does anyone else find the idea of heaven repulsive?

86 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nyarlathotep's picture
If someone dies while you are

If a helpless person dies while you are choking them, even if it is an accident, even if it is from an unrelated medical condition, even if the victim manages to squeak out a few words to beg for their life during the process: you are a murderer.

When you watch this happen and do nothing, you are an accessory to murder. When you make false statements about the incident you are a perjurer. When you're in charge and you keep putting the same criminals back on the street (in uniform), you're participating in organized crime (racketeering).

Nyarlathotep's picture
In Roman times when they lost

In Roman times when they lost control of a unit; they would summarily execute 10% of the unit (without concern for guilt or innocence, to ensure no one ever did it again). I suggest we do the same, but instead of murder 10% randomly, just fire 10% randomly; every time this happens.

dogalmighty's picture
@nyar

@nyar

I don't think that's the change we need. I personally don't think that war tactics should be used in our own civilian population. Cutting off blood flow to someone trying to kill you, or harm your country, to kill them, or render unconscious to put in transport, is useful in wartime environments...its not on our own streets...I think this would be a better place to start.

Nyarlathotep's picture
doG - I don't think that's

doG - I don't think that's the change we need. I personally don't think that war tactics should be used in our own civilian population.

When I was in the US Army they told us that choking a prisoner to get them to do what you want, was torture; and that it might get you a position on the wrong end of a firing squad. At this point, "war tactics" are starting to sound like an improvement.

dogalmighty's picture
@nyar

edit

dogalmighty's picture
@nyar

@nyar

"If a helpless person dies while you are choking them, even if it is an accident, even if it is from an unrelated medical condition, even if the victim manages to squeak out a few words to beg for their life during the process: you are a murderer.

When you watch this happen and do nothing, you are an accessory to murder. When you make false statements about the incident you are a perjurer. When you're in charge and you keep putting the same criminals back on the street (in uniform), you're participating in organized crime (racketeering)."

Agreed...but someone has to collect the data, to initiate change in legislation...otherwise nothing will change. We have to find out what exactly happened, to prevent it from happening again.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Changes in legislation? There

Changes in legislation? There are already plenty of laws on the books that were broken.

We always hear the cry that these officers are just bad apples, and are not reflective of the profession. The problem is it seems in law enforcement, they don't seem to get rid of the bad apples, and they metastasize. Consider:

The city already paid $25,000 to a previous victim of Tou Thao (one of the officers present for Floyd's murder). According to this victim's complaint (which the city paid him for) he was handcuffed, then had his teeth kicked out by the police, then the officer confiscated and destroyed the medication the victim was given for his injury, then fabricated a fictional warrant (so the victim could be taken to jail). If this was simply a matter of bad apples, this apple would have been weeded out long before Floyd's death.

They might have started as bad apples, but now they are Sturmabteilung; they are career criminals being subsidized and imbued with authority by the police department and city (at least until they got caught on film). They need to be put where they belong (in prison); and fire anyone (and look into charges against) who was involved in keeping this person on the police force after the first incident.

dogalmighty's picture
Agreed. What I mean by

@nyar

Agreed. What I mean by changes in legislation, was in respect to changes in policing policy. If it is discovered that indeed Mr. Floyd's airway was collapsed, then the means of it's collapse, said restraint, could be banned from active use by civil law enforcement. If, cardiac stress was involved, patrol car defibrillators could be applied...above and beyond weeding out the bad apples. If we don't legislate against bad acts, and move toward better policing care, all that will happen is a repeat of the bad acts, perpetrated by unchecked policing policy, that makes bad apples out of good apples, or apples required to perform poor policy.

