Atheist's slavery bible quote billboard blasted by MSNBC.
Online I really want everyone here to put pressure on local and national media, that if they are going to criticize the bible quote which DOES condone slavery, have a black atheist on and not just a black Christian. If MSNBC does not want to be accused of acting like FOX NEWS then present both sides. Just saw it on the news no link as of yet.
BUT the Washington Post AND Huffington Post ARE also covering it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/1 ... 42268.html
Please do a google search yourself and comment on any media website about this subject. EVERY VOICE COUNTS.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
- Login to post comments
care to slide me some keywords, first? Links don't cover much.
Fuck, I need my own secretary. Just type "atheist" in google click on "News" TO THE RIGHT not on top.
It will bring up the current stories for atheist news for the week, just scroll down look for the links for the Washington Post and Huffington post.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Fuckin A-poc! Fred's punk son from The Depths Below Mariana gives theistards a slap on the eyeballs!
FUCK YEAH I'm ecstatic!!!!
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
the video is here:
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/jansing-and-co/46759761/#46759761
It sad sometimes to see the US from outside...
there is 2 things about this: Yes they should have had an Atheist on studio and also 2 wrongs don't make one good... that was a provocative billboard, you don't get "love" by doing those things
"Well behaved women seldom make history"Susan B Anthony. If she took your advice women wouldn't be able to vote now.
If Galileo had "behaved" we would still think the earth was flat.
DAMNED FUCKING RIGHT I am going to be provocative. If humans never questioned social norms our species never would have left the caves. The truth hurts sometimes. But when you accept it you learn and grow.
Your childish attempt to silence blasphemy and equate it to meanness is pathetic.
Now go read your own book. YOU DO NOT have to take my word for it. Every time you see the word "Lord" "King" "servant" or "slave" ask yourself, do you want to live under a dictator?
Saying that the bible contained the word "slave" and that WHITE CHRISTIANS used the bible as an excuse to own other humans, is THE MORAL THING TO DO. Ignoring history is the quickest way to repeat it.
If you are going to tell me I shouldn't point that out, then tell the Jews they shouldn't have built the Holocaust Museum because it shows death and has Hitler's image in it.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Damn! You're a stubborn little Nazi aren't you?! Not even a thanks for finding that video for you...
Don't put "Your" in your sentences because I AM NOT FUCKING CHRISTIAN! nor is the Bible my BOOK!
I don't agree with dividing people. Things done that way only divide people... that's what's happening in your country because there is a lot of people like you. There are alternatives.
I know that you would prefer the "ultimate solution" for all those that don't agree with you... I'm glad you're just one person
Godwin's law, when you have no argument you equate the person to Hitler.
Having passion and being blunt does not mean I want to kill you or oppress you dumbass. You just don't like having cold water thrown on your face.
SLAVERY HAPPENED AND IT WAS BAD AND WE SHOULD NEVER REPEAT IT
THE HOLOCAUST HAPPENED AND IT WAS BAD AND WE SHOULD NEVER REPEAT IT
Calling me a Nazi is merely you reacting to having a mirror put up to your book. The word "Lord" and "King" and "servant" and "slave" ARE IN THE BOOK for a reason, because in real life people lived under a feudal tribal community under a autocrat. The writing was for that time, not now.
If I was a Nazi, I wouldn't tell you "Don't take my word for it, read it yourself"
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
You have as much an argument to keep calling the Bible my book, or to imply that I'm going to cry God at the end of every thread in the forum, as I have an argument to call you a Nazi.
So until that changes you're a Nazi to me from now on. The imagination quote from Einstein really applies now
I do not think I am wrong. AGAIN, if you do not believe in a god, then why do you have the title "theist" under your avatar?
Did you read his last letter or are you just paying me lip service because you are afraid of what you might find?
And again, you calling me a Nazi is stupid when you came here. That would be like going to a nudist camp and get pissed when they ask you to take off your cloths.
You were not forced to come here. The government is not forcing you to post here. I will not have you arrested for holding a belief I don't agree with. You simply get pissed because I don't like walking down your Yellow Brick Road.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
I don't think billboards like this do anything to persuade people to question religion. About the only benefit these types of billboards have is that sometimes they are funny. This particular one wasn't even funny. But whatever, Perce can buy whatever billboard he wants. What irritates me is that the news media terms him an "atheist leader" and try to portray it like there is some massive shadowy atheist organization whenever Perce and company do something obnoxious.
