Just sayin'....

[svensson]

The only thing worse than a born-again vegan is a born-again atheist. But it's close.

If 'ignorance is bliss', why are there so many pissed off stupid people lately?

The only difference between a Republican/Tory and a Democrat/Liberal is the audience they lie to.

 

Feel free to add your own.

[Nozbat]

I'm not sure why you posted this or what the circumstances were that you felt you needed to do so but I felt I had to comment on this @svensson.. not because I want to start a discussion or have an argument.. but because I think it's dangerous, and if you'll forgive me for saying, a lazy argument, to lump all these things together and you need to provide context to statements like that.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'born-again'.. but if its about proselytising their views then while I accept vegans very often are emphatic and outspoken about eating flesh and animal cruelty, I've never come across that in atheists. Both are personal views which they are entitled to hold and everyone else can chose to accept them or reject them. Apart from some totalitarian states, atheists and vegans don't ban books because they hold a different world view, they don't believe women should be confined to the home and have as many children as possible or tell women they have no say over their own bodies, to name just a few things that tend to be imposed by minority actions. Those acts are carried out by theists of all faiths. 

In my view, there are worse things in this world than vegans and atheists.

'Ignorance is bliss' has a context. It's usually to denote inaction when faced with a moral dilemma. Your 'pissed off stupid people' are demanding action on some perceived wrong and just because you or I don't agree with them doesn't necessarily mean their grievances are wrong. They might chose the wrong people to fix the problem, be misinformed about the grievance and react on an emotional level or be told that its easy to be put right by being offered simple solutions to complex issues.

I feel that not listening or engaging and not considering their views as valid is wrong and sets up polarities which ends in shouting at each other and not reaching compromise. 

I find it curious you then disparage the political systems and lump them all together as liars. Yes, there are people that say anything to get elected and then forget about their constituents afterwards to pursue their own agendas or the agendas of those that bankrolled them. However, there are clear differences in world views between left and right and how they see their citizens. I've always thought that the Anglo-Saxon system of government of 'we won- you lost' does not encourage compromise, even if they won by 51%-49%. Ignoring the views of the losing 49% breeds dissatisfaction and anger and worse still in a lot of western countries the voting is so low, it only needs 30% of the population to win an election and impose extremist views on 70% of rest of the voting and non-voting population for the next 4-5 years. 

Systems of government and voting systems are imperfect, but it is what we have and really if you don't engage with it then by inaction you are complicit.

 

[svensson]

@Nozbat 

I'm glad that you've missed out on an unfortunate aspect of the internet, vis-a-vis atheism. That has not been my experience. I've had to verbally smack more than one vegan and atheist for their commonly-held conceit that anyone who doesn't believe exactly as they do is unethical /immoral /stupid /etc.

I have no issue with how anyone conducts their private life. Your faith [or lack of it], your empathy [or lack of it], your relationships... none of that is my any of my business. I don't have the right to dictate to you how your conduct yourself in your private life, barring certain commonly held minimum standards and staying within the laws applicable to where you live.

But there is a certain subset of society that is a canker on the ass of Western civilization that firmly believes that it is their right and responsibility to interfere with your life because of their beliefs. These are the people that I am pointing at. It is not a specific religion or belief that spawns this nonsense, it is a certain personality type that I object to. It's that sense of entitlement that allows a person to judge or condemn another person because they've made different decisions than someone else.

Let me be pointed and blunt about it: Getting on your high horse just let's everyone see the horse crap on your boots.

As for political parties, I stand by my statement. One political party is no more virtuous, truthful, or worthy of power than any other. I've watched political theater since Nixon was POTUS and I would rather a child of mine be an ambulance chasing injury lawyer than a professional politician, or worse, a party apparatchik. It's more honest work. And I am equally disgusted with the Left and the Right and I firmly believe that anyone who believes a political party's hyperbole should have their head examined.

As for your comments about 'majority rules', you make a point... BUT [!] coalition governments made up of 6 political parties who each control 8% of the vote don't work either. Democracy has been called 'the best worst form of government possible' and I believe that to be true. One party rule is fascism, but having too many parties devalues the individual vote to the extent that a taxi cab or trucker's strike can bring down the entire process of government.