Nyarlathotep's picture
According to the charges

According to the charges filed today, the officer put his full weight on the victim's neck, for almost 3 minutes, AFTER they determined he was unconscious with no pulse. This isn't bad training, not enough laws, or not having the right equipment. Floyd was executed, and the police department has repeatedly lied about what happened. Lying to cover up a murder makes the department an accessory to murder.

dogalmighty's picture
I think you are missing my

@nyar

Agreed, but I think you are missing my point. How would you prevent this from happening again? How would you initiate the change needed to prevent these tragedies? They keep happening. There is something wrong. We need to discover what is wrong, in hopes of changing these results.

No its not bad training, it seemed that cops training actually killed a man. So his training isn't in question. It is whether that training should be used at all, on civilians. I would hope you would agree with that.

Legislation, is the only means of making that change, when the law is concerned. After discovery, legislation states what is and is not against the law. State and federal statutes, can not be vague anymore.

Having the right equipment is a means of direction for police, besides law. If we take away lethal tools, and provide tools for appropriate response, IMHO, these events would decrease. One of those tools should definitely be critical thought...you and I both know that the fluidity of events, dictates thought. However, that thought is only applied to their own and public safety...the burden of the lawbreakers safety needs to be a main tenet of response and custodial treatment, taking into account his well being. Clearly, that is not happening. There is a lack of respect for citizens in general, lawbreakers or not, because of the dichotomy presented by law enforcement, and lawlessness. The same thing you see in service to your country. That mindset needs to be replaced with a more empathetic response on each dipole. I did not know the stations response was to lie. That is wrong and sad. It is very sad that these tragedies continue. Something is wrong, and we need to identify it, and resolve it.

Nyarlathotep's picture
doG - Something is wrong, and

doG - Something is wrong, and we need to identify it, and resolve it.

At the corporation where I work, when we find a criminal in the organization, they are fired, along with anyone who knowing participated in the crime or the concealment of the crime. Maybe that should be tried with the police.

There is always going to be bad apples; but when they are identified as such, we need to fucking remove them, instead of enabling them.

Whitefire13's picture
Is there not ethics training

Is there not ethics training for US officers? Or a legal/fiduciary responsibility to the public? ALL public? I find that often I read of escalated conflict situations with the police - aren’t they trained and accountable to de-escalate a situation?

The continued tolerance of “bad apples” is disgusting AND more than enough “time” has passed, with repeated incidents, that for fuck’s sakes, it appears to be an “accepted” practice within the departments.

Edited to add: PERHAPS when it’s a Caucasian ass that’s held to the ground with three “ethnic” cops watching his death over a “minor” infraction ... maybe there will be change? Or PERHAPS some equality?

Edited to add again: OR how would the legal system respond if the situation was a father kneeing his teenage son (over something relatively minor) while the mother and uncle watched?

dogalmighty's picture
@white

@white

My point is that there is something endemic to policing that needs to be identified, that promotes bad actions, maybe even specific policies themselves, that need to be correctly identified and changed. If citizens are killed, irrespective of race color or creed...something is wrong, and needs to change.

dogalmighty's picture
@nyar

@nyar

Agreed, that is obvious...and policing structure knows this, hence eternal affairs departments...but even so, there is a club mentality, a tribalism culture that is pervasive.

You don't think there is a superiority complex endemic to policing? The same one that pervades in the military, a culture of superiority through the authority the job imbues? I think that this tribalism culture is an environment that racism and sexism grow to be honest.

I don't think this issue is as cut and dry as implied.

We need to identify all these issues perpetuating the same tragic results, in the open, and change them. Otherwise they will be repeated.

Nyarlathotep's picture
doG - but even so, there is a

doG - but even so, there is a club mentality, a tribalism culture that is pervasive.

That is why the military often punishes everyone, without concern of guilty or innocence. So it is in your self interest to stop someone who is doing something really bad, instead of lying to cover it up.

dogalmighty's picture
Exactly. That is why an

Exactly. That is why an autopsy is needed, not to hide the truth, but to discover it. Objective evidence of Mr. Floyd dying of asphyxiation, will lead not only to quicker justice for his family, but also get rid of maneuvers used in war, being used in our streets. I did not want to upset you...and I am sorry I did...I was just using logic and my knowledge of that maneuver. I hope the family asks for an autopsy, so maybe this type tragedy doesn't happen again.