If you are going to do something like this to offend someone, at least make it funny. It is such a waste to offend someone without having a good laugh at their expense.
As far as attempting to be an actual political movement, this kind of "in your face" obnoxiousness does not win you any votes, and can easily be detrimental to your goals. There is a reason Martin Luther King was more successful at creating real change than Malcolm X. Simply standing on your principles and refusing to budge while the other side makes themselves look bad is more effective than attempting to demonize them with your words. Especially since 99.99% of Xtians in America do not support slavery. Trying to make that link simply causes most people to dismiss you out of hand.
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
<---- hates the "love" people have tried to 'force' on him, because of latent avoidance issues and because they almost always required some (HIGHLY) asinine belief in "spiritual" good.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
It's also rare for someone to unwittingly describe my political philosophy with just a sentence fragment.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Soooo becoming my next signature... object now if you don't want that.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Teralek, how would you describe your spiritual beliefs ? This would help avoid further confusion...
For someone who loves business you seem to know less than I do.
I agree, LONG TERM billboards do nothing, but neither does any advertisement. HOW IT WORKS is two pronged.
1. Pull new people in who don't know about it
2. Remind people they exist.
What adds don't do is suddenly make people switch.
You focus on the products you ignore and don't buy and falsely think that "If I am not sucked in, no one will be"
Typical script thinking. Everything is simple and works the same way.
Selection bias, sample rate error.
If no form of speaking out worked, which is what all forms of communication are, then we wouldn't evolve.
AND if 10 years ago when there were no atheist billboards up, if they thought like you, then we wouldn't have gone on to put them up in every state. If if doesn't work why repeat it?
I am glad the atheist community doesn't think like you, otherwise Infidel Guy and Brian wouldn't have their websites and there wouldn't have been any atheist billboards at all. I don't think you have any clue how many bus signs and billboards have gone up over the past 10 years.
You pontificate about the "can do" spirit but your problem is you think everything is a script.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
"Knight's Templar"?
(Masonic Christianity/Masonic Theism)
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
As I understand it, the atheistic message was this:
"Your worshipped book condones slavery (you dumbass) !"
But Christians understood it as:
"Jesus, help, the mean atheists are picking on us!"
And their public message on MSNBC was:
"The evil atheists want to enslave the black people!"
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
I fully support this billboard. It highlights the fact that there is immorality in the Bible, and yet people still cling to it. They read the Bible through the lens of their political philosophies, and can't see what the scripture actually says. It's a shame!
It was hilarious when the black pastor said that the atheists meant the billboard as an attack partly on black people. What bullshit. Can't a white man do anything without it being considered racist or sexist? I know the pastor is Republican, but I don't like the trend in liberals of over attributing racism and sexism, especially when it's done for political points. Conservatives do it too, you just saw the pastor do it.
The atheists were making a point about the promotion of slavery even in the New Testament. A lot of Christians think that Jesus made it all better, undoing the evil in the Old Testament (which Yahweh got wrong for some reason and needed a do over). This billboard showed that that isn't so. There should be other billboards with similar New Testament endorsements of slavery and other immoralities, like Jesus' unjust endorsement of eternal torture.
Remember the words of Mark Twain about this same Christian phenomenon: "The practices change, but the texts remain." Christians should tear out the texts they don't believe in and practice anymore; it's the intellectually honest thing to do.
~~~~
Here's the full Mark Twain quote, for the serious reader!
"The Christian's Bible is a drug store. Its contents remain the same; but the medical practice changes...The world has corrected the Bible. The church never corrects it; and also never fails to drop in at the tail of the procession- and take the credit of the correction. During many ages there were witches. The Bible said so. the Bible commanded that they should not be allowed to live. Therefore the Church, after eight hundred years, gathered up its halters, thumb-screws, and firebrands, and set about its holy work in earnest. She worked hard at it night and day during nine centuries and imprisoned, tortured, hanged, and burned whole hordes and armies of witches, and washed the Christian world clean with their foul blood.
Then it was discovered that there was no such thing as witches, and never had been. One does not know whether to laugh or to cry.....There are no witches. The witch text remains; only the practice has changed. Hell fire is gone, but the text remains. Infant damnation is gone, but the text remains. More than two hundred death penalties are gone from the law books, but the texts that authorized them remain."
-- "Bible Teaching and Religious Practice," Europe and Elsewhere
I finally got around to reading the article...
