for someone regardless of a few unrelated kooky beliefs. The election wasn't about demons and I doubt more than 1% of the voters even knew his beliefs about demons. And there are far more immediate and pressing issues for the voters anyway. To make any judgment about the voters based on it is ridiculous.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

The same source as everyone else. Their family, colleagues and the people they socialize with. Your idea that morality is in the confines of religion is absurd. Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality. Moral norms stem from culture and are always changing, religion changes with society's morals.

Get your head out of your ass. Just like economics, you stupidly think that any objection to your POV means "Getting rid of"

 

No one is talking about or should talk about ridding the world of religion, as if it would work any better than Isis claiming they could take over the world. Just like your stupid attitude about economics that any objection to how business is currently conducted means somehow I want to rob you or rid the world of the private sector. 

 

Religion is poison for all the reasons I stated countless times  and links posted  in this thread, just like being dogmatic about your own religion(my way or the highway economics). 

 

It isn't a matter of "getting rid" of anything, it is a matter of better management . You do not fix a problem by pretending the source of it doesn't cause the problem itself. Just like you will never get rid of a volcano, but only a fool pretends it will always stay dormant. 

 

And if you think I don't apply this to atheists as well you'd be wrong. I certainly don't agree with you so I also would not blindly support someone because they claim that label either. 

 

You treat religion like a poison because evolution produces false perceptions and you don't let those false perceptions go unchecked even if you cannot completely get rid of them.

I think you are an idiot in sore need of reading comprehension skills. I never said you supported getting rid of religion. Of course, arguing with a strawman is easier than actually addressing the content of my post.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:To make

Beyond Saving wrote:
To make any judgment about the voters based on it is ridiculous.  

Who's "judging" the voters ? What I have a problem with is how acceptable this particular form of insanity has become, apparently without anyone noticing or caring.

Any other brand of bugfuck looney tunes, and his opponent would have made damn sure the voters knew about it.

But with this ? Nobody cares, so why even bother.

So if I'm "judging" anyone, it's pretty much all of us.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote: Who's

Antipatris wrote:

 

Who's "judging" the voters ? What I have a problem with is how acceptable this particular form of insanity has become, apparently without anyone noticing or caring.

Any other brand of bugfuck looney tunes, and his opponent would have made damn sure the voters knew about it.

But with this ? Nobody cares, so why even bother.

So if I'm "judging" anyone, it's pretty much all of us.

 

  As an atheist I'll happily cast a vote for a Young Earth Creationist or a Wiccan or a Deist or a Mormon polygamist or a dope smoking, transexual vegan, whatever...as long as their political views line up with mine.  Candidates are free to be whoever they want to be in their personal lives.  I don't give a shit.  Being different or downright weird in a politician doesn't bother me as long as they are not supporters of an all invasive nanny state.  Beyond that, they can believe or do whatever the fuck they want.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1951
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
About ProzacDeathWish's remark . . can I get some links

Beware the rider of a fleet horse.. capable of subduing the wicked; having a name written that no one knew . .

Arrow Up

Query -- I didn't see it come up much. Did anyone follow, is the United States judiciary (also known as the judicial system or court system) starting to kick back the battle over 'Traditional' marriage -- w/ prohibiting and bans on same sex marriage for the states to decide ? (?) * Implications ???


-- -- --
Other/Non-Other Off-site --

0ff-site :: Hey! If you've got the time to view all this, then you've got the time, to take some time to 'share', K? View/See Image(s)::

-- -- --

“For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks” ...


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:p>  

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

 

 As an atheist I'll happily cast a vote for a Young Earth Creationist or a Wiccan or a Deist or a Mormon polygamist or a dope smoking, transexual vegan, whatever...as long as their political views line up with mine.  Candidates are free to be whoever they want to be in their personal lives.  I don't give a shit.  Being different or downright weird in a politician doesn't bother me as long as they are not supporters of an all invasive nanny state.  Beyond that, they can believe or do whatever the fuck they want.




lol. yeah, i would have voted freak power in aspen, colorado, back in the '70s, no question about it.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
how is it that even when

how is it that even when someone posts after her, dana's edits still show up as new posts?????


Antipatris
atheist
Antipatris's picture
Posts: 205
Joined: 2011-05-20
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:as

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
as long as they are not supporters of an all invasive nanny state.

That would make you a pretty strong opponent of anyone who wants to weaken the separation of church and state, wouldn't it ? 


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:how is it that

iwbiek wrote:
how is it that even when someone posts after her, dana's edits still show up as new posts?????

I almost wonder if she keeps a window open with the edit, then randomly goes back and changes one period, then saves it, then goes back in to edit mode and waits.

She's like a Black Widow waiting to trap you.


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1951
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Re:: Write down your 1st impressions, what do YOU see ?

RE:: Write down your 1st impressions; what do YOU see ?

Hey, Scribbling on the doors of the gate and such.



http://tinypic.com/m/idhnad/3

Hey?!? Why's everybody always pickin' on me (Why's everybody always pickin' on me) Who's always writing on the wall? Who's always goofing in the halls? Who's always throwing spit balls? Guess who? Guess who? Who me ? Who me?!?