Grinseed's picture
I read Mr Porsche also use

I read Mr Porsche also use his mobile to film that event of himself swearing at the dying policewoman for wrecking his car before he escaped the crash scene.
If all this is true he is in deep shit, leaving a crash scene, not giving assistance to crash victims and being off his face is likely to see him do serious jail time.
Abusing the policewoman while she was dying is an issue the cops arent going to conveniently let him forget even long after he serves his time.

added later...just got this from the Guardian website

"An accused drug-driver filmed and abused one of the four police officers killed in a Melbourne freeway crash as she lay dying, a court has heard.

Leading Senior Constable Lynette Taylor could be heard calling for help before Richard Pusey began filming the crash, Melbourne magistrate’s court was told on Friday.

Pusey allegedly walked up to her and said: “There you go. Amazing, absolutely amazing.

“All I wanted was to go home and have my sushi and now you’ve fucked my fucking car,” Pusey allegedly said."

He has fucked his life, for life, for the callousness he showed Constable Taylor. I hope his jail time feels like eternity.

Whitefire13's picture
I was “lucky”. Jehovah’s

I was “lucky”. Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t believe in going to heaven or hell after death. They believe in an earthly resurrection. Anyone who dies before Armageddon gets a resurrection (except apostates and those who died during god’s judgement ie Noah’s flood). They believe the first to die will be the last to be resurrected on earth (I guess Abel will be the last resurrected human).

So, I was raised that when you are dead, you are dead until god brings you back to life. Perhaps that is one reason I didn’t have a big problem with “death” - I could just let go of the “bring back to life” part.

LogicFTW's picture
@Whitefire13 / thread.

@Whitefire13 / thread.
Never understood how that could work. "Resurrection."

When do folks get resurrected? I am guessing "unknown." Maybe after "Armageddon." When is that? So far their is zero evidence any armageddon in all of human race fossil record. Going back 100's of thousands of years. When is this armageddon going to come? How likely it will happen in the next oh 1000 years? Can you imagine someone that lived 1000 years ago being born in a rich well to do country today? How could they even function? What is childhood like, with memories of previous life?

So far, beyond a few scattered mostly unverifiable reports people never claim to have led a life before that they can recall. Details only a dead person could possibly know. So we have to assume eithir:
1. Memories are not restored when resurrected
2. No one (or an impossibly tiny minority) have been "resurrected" so far.
3. There is no resurrection.

If there is no memory, or very little, vague pieces, is that resurrection? If I can not even remember my name, or anyone important or anything I done, am I still the same person, or am I just a lump of flesh and organs, with the mental capacity of a newborn?

This is just the tip of the iceberg, thousands of questions and complications come to mind. Or there is the very simple answer: resurrection is nonsense. A fantasy made up by humans that is very convenient to those that control the fantasy.

David Killens's picture
Lately, I have been pondering

Lately, I have been pondering the "what if?" god did exist as depicted in the christian bible.

So this time on earth is just a test phase, to sort out who? The faithful from the heathens or the boring morons from the party animals?

Of course death is something no one desires. And we all wish that we could extend our lives if not just another month, just one more day. But a hundred thousand years? Millions of years? Back the truck up and make sure it's loaded with Adam Sandler movies. Because I do not want to spend an eternity wandering around some place surrounded by millions of blank-eyed minions making a god sign and saying "hail god".

No parties? No rock and roll? No boys night out and get hammered nights? No AC/DC? WTF?

elphidium55's picture
Christopher Hitchens makes

Christopher Hitchens makes some sobering comparisons between North Korea and some depictions of the heavenly assembly as described in the Book of Revelations. Spoiler alert: heaven does not come out on top.

boomer47's picture
@Rebasack

@Rebasack

"does anyone else find the idea of heaven repulsive?"

old joke:

Convent school, Nun asks class; "hands up all those who want to go to heaven'

Every child except one raises their hand. So the nun says 'Why James, don't you want to go to heaven?".