I have two assumptions about this "atheist group" in PA.
1 - They are ignorant fucks
2 - They intentionally want to cause a disturbance.
I'm tending to believe they are #2 because the one guy is the same one who was involved with the halloween parade/zombie mohammad.
Yeah I get it. They have the right to do what they did... I know.. free speech, etc etc etc.
But there are better ways to do things and not cause a ruckus. Atheists should be better than the theists who are ignorant assholes.
I agree.
Maybe that's why I make money and you don't. Funny you accuse me of "following a script" when your argument basically amounts to "the message appeals to me, therefore it is good". In advertising what message appeals to you doesn't matter, you have to consider how your message is going to appeal to your target audience.
This billboard does not pull in new people. It does attract attention, but the attention it draws is mostly negative. It is basically what is known as "red meat" in political circles, meaning the message plays well for people who are already hardcore supporters but not others. These messages have their place in politics and are usually used to motivate for fundraising or to solidify your existing base if you have reason to believe they are slipping away. When presented to people who are ambivalent, red meat messages usually leave them with a negative feeling. When the message is further distorted by the media in a predictable way it harms your image even more. Political advertising is ALL about controlling the message and limiting the extent to which your opponents can distort it. Which is why red meat advertising is usually limited to very select demographics and usually done in a very controlled way through direct mailing and private speeches instead of mass advertising.
Compare it to a billboard that says "Obama hates America"- effective among the radical right, but beyond that people will roll their eyes consider you a kook and not want to be associated with you. If your goal is to get people to vote for you, such a billboard would not be helpful, even though a certain portion of the population is going to be cheering you on.
In advertising the message does matter, especially in an advertisement that is necessarily limited like a billboard. If the goal is to draw people in, a red meat message simply isn't an effective way to do so. A more thought provoking and less offensive message is going to be far more effective. Maybe a message like "What is the flying spaghetti monster? Find out at..." pique peoples curiosity and maybe a portion of them will look at you seriously. Of course, you would be missing out on the free advertising of the news media, but since the coverage basically amounts to a smear I think you are better off without it. The message as it is only appeals to a very small demographic, most of whom already agree with you.
If your advertising goal is to draw in new people, you need a message that appeals to them, not to you. If your goal is to piss off Christians then at least make it funny.
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
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SLAVERY!
DAMNED FUCKING RIGHT I AM GOING TO GET "IN YOUR FACE" ABOUT IT
THE BIBLE HAS THE WORD "SLAVE" IN IT
If you think pointing that out is "obnoxious" then you have a problem because you are ignoring history. I did not make that up. SLAVE IS IN THE BIBLE.
FACT White Christians used those verses to justify owning other people. The fact that that view has been watered down over the years and forgotten does not change that holy books CAN BE WEAPONS. I am glad people don't view those verses in mass the same way, BUT THEY ARE STILL THERE.
None of you here have any problem pointing to the Koran and blaming the Middle East for it's current turmoil and hatred for the west. WHAT YOU DONT WANT TO FACE is BOTH slavery back then, and the sexism and xenophobia the East has for the west is because OF THEIR HOLY BOOKS. Not to mention all three books come from the same literary loins, the god of Abraham.
AGAIN, the hate and harm humans do to each other is EVOLUTIONARY and a ratio to our species, it is the dark side of our evolution. When we realize that and take the power away from ANY MONOPOLY. by taking away the meme that a label makes you entitled to be the alpha male we can reduce the harm we do to each other.
Humans are human and when we ignore that words CAN have power, be in the form of holy books or mere adds, and put them in the rightful place of only giving them the power we consent to, we can avoid the past.
American Atheists in putting up that billboard WAS being provocative, not bigoted.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Of course it did. But whose fault is that? American Atheists didn't write the bible. And when enough people actually go to their website it will be no different than Fox News viewer realizing they were sold a bill of goods.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
If it weren't for my "fight fire with fire" doctrine of living, I'd agree.
However... Christians like to go on Demogogic crusades here in the west. I respond by heckling and disparaging the lulz (and anguish) they create by doing so.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
WHO THE FUCK IS DEMONIZING ANYONE? Where did I say Christians should be arrested? Where did I say the are all evil?
I shouldn't say slavery was horrible? I shouldn't say that the word still exists in the bible? I shouldn't point out that the god character is an autocrat that cannot be removed from his position?