Yeah, I get a lot of that . . . YouTube video part of comment . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjEuYztBbBo {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjEuYztBbBo}

Edit :: Edit -- I had to turn the safe mode to OFF. I don't understand for the life of me why I would, with just a Karaoke version of the song, (no images in the Uploaded video)


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15723
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

The same source as everyone else. Their family, colleagues and the people they socialize with. Your idea that morality is in the confines of religion is absurd. Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality. Moral norms stem from culture and are always changing, religion changes with society's morals.

Get your head out of your ass. Just like economics, you stupidly think that any objection to your POV means "Getting rid of"

 

No one is talking about or should talk about ridding the world of religion, as if it would work any better than Isis claiming they could take over the world. Just like your stupid attitude about economics that any objection to how business is currently conducted means somehow I want to rob you or rid the world of the private sector. 

 

 

Religion is poison for all the reasons I stated countless times  and links posted  in this thread, just like being dogmatic about your own religion(my way or the highway economics). 

 

It isn't a matter of "getting rid" of anything, it is a matter of better management . You do not fix a problem by pretending the source of it doesn't cause the problem itself. Just like you will never get rid of a volcano, but only a fool pretends it will always stay dormant. 

 

And if you think I don't apply this to atheists as well you'd be wrong. I certainly don't agree with you so I also would not blindly support someone because they claim that label either. 

 

You treat religion like a poison because evolution produces false perceptions and you don't let those false perceptions go unchecked even if you cannot completely get rid of them.

I think you are an idiot in sore need of reading comprehension skills. I never said you supported getting rid of religion. Of course, arguing with a strawman is easier than actually addressing the content of my post.

Just like a theist, call them out then the words you type suddenly don't mean what you actually typed. Maybe instead of blaming me for my "missinterpretation" maybe you should make it clear from the start. 

And don't fucking hand me that crap. You automatically have on econmics done the same stupid shit with religion, outside of not believing and the NFL, I could rightfully point at the moon and call it a moon, and you'd call it something else just to spite me.

You don't like me, that is all this amounts to. 

"getting rid of" are your words not mine. 

Quote:
Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality

 

Did you not type that? Now that DOES imply that you think it is my goal to "get rid of" religion. 

 

Same stupid gun nutter argument "other bad shit happens so lets do nothing about this".

 

NO shit religion will exist. But you do not manage it better by pretending it never causes problems. There is no such thing as a utopia, but that does not mean as humans we can't seak to manage better. Same stupid argument you have about economics. "Works for me so who am I hurting".

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Just like a

Brian37 wrote:

Just like a theist, call them out then the words you type suddenly don't mean what you actually typed. Maybe instead of blaming me for my "missinterpretation" maybe you should make it clear from the start. 

And don't fucking hand me that crap. You automatically have on econmics done the same stupid shit with religion, outside of not believing and the NFL, I could rightfully point at the moon and call it a moon, and you'd call it something else just to spite me.

You don't like me, that is all this amounts to. 

"getting rid of" are your words not mine. 

Quote:
Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality

 

Did you not type that? Now that DOES imply that you think it is my goal to "get rid of" religion. 

 

Same stupid gun nutter argument "other bad shit happens so lets do nothing about this".

 

NO shit religion will exist. But you do not manage it better by pretending it never causes problems. There is no such thing as a utopia, but that does not mean as humans we can't seak to manage better. Same stupid argument you have about economics. "Works for me so who am I hurting".

 

 

Yes, I typed it, not YOU and I never said you did. Let's break it down. You posted a link to a story asking where the people got their morality from, clearly implying that, as you have stated explicitly before, that their moralty comes from their religion. So the point of my reply was to refute your position that religion plays a key, if not determining role of a person's morality.

So I started by answering your question directly, even though I knew it was rhetorical. I said,

Quote:
The same source as everyone else. Their family, colleagues and the people they socialize with.

With these two sentences, I lay out a view that opposes yours. I argue that morality comes from primarily cultural sources as opposed to religion.

Then I said,

Quote:
Your idea that morality is in the confines of religion is absurd

This sentence I restate how I interpret your position. IOW, I believe you are saying that morality primarily derives from religion.

 That is when I said,

Quote:

 Getting rid of religion wouldn't dramatically change morality. Moral norms stem from culture and are always changing, religion changes with society's morals.

IOW, if religion was completely non existent, the morality that you take issue with would remain unchanged. I am arguing that religion changes to match morality, as opposed to your apparent belief that morality changes to match religion. I use the extreme, 'getting rid of religion' as a tool to illustrate my point that religion plays minimal to no role in shaping morality.

NOWHERE did I suggest that your position is that we should eliminate religion. If it was, I would attack the more obvious problem that getting rid of religion is impossible and persecution often makes religion stronger. I used the thought experiment to convey my belief that religion is a reflection of moral codes that exist as opposed to a source of those morals.

Evidence of this can be seen by numerous atheist clusters that also avoid modern medical care usually under the idea that chemicals are bad and 'natural' is best. I know an atheist who tried o treat his xancer by eating shitloads of broccoli because chemo was 'poison'. He died.

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Antipatris wrote: That

Antipatris wrote:

 

That would make you a pretty strong opponent of anyone who wants to weaken the separation of church and state, wouldn't it ? 

 

                                     

 

         Obama, a Democrat,  swore upon two bibles and concluded his presidential oath with the words "So help me God"   FYI, the words "So help me God" are not legally required for the presidential oath.  What's up with that shit ?

 

        In 1901, Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican, refused to swear his presidential oath upon a bible.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.