- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 2,071
- Reaction score
- 163
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Do we really need millions of mosques, synagogues, churches, temples and cathedrals? Do we really need to debate whether schools should teach evolution or creationism? Do we really need to struggle to try and ensure that abortion isn't outlawed? Do we really need to fight for marriage equality? Given that society's resources are scarce/limited... couldn't all that time, money, effort and energy be used in more valuable/productive ways?
If you're an atheist...isn't it a given that the outcome would be largely beneficial if we simply made it illegal for theists to vote/shop for themselves?
If you're a theist...isn't it a given that the outcome would be largely beneficial if we simply made it illegal for atheists to vote/shop for themselves?
If you're an adult...isn't it a given that the outcome is largely beneficial because it's illegal for people who believe in Santa Claus to vote? Doesn't it follow then that we would benefit even more if we made it illegal for minors to shop for themselves? Couldn't all the money wasted on ice cream, candy and toys be better spent on more valuable things?
This is about the dumbest OP I have ever read.....
Theists can never be patriots, their first loyalty is not to their country.
Should they even be considered as citizens?
pa·tri·ot
/ˈpātrēət,
noun
noun: patriot; plural noun: patriots; noun: Patriot1. a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.
synonyms: nationalist, loyalist; Morechauvinist, jingoist, flag-waver "would a true patriot abandon a comrade?"
2. trademark
an automated surface-to-air missile designed for preemptive strikes.
This is about the dumbest OP I have ever read.....
Moderator's Warning: |
Do we really need millions of mosques, synagogues, churches, temples and cathedrals? Do we really need to debate whether schools should teach evolution or creationism? Do we really need to struggle to try and ensure that abortion isn't outlawed? Do we really need to fight for marriage equality? Given that society's resources are scarce/limited... couldn't all that time, money, effort and energy be used in more valuable/productive ways?
If you're an atheist...isn't it a given that the outcome would be largely beneficial if we simply made it illegal for theists to vote/shop for themselves?
If you're a theist...isn't it a given that the outcome would be largely beneficial if we simply made it illegal for atheists to vote/shop for themselves?
If you're an adult...isn't it a given that the outcome is largely beneficial because it's illegal for people who believe in Santa Claus to vote? Doesn't it follow then that we would benefit even more if we made it illegal for minors to shop for themselves? Couldn't all the money wasted on ice cream, candy and toys be better spent on more valuable things?
This is about the dumbest OP I have ever read.....
Apart from the existence of the buildings (and you could ask the same of theatres, malls and sports stadiums), none of those things are a consequence of theism, they're a consequence of human nature (just as theism itself is). Even if we somehow eliminated belief in gods, people would still disagree on these things and countless others too.Do we really need millions of mosques, synagogues, churches, temples and cathedrals? Do we really need to debate whether schools should teach evolution or creationism? Do we really need to struggle to try and ensure that abortion isn't outlawed? Do we really need to fight for marriage equality? Given that society's resources are scarce/limited... couldn't all that time, money, effort and energy be used in more valuable/productive ways?
Of course not! Believing or not believing in gods doesn't alone say much about an individual, certainly not enough to start denying them basic rights. What we believe doesn't really matter, what we do about it is key.If you're an atheist...isn't it a given that the outcome would be largely beneficial if we simply made it illegal for theists to vote/shop for themselves?
If you're a theist...isn't it a given that the outcome would be largely beneficial if we simply made it illegal for atheists to vote/shop for themselves?
I can conceive plenty of benefits in giving children staged freedoms to do things they would need to do as adults, including letting them make mistakes. You also assume that luxuries like sweets and toys can't have significant value which seems fundamentally flawed to me.If you're an adult...isn't it a given that the outcome is largely beneficial because it's illegal for people who believe in Santa Claus to vote? Doesn't it follow then that we would benefit even more if we made it illegal for minors to shop for themselves? Couldn't all the money wasted on ice cream, candy and toys be better spent on more valuable things?
I'm sorry to add that, without a clear indication of the point behind your thread, I can't help but agree with the negative opinions of it.
You should read more of his OPs. I would say this is about par for the course.
I'm looking for good answers to the questions I posed. Unfortunately, none have been shared. Lots of righteous bluster though.
What is the economic rationale behind your perspective on the proper scope of government?
We've already had this discussion and it's never been fruitful, so I'll just abstain.
Can you link me to the discussion so that I can refresh my memory? Plus, maybe somebody else might be interested in learning about the economic rationale behind your perspective on the proper scope of government.
I thought I gave as good answers as possible given the nature of the questions. Not the answers you're looking for I'm sure, but that doesn't mean they're not good answers.
Theists should be allowed to vote, but they should be banned from shopping.
:shock:
Dude, I'm doing you a favor. I'd love to be banned from shopping. My wife wouldn't be able to try dragging my ass to the store to buy useless friggin' doilies and **** during a game ever again.
Dude, I'm doing you a favor. I'd love to be banned from shopping. My wife wouldn't be able to try dragging my ass to the store to buy useless friggin' doilies and **** during a game ever again.
No, because that would be too laborious to find. I just know we've had this conversation multiple times and it's always boiled down to an insanely different view of the world that will never be compatible.
While one can reject this notion of a stripped-down state, libertarianism is a principled and coherent worldview. It provides an answer to every question. Police departments and the army - yes. Just about everything else - no. Ask most politicians, from Gingrich to Clinton, what the role of the federal government is, and you'll get a stream of mush. Poke a libertarian and you'll get a response like the one Dick Armey gave shortly after becoming majority leader: "Defend our shores, build a system of justice, and construct some infrastructure. Gee, I'm running out of other suggestions." - Jacob Weisberg, The Coming Republican Crack-Up
:shock:
That's because I was disagreeing with your assumptions about negative/positive outcomes. As I said, just because they're not the answers you wanted to hear doesn't make them bad answers.The questions all involved negative/positive outcomes...while your answers did not.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?