Are you not willing to stand on the principle that slavery was bad?
Or does it bother you that a non Christian group brought the issue up?
I do get tired of the slur of "demonize" or "militant" when all it amounts to is "I am uncomfortable when you use certain words".
Demonizing is what Fox News does. Demonizing is what bigots do. Having a passion for truth and stating facts is hardly demonizing someone because they don't like the delivery.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
I am for BOTH fight fire with fire and the King Approach in context of situation, because not every person will respond the same and neither would work by themselves as an absolute.
But my critics here on this issue think that I am going to go on a killing spree stupidly. And they also think that because they don't like my tactics it reflects badly on them. If they don't like theists attitude of "guilt by association" then they should consider themselves individuals and not ask me to be a clone 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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
"Close! But no cigar..."
Yes... I just fibbed/slashfic'ed up a prank movie quote.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
"That thing will never fly."
Wright Brothers, "Fuck you, yes it will"
You simply don't like my tactics. If you want to build a hand glider fine(Gentile approach). I am building a jet,(boxing ring) and neither of us are wrong. I've torn into you and I am sure you know I don't want to kill you. You aren't afraid of me.
You do your thing, I'll do mine.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
"You know how you got that dent, on your upper lip? Before you were born, I put my finger there, and I went....
'SSHHHH!!"
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Who said that?
I'm not. I'm simply stating that the billboard fails to achieve the presumed goal of attracting people to consider atheism. No one has said that Perce can't put up the billboards. I just think he is an immature idiot who is wasting money and providing a helpful target for idiots like O'Reilly. It is annoying that the actions of him and people like him are often used in the media as "examples" of atheists. But such as life, people tend to associate people by labels and nothing can change that. I'm sure many baptists are not fond of the Westboro Baptists. For my part I simply refuse to donate money to any of Perce's organizations because I think he is a lousy spokesman and gives more people a negative view of atheists.
But yeah, he can buy as many billboards as he wants as long as he has the money. I'm just going to state my opinion that he is a terrible marketer and make sure none of that money he is spending is mine. This billboard is simply another example of his incompetence in the political realm. And like I said before, if you are just fanning flames for the sake of fanning flames make it funny.
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
The atheist extremists make the moderates look better. When they meet a moderate atheist or a more accomodationist type they'll say, "I didn't know atheists were so nice. I figured they were all assholes. There is love in you." Not that there's no love in confrontational atheists (some are haters), but that's how they're seen.
The billboard expresses a Biblical truth, and the graphic picture of the slave drives the point home; there wasn't even a need to exaggerate for effect. The endorsement of slavery is an uncomfortable truth about the New Testament, and the light will temporarily blind the eyes.
For psychological and moral reasons I think the majority of marketing should be respectful, but graphic truths once in a while are a necessary discomfort; not for the sake of discomfort, that would simply be uncalled for cruelty, but for the sake of truth. I don't consider this billboard to be immoral; the only problem is its lack of psychological appeal.
I can understand your position, but if you had a choice of putting up a billboard as such, couldn't they have put a different picture? Seriously. Think of the other pictures (other than a black slave) which might have worked.
Also, I'd like to point out an historical fact about the slavery of the 1700-1800's of America.
People, especially these black leaders of the NAACP will never mention or inform the public that BLACK tribes in Africa were the ones who SOLD the other blacks in to SLAVERY. It was an issue of powerful tribes making money off the weaker tribes. It wasn't the white man who was going over to Africa rounding up the blacks. It was blacks rounding up blacks.
The Transatlantic slave trade peaked in the late 18th century, when the largest number of slaves were captured on raiding expeditions into the interior of West Africa. These expeditions were typically carried out by African kingdoms, such as the Oyo empire (Yoruba), the Ashanti Empire, the kingdom ofDahomey, and the Aro Confederacy. Europeans rarely entered the interior of Africa, due to fierce African resistance. The slaves were brought to coastal outposts where they were traded for goods.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Africa
A picture of barely-robed kids and adults neck-shackled in "legion-sized" chain gangs might have worked even more effectively. It goes without saying... "Stir the religious pot? Watch entire cities flatten themselves overnight!"
So provoking people over religion (Abrahamism, specifically) does bring the worst out of everyone, eventually. What does a person do?
edit; I can't help but point out that you are awake early on a Saturday. So have I been most of my life.
It annoyed my parents to NO end.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
"That thing will never fly."