James replies; '"Not if that lot are going"

Mark Twain wrote; "Hell for the company.heaven for the climate"

On a more serious note. My favourite theist, bishop John Spong has said that the church invented the notion of an eternal hell. because the church "has always been in the guilt and control business"

I've been aware for many years that Judaism ([on which Christianity is based)] has no concept of an eternal hell.

Only this week, I was watching a lecture by Richard Carrier. He claims that neither does Judaism have a concept of an afterlife.
It's a long time since I read the Old Testament,and I can't remember any mention of heaven or hell. I guess l might have missed it.

In 'biblical times' most religions in that general geographic area did not have an afterlife. Their gods were about now. About getting rain to fall, defeating enemies in war and the minutiae of life. People were also afraid of their gods. Because as can be seen in the old testament,they could be right bastards if you pissed them off .

Of course there were exceptions, such as the Egyptian religion, which had developed the notion of an afterlife to the point of absurdity. Perhaps THE most important monotheistic religion of Zoroastrianism was prevented coming a dominant religion by Christianity,.

Richard Carrier argues that Zoroastrianism influenced several religions, including christianity . I'm not quite convinced by that claim but it's worth pursuing I think.

Historical coincidence of ideas, practical, philosophical or religious dos not equal causality. Most 'great' religions tend to share the same basic moral precept; do not lie, cheat,steal of kill. Yet some emerged at around the same time in different parts of the world .EG The Pre Socratic Greek philosophers ca 600 bce, Master Kung (Confucius) in China born ca 500bce and Siddhartha Gautama , The Buddha , India fifth to fourth century bce.

Nyarlathotep's picture
doG - That is why an autopsy

doG - That is why an autopsy is needed...

Dr. Baden's autopsy was just released. Cause of death:

Dr. Baden - Homicide caused by asphyxia due to neck and back compression that led to a lack of blood flow to the brain..."

------------------------------------------------------------------

doG - Like, if his upper airway was being occluded by the cops knee, how was he able to carry on a conversation with the cops?

doG - ...you don't carry on conversations with an occluded airway.

doG - One of the determinants for airway occlusion assessment, is ability to talk.

V.S.

Dr. Baden - Police have this false impression that if you can talk, you can breathe. That’s not true.

dogalmighty's picture
@nyar

@nyar

I am glad they did an autopsy. This way certain maneuvers can be legislated out of use for the police.

Without moving air over your vocal cords, you can not make sound. This does not mean he was not asphyxiated. If the occlusion was around or below the hypo pharynx, which is so with the maneuver used to cut off blood supply to the carotid artery...if it was done incorrectly, and completely occluded his airway as well, then I don't see how air can move over the vocal chords. Ever seen anyone choking on food occluding their airway, they point at their airway for a reason, because they can't talk. The Dr. is being dishonest. Why? I am not sure...but this is painfully obvious. If your airway is occluded, you can not make sound...if your airway is partially occluded, you can make sound, but the worst that can happen with partial occlusion, is increased pco2, and subsequent increasing of respiratory rate, but not unconsciousness. From what I can see on the video, Mr. Floyd lost consciousness right after talking, and losing consciousness, is not inline with partial occlusions...which is why I thought something else may have happened to cause unconsciousness. It is possible that the maneuver cut off the blood flow to his brain, losing muscle tone due to unconsciousness, thus with the same knee pressure, subsequently causing asphyxia. That is possible, and is the wrong use of this maneuver, which IMHO, should not be used on civilians.

The autopsy now shows full culpability of the police, as tracheal hemorrhaging needed to deduce asphyxia, was identified during autopsy, I am assuming...and not cardiac in nature, which may have shifted culpability away from the cop in a trial. Only now do they have objective evidence showing full police culpability...and not a pre-existing condition.

