Donating = Loving
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.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
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.
Donating = Loving
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.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
You do know that anyone with more than 10$ to their name, subtracting debt, is richer than 25% of Americans? That's because everyone's dead broke, except for a hand full of 6 digit earners, which makes wealth inequality look 'so bad.' The reason is the Federal Reserve's Keynesian bullshit.
Also, we have more regulations and more spending than we did 30 years ago, we haven't been pushed to the right, we have just been pushed to the left much less than Europe has.
You're right Algebe I do disagree with you emphatically.
@Mykcob4 "You're right Algebe I do disagree with you emphatically."
I'm not sure I understand. Am I right, or do you disagree with me?
@Mykcob4: "Government regulation is not government control It's holding people and corporations responsible for their own actions."
What happens when government owns the corporations? That's a necessary part of socialism. Look at China's state-owned enterprises. They're hopelessly inefficient, but reform is almost impossible because of the government's involvement. The government owns the corporations and the corporations own the politicians. Who you gonna call?
Government is supposed to be a neutral umpire that can establish and enforce rules fairly. That's not possible under the socialist model.
@Algebe
I am not a socialist. I do agree that some things need to be the province of the government. Education, healthcare, defence, and various other things. Yes, the government is basically a referee.
I don't propose China as an example, or anything that doesn't resemble the representative democracy that is the United States. I don't even like constitutional monarchies.
What I don't agree with at all is anything that resembles corporations running everything, the pay as you go idea and the hell with people that will never afford necessities.
I believe in equal opportunity, fair enterprise, consumer rights, workers rights, respect for the environment, corporate responsibility.
After living in four constitutional monarchies: Britain, New Zealand, Japan, and Australia, I've reached the conclusion that monarchs are expensive luxuries that contribute nothing. I especially dislike the religious connotations. If we need figureheads, we should carve them out of wood.
@mykcob4
You stated: "Conservatism is based on self. Not self-reliance but self-importance and selfishness.
Liberalism is based on social responsibility and equal opportunity.
Religion is based on a myth.
Atheism is based on facts."
These are bold and far-reaching statements which are difficult if not impossible to quantify, and have the tendency to give rise to little positive response or discussion.
As such, do you think painting with such a broad brush might be a violation of AR's first rule of posting which clearly disallows trolling?
As to the definition of trolling:
"Trolling" Def. = making deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.
If the dictionary definition does not agree with you, perhaps your own definition can be applied:
When you allege trolling violations in reference to other people's posts, you have stated the following:
"Continually posting proselytizing posts that are not fact. Is trolling. .
Generally insulting forum members with condescending comments is trolling."
Yet, in this very post alone, you have demonstrated the epitome of the very definitions of trolling that you yourself have established.
You are both proselytizing and generally insulting forum members with condescending comments.
I think many of us at AR would be interested to hear how you justify such behavior?
@Freeslave
Ah, the obligatory projection argument. You are a non-atheist. You are probably a Trump supporter or at least a conservative of some sort. But if you studied political science and the practical application of that discipline you would know that I am correct about Conservatism and Liberalism. In the last 40 some odd years conservatives have gerrymandered voting districts, impose voter suppression laws, passed laws that only favor the rich and large corporations. They have fought against protecting the environment, against equal rights for women, LGBT, and minorities. They have done their level best to end public education. They have tried to privatize everything. They have passed laws against the consumer. In Texas, you can't even sue your insurance company no matter what they do. They are against any regulation on the books. In other words, they are for large corporate profits, wage disparity, and a lawless irresponsible business world.
Liberals have tried to increase wages for the average worker, to enact fair taxation, create an opportunity for women, labor, minorities, and secure rights for the LGBT community.
Religion IS a myth unless it can be proven and never has and never will be. Christians state that their religion is based on faith which is the same as a myth.
Atheism is entirely based on facts. We ask for proof of everything.
So did I troll? No, not at all. Am I worried what the rest of the AR Forum thinks about my post? No, I am confident they will see it for what it is...FACTUAL!
Are you butt hurt because I made this post? Certainly seems so.
The validity of your views or lack thereof is not what is in question here. As such, attempting to further justify your stance does not address the issue. The issue is that you are accusing anyone who disagrees with you of "trolling". Yet, even by your own definition of the word, you have consistently demonstrated that you do the same.
Taken from your reply, you are clearly intent on applying a very different standard of "trolling" to yourself than you do for anyone who disagrees with you. This is the classic definition of hypocrisy.
The bottom line is that, in all practicality, your definition of trolling is the posting of any opinion that disagrees with your own.
The arrogance of assuming that anyone who does not agree with you does not base their opinion on facts, or is not rational is the epitome of self-righteousness.
Please understand that I am not attempting to insult you by the above, merely to point out what you are actually doing in hopes that this will change. Perhaps some day, you may decide that it is more beneficial to carry on a civil conversation without resorting to such trolling tactics. Respectful conversation is what's necessary to effect change. Until then, anything you have to say will be ineffective at convincing anyone of anything, and as such, dismissed just as easily... and that's not what I want for you.
Wishing you all the Best.
Parroted by the fledgling roosted in a system of parrots.
I'm not a parroting minion, or a political party savant. I play it as I see those who matter playing it. If I was to create standards, or uphold existing ones, I'd follow them into the hell's of irrelevancy. Those who have the gold make the rules. Those who don't like the rules try to steal the gold. Tell me which is the crime. That has never changed from the time of the human alchemists. It just doesn't matter and soap boxing "better" is the ad nausea successive generational Abby Hoffman-izing ego-tripping squeaky wheeling that never, ever gets the juice of relevancy awarded to it because its just too pesty to be relevant. Remove your shirt and administer the cat-o-nine tails of your standardized morality all you want if it will make you feel better but I doubt it will.