Wright brothers, "Your right, it won't, but ours will."
See... I can make up stupid fucking quotes to show support for my views.
And no. I don't like your tactics nor your attitude. I think you are one of those people who go to a rally and shout obscenities and get all angry, but never accomplish much because your tactics are too abrasive.
To you. I am not you.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
I love you man! Don't ever change!!!!
Read your own signature before you go complaining about what I do or say.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
I love you man! Don't ever change!!!!
I always knew you were mythic!
But even then, I have a hard time complaining about your confrontational viewpoints. Maybe... I am... "relieved" to have a (mostly!
) functional male family member that I came 'within inches' of having to bury last year. His death... would have meant a world of pain for me. His death... would have made my death seem like a 'sound escape plan', to paraphrase no one in particular.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
I already answer you here
No one is saying I am going to go on a killing spree. They just act like it out of fear, much like you act like my right to vote is going to mean the end of the free market.
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
It would if you were the only person voting. Fortunately you're not because despite your insistence that you support free markets, every specific policy question you come down solidly against free markets and you fly off the deep end any time I suggest markets should be free. I guess your definition of a "free market" is not very free. You seem to think saying "you are free to do whatever you want as long as I like it" is freedom, it isn't.
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
No, YOU are the one who isn't happy unless YOU win. Don't get pissy with me because I vote too.
1 Trickle down sucks and no rules, has sucked since Reagan started it and has created bubble after bubble after bubble to this current triple whammy of the housing, bank and car bubbles.
2. Saying that I want a shot (my politicians) in office to correct this long term damage, is not nor ever will be a demand to end the free market.
Republicans are merely trying to repackage the same stinky skunk which is protecting privatized profits and socialized losses.
NOPE, your fear mongering garbage wont wash.
If you want to be an idiot and support the party that values the market as a giant ponzy scheme, I won't take away your right to vote. But I damned sure am going to use my voice to compete.
BOO AND FUCKING HOO
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
What type of economic system I live in is irrelevant to my happiness. I'm used to my guys losing election, no one I have voted for has won election in 12 years and that was the last time I plugged my nose while voting. No person I could enthusiastically support has ever won an election. I take a pretty light view of politics and simply enjoy the absurdity of it. I engage in debates because I find them entertaining and stimulating, not because I expect that my side will ever win.
The democratic experiment has revealed that most people don't want freedom. They are content to be slaves as long as they are house slaves that are well taken care of and promised 3 square meals, a warm place to sleep and healthcare. Most people would rather have few freedoms and promises of security than have freedom and risk not having security. I don't get it, I don't understand how people can live being so dependent for alms and allowing others to have such control over their lives. Somewhere along the line I missed that gene. But it explains why slavery had such a long history and even now it hasn't disappeared, it simply has modified into a less brutal form.
Millions of people simply work like drones every day with no desire to even attempt to own their labor. They willingly sell themselves to employers, to the government and to creditors, not out of short term necessity but as a long term way of living. The sad thing is that our country provides ample opportunity to own your own labor, to create and sell the products of it, to be the owner. Why don't they seize that opportunity? I think because of fear, because with such opportunity comes risk of failure. People willingly surrender their liberty in exchange for a guaranteed paycheck, for promises of food, shelter and healthcare.
Then after you surrender your liberty to your boss and the government, who do you get angry at? Those of us who didn't do the same as you. Those of us who passed on the security of a steady paycheck and government alms and embraced the liberty. Those of us who risked everything we had gambling that we could improve our fellow citizens lives enough to convince them to pay us. So you DEMAND that the government take from us so that it can provide you with the security you desire. In the end, you will become completely dependent on the government for the basic essentials to live. A government powerful enough to provide you with everything you need, also has the power to take it away. Someday, it will. Maybe not in your lifetime, but the day will come when the government can't or won't give you what you need. Only then will you realize the liberty you have surrendered. No doubt, you will blame me and be out picketing in the streets demanding that we give you money, food, shelter, medical care etc.
If any of my rants have any influence on any of the lurkers out there, I don't care if they vote for the right politicians or join the right party. I hope that one person out there reads my rants and decides they don't want to be a serf. They don't want to live a life of being controlled by their employer and the government. That they save their money and take the greatest risk of all making a gamble on themselves and take ownership of their lives and career. Give the corporate world the finger and prove you are better than them instead of whining about the unfairness of it all. We still have a good amount of freedom in this country, but freedom is not handed to you, you have to seize it because there are a lot of people out there that want to control you. If I inspire even one person to pursue their dreams I will consider it a huge success.
