g hall

How patronising is that, are you incapable of explaining yourself clearly


I think you'll find that it was a lot more complicated then that
and certainly the USA of today is not what the founding fathers set out to create

You do not know what I believe I merely stated that it is not self evident which is true

The size of the population is what it is because it is sustainable and the population of the UK wasn't that much smaller 60 years ago and we kept ourselves alive. What you are advocating is a form of socialism which of course explains your love for the BNP which is a National Socialist Party (which is strangely at odds with your espoused christianity)
And why put the wealth into the hands of the middle class are you a snob who believes that blue collar workers are worthless ?

People have lifted themselves without religion and how many atheists can you name who have murdered and tortured as many religious people have - of course I'm prejudiced look what deeply religious people have done in the name of a myth. It's not black and white merely reason and logic

__________________
"That government is best which governs least."
"This is a sharp Medicine, but it is a Physician for all diseases and miseries".
"To be "matter of fact" about the world is to blunder into fantasy --and dull fantasy at that, as the real world is strange and wonderful."
TANSTAAFL TANJ

For_England

It's not my intention to patronise. However I don't wish to attempt an explanation as to why the average American is not going to understand the power and reality of having a shared culture with deep roots.


Well of course it is alot more complicated than that! However Lincoln brought about a major shift, which is not left upon historians who refer to the 'second founding of America' etc.

That's not how you expressed it. You said:
"I have several problems with indeed the same with any religion that perpetrates the myth of an all seeing, all powerful immortal being"

You called it a myth, as thought such a statement were self-evident. You didn't express it as a probability that God might be a myth. However I still do believe that it is self-evident he does exist, even if you don't believe that either position is self-evident.


Yes, it has been sustainable since the industrial revolution. But if we put our total reliance upon the world economy, we may find ourselves unable to feed ourselves if that world economy starts getting very expensive and/or collapses in some way. Obviously if I didn't believe we could be sustainable, I wouldn't be advocating that we become sustainable. But it will take time, and needs to be done before we have problems because of too much reliance on the global market.

Is it really socialism to believe that the free market needs some regulations so that it best suits the purposes of the national economy? If that makes me socialist, then Benjamin Disraeli was a socialist! On the contrary, I would like to see the graduated income tax abolished, as does the BNP. I am happy with certain key industries being nationalised (I never used to be), such as health care and certain transport systems. I am in favour of private schooling, but can live with a continuation of state schooling. There is a good article on the distributive economy on the BNP website. Perhaps you could lay aside your prejudices and take a look. Many people who support the BNP weren't born monsters. We just care about the country and see the party as the best solution. Their views are not much different, from what I can see, to the basic economic ideas of Thomas Jefferson. Nor of those of R E McMaster, the 'Indiana Jones of the trading world', who advised both the Reagan and Bush Sr White Houses on economic matters (and who espouses a reform of economics based on the Mondragon scheme in Spain).

How is that? Last time I checked, they weren't planning on building gas chambers for anyone. But they were planning on preparing Britain for Peak Oil and Global Warming by having a sustainable and environmentally friendly economy.

No, of course not; like the BNP, I support worker owned enterprises, again on the Mondragon model. If you would consider such worker-owners 'working class', then I would include those. For non-owning workers, I support a decent days wage for a days work. But we will need a decentralised and localised economy, protected from corporations who import cheap labour which suppresses wages.

Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot - that's more murders right there than all others put together in the whole of history. If you think atheism is the answer to the condition of man, you are terribly deceived. And if you think it is so black and white, that all Christians are/have been bad, and all atheists are good, and that all people need to do is use 'logic' and 'reasoning' and abandon a God whom you yourself now acknowledge might exist in accordance with what is self-evident - then your prejudice may well be beyond reason. People will always have philosophical ideas. Perhaps you think that a brainwashing scheme of children by government, with laws restricting theist ideas, is the answer. I don't. I believe having governments that represent the people, and a balance of powers, is the best we can achieve in this life. The idea that atheism can bring about the utopian society would be comical had it not led to the deaths of so many.

John Carter

(* = a particular)

In other words, money in itself is not a root of all the evils. Replacing religion with a love of money is a root of all the evils.

Evils = evil actions. Not evil itself.

Young's Literal = only truly valid English translation of The Bible.

John Carter

Cannot concur.

TonyG

Agreed.

Can't agree with that. Religion is no different from money in this regard. Most religions espouse humanity, charity, kindness and consideration. However, it is the application of those religions that cause the problems because in that application most of them get distorted and corrupted. As the power base grows and the fear of losing that power coupled with the desire for more power the corruption accelerates.

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

g hall

Ok There is a deity or pantheon of deities, there are acolytes, priests, etc., they all have to be fed and watered and homed so lets espouse charity as in give to the religion. If you don't follow are brand of cult you will suffer some form of punishment. Please name one that does not have that ?

__________________
"That government is best which governs least."
"This is a sharp Medicine, but it is a Physician for all diseases and miseries".
"To be "matter of fact" about the world is to blunder into fantasy --and dull fantasy at that, as the real world is strange and wonderful."
TANSTAAFL TANJ

g hall

bnpforme
What is a myth here's wikipedia's definitions which I'm happy with
Myth may refer to:

* Mythology, mythography, or folkloristics. In these academic fields, a myth (mythos) is a sacred story concerning the origins of the world or how the world and the creatures in it came to have their present form. The active beings in myths are generally gods and heroes. Myths often are said to take place before recorded history begins. In saying that a myth is a sacred narrative, what is meant is that a myth is believed to be true by people who attach religious or spiritual significance to it. Use of the term by scholars does not imply that the narrative is either true or false. See also legend and tale.
* A myth, in popular use, is something that is widely believed but false. This usage, which is often pejorative, arose from labeling the religious stories and beliefs of other cultures as being incorrect, but it has spread to cover non-religious beliefs as well. Because of this usage, many people take offense when the religious narratives they believe to be true are called myths (see Religion and mythology for more information). This usage is frequently confused with fiction, legend, fairy tale, folklore, fable, and urban legend, each of which has a distinct meaning in academia.

link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth

Very few things are self evident you have to investigate

Population expanded for several reasons including; our ability to feed and house more in comfort, better medicines and palliative care, more sharing of wealth and power, an increase in the use of capital for all.

Ah the usual so called atheist suspects I think you'll find that they had a religion called Communism with the dual figurehead of Marx and Engels

By the by I have never said I am an atheist or indeed anything else I just have a problem with organised religion. Which is why I dislike big government because that is the same thing hence my opposition to the EU

__________________
"That government is best which governs least."
"This is a sharp Medicine, but it is a Physician for all diseases and miseries".
"To be "matter of fact" about the world is to blunder into fantasy --and dull fantasy at that, as the real world is strange and wonderful."
TANSTAAFL TANJ

TonyG

I think that you might have a problem finding that in Buddhism.

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

TonyG

Agree totally.

__________________
If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you?

----

http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

rjt

Totally ignoraing the good organised religion does in this country and the hundreds of thousands of pounds given to the vunerable that you would have to stump up out of your own pocket to the sound of much complaining I no doubt.