Again, nyar, I am not defending the police at all. I am incensed by their actions. I was just putting forth my knowledge of what happened. I know you are as angry as I am, but I'm not sure why I seem to be your target.

Nyarlathotep's picture
doG - If your airway is

doG - If your airway is occluded, you can not make sound...

I think you should double check that, as I'm maybe 95% sure that is a myth.

dogalmighty's picture
@nyar

@nyar

You need air movement by the vocal cleft, and over the vocal cords, to make any sound. Without air movement, no cord vibration, no sound. No mythology involved...its the physicality of upper airway construction. I studied this exactly in human subjects, where we discovered a type of breathing noted in perspective SIDS patients we called, end expiratory apnea, the forcing of air past the epiglotis due to muscle tone change in premature infants...its a partial occlusion...an ahhhh sound conbined, with increased end tidal co2 recorded at the nose and mouth and cardiac deceleration, which objectively evidenced this phenomena. You need air moving for sound.

Try this...take a deep breath, hold your breath...that is occlusion of the airway, as no air is moving...then think of making an ahhhhh sound, by letting a tiny bit of air through...you will hear the "ahhhhhh" sound...that is partial occlusion. Now take a deep breath and talk normally...that is the vocal cords vibrating as you purposefully expire air past the cords to make sound. Go back and look at his murder, see which of the three you just did, happened in the video.

google:
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1CATTSD_enCA856&sxsrf=ALeKk02ozVb7AgjM...

Nyarlathotep's picture
I think your original claim

@doG
I think your original claim was that if you are talking, you are breathing. I think we both drifted off that a bit. From personal experience I know that claim is false.

dogalmighty's picture
@ Nyar

@ Nyar

This is my original post...

"Wait a sec folks, yes deplorable actions by the cops who are responsible for the health and safety of every handcuffed person in their charge....but lets apply some critical thought. Like, if his upper airway was being occluded by the cops knee, how was he able to carry on a conversation with the cops? Highly unlikely. My guess is a heart attack. An autopsy will tell. But at this point, it doesn't much matter."

You need air to be moving over your vocal cords to make sound...without a respiratory cycle, no air is moving...no air moving to cause vocal cord vibration, equals no sound.

Air movement equals respiration/breathing...equals non-occluded airway...equals breathing and talking possible. No air movement equals no respiration/breathing...equals completely occluded airway, or respiratory failure...equals breathing and talking not possible. Without air movement you can't talk. I googled it for you, and you didn't read the hits? I suggest learning about the mechanics of talking.

Just a heads up, " From personal experience I know that claim is false.", sounds like cognitive bias. As you know, you are welcome to believe what you want.
Hold your breath, (no air moving) and try and talk.

The nurse here makes a good analogy...
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1CATTSD_enCA856&sxsrf=ALeKk019QjSqp3Tk...

Nyarlathotep's picture
doG...without a respiratory

doG...without a respiratory cycle, no air is moving.

That isn't accurate. The respiratory cycle is inhaling and exhaling. Sometimes when you can not inhale, you can still exhale (and speak until you run out of air). It's because the amount of force required to inhale can be much larger than the amount of force required to exhale. It is something I deal with everyday.

dogalmighty's picture
The inspiratory and

The inspiratory and expiratory phase of a respiratory cycle are non-existent when the airway is completely occluded. You will not be able to move air in or out during either respiratory phase, if your upper airway is completely occluded...which has nothing to do with intraplural pressures or boyles law. As a matter of fact, the expiratory cycle, due to the negative intraplural pressures, makes partially compromised airways collapse. It has nothing to do with intraplural pressures or phases of a respiratory cycle, It has to do with occlusion of the airway. Analogy: If you have cars moving in, and out of a city over a bridge, you have traffic flow. If that bridge collapses completely, you have no traffic flow, in or out of the city...irrelevant of the number of cars waiting on either side. If the airway was occluded, you have no air moving either way, which means no air moving over the vocal cords, which means no vibration of the cords, which means no sound, let alone talking.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.