Ebbs and flows are a natural consequence of a free market. "No rules"? Your definition of no rules is obviously different than mine. To me the word "no" means none, zero, zip, nada. If you think there has been anytime during our lifetime there has been anything close to "no rules" you are either delusional or ignorant. The number of laws, regulations and rulings regulating the economy are literally hundreds of thousands of pages. 100,000 > 0
Yet you just said above you don't like the free market. You want a less free market than we currently have and your politicians have aggressively passed laws the last few years that make the market less free. It is rather absurd to declare your support of a free market while supporting policies that restrict the market (and therefore make it less free). At least you could be honest with yourself and just admit you don't think a free market is a good idea.
I'm not a republican, I don't vote republican, I don't give money to republicans, I don't show up at republican meetings. I was at one time part of the party where most of my time was spent trying to change it. I don't find very many ideological allies in republican circles because I am a heathen supporting the "moral decay" of our country and I refuse to compromise with my freedoms just because it is politically expedient. Most republicans do not support a free market or individual liberty. For someone who is so obsessed with avoiding labels you certainly don't hesitate to label me incorrectly.
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
You don't vote republican but you DO support economic anarchy which to me is controlled by corporate America that love social issues to pit the voting public against each other to maintain their monopoly.
You morality is quite simple.
"Fuck you if you cant pay" which is nothing more than might makes right and money equals power. Your problem is that you forget that no class has a monopoly on OUR GOVERNMENT.
You are no different. You have the same "if I cant get my way, you are oppressing me". Libertarian is just another strain of the Republican flu for "fuck you".
GET THIS THROUGH YOUR FUCKING HEAD. No one wants to take your freedoms away. Your dick is not going to fall off because other voters want to try something other than what has been going on.
We had higher taxes after WW2 which publicly funded our infrastructure, electricity and phone lines that EXPLODED our economy and that investment mostly WENT TO PRIVATE CONTRACTORS.
What we have now is an economy built on, not investement, but "fuck you I got mine". It certainly works for those who say that, but it erodes the stability of the rest of society.
Keep it up, maybe if we all say "fuck you" we can have the same slave wages of third world countries and even more poverty. YIPPY!
"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 Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
If you value freedom more than happiness, why do you want freedom? I think freedom makes you happier than being controlled.
Maybe somewhere along the line they missed that gene.
Republicans don't support economic anarchy, hence the problem. G.W. was a huge interventionist, he started the whole idea of bailouts when we really should have told the irresponsible corporate fat cats "fuck you if you can't pay" declare bankruptcy, pay your creditors, if you committed fraud go to jail, do not pass go.
So why are you so insistent that you should have a monopoly on our government? I don't wish to use the government for anything. I have never suggested that anyone should use the government as a tool to take anything from anyone. You want to use the government to take from me and redistribute to others. Your morality is simple "I want it, so government take it from someone and give it to me"
If the government is preventing you from doing something your way by definition it is restricting your liberty.
Really? A law was recently passed that forces me to purchase insurance from a private company. Before that law, I could choose whether or not I wanted to purchase insurance, now I can't. I used to be able to make a decision, now the government makes it for me- therefore someone wanted to take my freedom away.
If I did purchase a health insurance plan I used to be free to determine the deductible, how much it covered and what types of care it covered, now the government decides for me. Someone wanted to take my freedom away.
I used to be free to decide whether or not I wanted to play internet poker. The government seized those websites I can no longer choose to play on those sites in the US. Therefore, someone wanted to take my freedom away.
It used to be legal for me to tell some chick in the bar I had a medal of honor (I never did, but I could have) now that claim could land me in jail. Someone wanted to take my freedom away.
I used to be able to purchase a 100 watt incandescent light bulb if I chose to, after September 30th of this year I will not. Someone wanted to take my freedom away.
The Patriot Act was renewed and expanded giving the government more power to spy on citizens, to detain them and even to assassinate them without a trial. While I am not so paranoid to believe there is even a small chance I am on the list, it is a significant and deadly loss of freedom to those who are. Someone wanted to take those freedoms.