[Ali the Helering]

While I have enjoyed many of your posts, my friend, I have to agree with Nozbat on this one.  If you simply want to insult a large proportion of the population why do it on this forum?

I have to point out that I am an ordained Christian minister who has the greatest of respect for - even the most aggressively evangelical - atheists.

I am a conscience omnivore who has the greatest of respect for - even the most aggressively evangelical - vegans.

I have my own political opinions that are as far from those you ridicule as may be possible, and in no way comparable to either, and I find your cynicism deeply saddening.

Sometimes getting pissed off is the heart of wisdom, not stupidity. 

[Ian Absentia]

The only thing worse than intolerance is intolerance of intolerance.  I simply won't stand for it.

Nor will I devote undue distress in promoting it further, even for the sake of irony.

I hope you all had a peaceful Saint Stupid's Day. 🙊💖

!i!

[g33k]

 

On 4/2/2024 at 5:02 AM, svensson said:

... I've had to verbally smack more than one vegan and atheist for their commonly-held conceit that anyone who doesn't believe exactly as they do is unethical /immoral /stupid /etc ...

Here's a question for you, @svensson.

Please take a moment to think about it before replying.  Note however:  I am not arguing the premise of this question, I am positing a "what-if" ... think of it as an "academic exercise."  I'll speak specifically and only to the "vegan" issue (let's just presume for the moment that God is in Heaven &c, in something <waves hand vaguely> resembling the Abrahamic view; let us not address the atheist in the room.  Alternatively, presume the contrary as it pleases you... or take ardently-agnostic position, "I don't know... and you don't either!" Or we might be presumptive Hindus, or Buddhists, or...  Not the topic).

➡️  All that being said... my "vegan" question for you (just as a hypothetical!) is:   What if they are right, and you are wrong?  ⬅️

That is to say, what if animals -- most if not all, and in particular the commonly-domesticated food animals -- are in fact "people-y enough" to have (for want of a better term) "souls"?  What if all dogs do go to Heaven?  What if these animals have moral rights largely-equivalent to your own... life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness...

If you're at all familiar with meat & dairy production at large scales, you realize what a hideous crime it would be to treat people that way.

What if we (all of us, as a society) are in fact treating people that way?

For the record:  I am not vegan.
I'm not convinced of the notion advanced above.
But I'm open-minded enough to entertain the idea.
And it follows -- if I thought it were true -- that I too would be an animal-rights activist, and be strident about veganism.
I couldn't live with myself if I didn't.

So, I'm not too critical of those who are.
It's more than just a  "difference of opinion"  here -- it's a deep moral conviction, one that demands speaking up, in the face of atrocity.

 

[PhilHibbs]

Yeah, there are some opinions that, if they were true, rightly should drive those aware of them to extreme lengths to reinforce. If there is a God in Heaven, and a Hell that my soul will burn in for not acknowledging Him, then my missionary auntie is absolutely right to try and convince me to turn to God.

I've seldom come across an atheist that argues that fervently against religion though, unless they are talking about people who take their religion to extreme degrees. Hitch in particular was very outspoken against the evil things that religious people have done and are doing today in the name of their faiths.

[Ali the Helering]

21 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I've seldom come across an atheist that argues that fervently against religion though

One of my favourite lecturers at Uni was Rev Don Cupitt, the 'atheist priest' who championed the idea of being "Post-Christian", and is one of the primary philosophers of the non-realist school.  He wrote 18 books on that subject alone.  I think my favourite sentence of his is "No more pixie (fairy?) dust!" (my uncertainty is due to age and post-Covid mind fog) and favourite book title is "Taking leave of God".

We did enjoy debating, because both of us are analytical rationalists, simply coming from different starting points!  He would argue against religion to absolute exhaustion. 

[mfbrandi]

2 hours ago, Ali the Helering said:

Rev Don Cupitt … one of the primary philosophers of the non-realist school

Surely a Nysalorean NPC if ever there was one. 😉

• Solar living
• Emptiness & Brightness
• Don’t get him started on Disneyfication and the City of Wonders