The government has pumped trillions of dollars into the economy, handing it out to the politically connected while taking from those who aren't. The government chooses which companies go bankrupt and which it bails out. You can't have a free market when companies are forced to subsidize their failing competitors. Perhaps the biggest example is Ford which refused the bail out money and now has to compete with its own money against car companies on the federal teat. GM going bankrupt would have been a gigantic opportunity for Ford to pick up more market share. Someone wanted to take away Ford's freedom.
The government routinely takes my tax money and invests it in companies. This takes away my freedom to choose which companies to invest in and which not. It also restricts the freedom of those who want to compete in the fields government is investing in if they don't have political connections. Someone wanted to take away my freedom.
I used to be able to go to a bar and smoke. Now I can't. Someone wanted to take my freedom away.
I used to be able to sign up for any online college I desired, now every online college must receive a permit in every state it operates. Someone wanted to take my freedom away.
I used to be able to loan my money to people over the internet with sites like Prosper, now I can't. Someone wanted to take my freedom away.
I used to be able to import wine directly from a vineyard, now I have to go through a government approved wholesaler. This significantly restricts the wines I can offer to consumers. Someone wanted to take my freedom away.
When I was growing up it was common for children to help out around the family farm. New regulations limit the work children can do on farms. I did my share of helping out neighbors on their farms for a little extra cash. Someone wanted to take their freedom away.
Museums used to have the freedom to display skeletal remnants and artifacts of native americans that they found or purchased. New regulations require them to hand them over to whatever tribe they belonged to. Someone wanted to take away their freedom.
People who own swimming pools that provide public access used to be able to use any sort of lift that allowed people in wheelchairs to access their pool(s). Now every pool must have an expensive permanent lift installed, regardless of how frequently or infrequently it is used. (Prior to this most pools simply had a portable lift stashed in the closet, since most pools don't see a lot of wheelchair traffic). The new lifts cost $5000-$7,000 a piece and must be installed in every pool and spa. So if you have two pools, it isn't enough to designate one handicap accessible, shell out the $14,000. Someone wanted to take away their freedom.
If you use a major bank chances are you have new fees that didn't exist a few years ago. That is because the government took away the banks freedom to charge merchants debit fees. So banks changed their fee structure to make up for lost revenue. Someone wanted to take their freedom away. (And that is one loss of freedom that benefited me personally because I no longer have to pay the fee and I use a credit union for most of my banking needs)
I'm sure glad that "no one" wants to take my freedoms away. Could you imagine how many freedoms I would lose if someone actually did? This is just a partial list off the top of my head. There are dozens if not hundreds (thousands?) of regulations issued the last decade that I am not the least bit familiar with affecting millions of businesses and consumers. You probably aren't even aware of most of them as they don't affect you directly, but they do affect the businesses you frequent and the cost of them is certainly passed on to you. You go to the store and bitch about the price of everything going up while remaining willfully ignorant of all the regulations that drive up the price.
You aren't aware of the freedoms being lost because you are one of the people I was describing above. You have no freedoms to lose because you have willingly surrendered them to your employer and the government. You trust the government so completely you expect it to take care of you. It is pathetic. True, every regulation on its own usually seems minor. A small cost to comply a small loss of freedom to a small number of people. Those little costs add up. You become especially aware of it when you realize you have to hire a fucking lawyer (I hate lawyers, even mine) just to make sure you are in compliance of the hundreds of little regulations that affect your business.
Even hiring a lawyer, I doubt there is a business in the country that is in full compliance. The government could probably go in and find enough violations that the fines would shut down any but the largest businesses. I doubt there is a single person in the country that isn't breaking some law- the only reason you haven't been brought to court is because the government is too incompetent to enforce them all. Which means that the government can and does, pick and choose which laws to enforce against which citizens and companies. That is a dangerous and scary power for the government to have.
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
Yes it does.
But as Heinlein said,
I am free in the sense that when I get fed up with all the bullshit I can simply withdraw. Nothing forces me to work so when it reaches the point that I am no longer happy doing what I do, I will stop. While government regulations and laws piss me off sometimes, and can be irritating at the end of the day there is no reason for me to allow them to affect my core happiness. There simply is little to nothing I can do about them, so I choose to be happy and enjoy my life. If it ever gets to the point where my freedoms have disappeared to the point that I am going to be thrown in prison, I will go be happy somewhere else.
Fortunately the government is lax in enforcing the laws I have decided needed breaking. (knock on wood, now you just KNOW the next time I smoke a joint or play in an illegal poker game or get the happy ending massage the police are going to crash in
)
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