Let's use the word "gay". If I make a statement decrying it's amorally twisted context would I be demonized for it by the new generation of victim salesmen? "Don we now our gay apparel, fa-la-la, fa-la-la, la-la-la". There goes that Christmas Carol. Aw, shucks....too soon? How 'bout The Flintstones cartoon's theme song's last line: "We'll have a gay old time". Not PC enough? Not the liberal utopian thought du jour? Maybe I should just neutralize, homogenize and globalize my every thought and simultaneously defecate at every point of the compass for the sake of equality.
I watched a documentary today on the plight of the Australian indigenous people as told from their perspective in the context of white oppression. The story was told first hand by the people of a particular village and opened with a dozen men walking line astern, through the woods, out harvesting a certain bark to make canoes with to harvest goose eggs from river nests. Technology is no where in view. As these men are walking along tail end Charlie suddenly calls for everyone to stop. They fall out of line and Charlie tells them he's not going to be tail end Charlie anymore because someone ahead of him keeps farting. (The show as called Ten Canoes. I recommend watching it.)
Anyway, is this equality? Is the world going to avail itself to all the tail end Charlies? Should people fart omni-directionally so that everyone suffers equally? Personal injury attorneys would love to see it pass legislation.
One has to think about the world in motion, what is and what isn't relevant, and how the money works to effect those changes. Morality and ethics alone never change a thing. Money does. Get yourself some gold and we'll talk.
@ Pitar
Utter nonsense!
That's interesting mykbob, because potatoes post was a coherent statement of facts, and yours was,a single, incomplete sentence which dismissed all that he said on the grounds that it wasn't completely in line with your dogma.
That's interesting mykbob, because potatoes post was a coherent statement of facts, and yours was,a single, incomplete sentence which dismissed all that he said on the grounds that it wasn't completely in line with your dogma.
I will explain this again for those who just don't get it maybe in a way that you will understand.
There is a voting age. Why do you think that is? The reason is that most people under the age of 21 have never had real responsibility. They may think that they know something but have no real experience to fall back on. That isn't an insult or anything NEAR a personal attack. that is just a fact.
Socialism has never been practiced in history. What has been practiced are forms of socialism based ideology that has proven to be wildly successful.
Now Harry Truman can call me names like an old socialist crackpot but that doesn't matter now does it. It certainly doesn't cause me any pain. What matters is the actual practice of things.
The fact is that the conservatives have been tearing down the very fabric of this nation. Destroying the environment. Holding wages down. Sending jobs overseas. Institutionalising racism. Ginning up fear of muslims and immigrants. Discriminating against women and the LGBT community.
Now the republican party is dominated by authoritarian populist nationalist. These are indeed NAZIs. It doesn't matter about the other factions in the republican party because as we can see they are impotent. The radicals own the party.
People can rail all they want about Hillary Clinton but they are wrong and they know it. She has been of all sorts of things and been investigated for over 30 years. Yet not one indictment. Not even close to an indictment. The fact is that she is a very capable leader and administrator. She isn't surrounded by thugs and Russian spies like Trump. She hasn't screwed anybody by not paying them. She hasn't claimed bankruptcy.
Obama saved this nation from certain financial collapse. He respected every sector and demographic of society. He was probably the best president since Harry Truman (the real one not the kid on this forum).
Yeah, everyone has a right to their opinion no matter who they are or what their age is, but their opinions aren't worth a hoot if it is based on far right propaganda and they haven't had ANY responsibilities in the short life.
The voting age is 18 mykbob square pants.
"Socialism has never been practiced in history. What has been practiced are forms of socialism based ideology that has proven to be wildly successful."
You dropped out of high school didn't you? Lucky for you I am a person who did not drop out of high school, and I happened to know that socialism has been tried repeatedly, and proven to be an abject failure.
"Now Harry Truman can call me names like an old socialist crackpot but that doesn't matter now does it. It certainly doesn't cause me any pain. What matters is the actual practice of things."
That's because you are square pants.
"The fact is that the conservatives have been tearing down the very fabric of this nation."
You mean democrats?
"Destroying the environment."
They did create the EPA what turned the Colorado river Orange.
"Holding wages down."
That's the Federal Reserve, which was created by Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat.
"Sending jobs overseas."
The idiot who signed NAFTA was Bill Clinton, another Democrat.
"Institutionalising racism."
Him Crow was created by democrats in the south.
"Ginning up fear of muslims and immigrants."
They've been spreading homophobia, the irrational fear of having your head cut off.
"Discriminating against women and the LGBT community."
The first female supreme court justice was appointed by Reagan, and the democratic party was opposed to gay marriage until 2012.
"Now the republican party is dominated by authoritarian populist nationalist."
Incorrect grammar. Also you said in a previous post that the democratic party was populist and that's why it was the better of the two parties.
"These are indeed NAZIs."
National Socialists? You mean the democrats.
" It doesn't matter about the other factions in the republican party because as we can see they are impotent. The radicals own the party."
Yet the freedom Caucasian killed Trumpcare.
"People can rail all they want about Hillary Clinton but they are wrong and they know it. She has been of all sorts of things and been investigated for over 30 years. Yet not one indictment."
That's why everyone hates her, she gets away with everything.
"Not even close to an indictment. The fact is that she is a very capable leader and administrator."
She's a piece of shut who started a civil war in Syria, driving backwards savages into west.
"She isn't surrounded by thugs and Russian spies like Trump."
She is, except they're Chinese spies.
"She hasn't screwed anybody by not paying them. She hasn't claimed bankruptcy."
No she's done worse than that. Look up whitewater.
"Obama saved this nation from certain financial collapse."
Alan Greenspan created a bubble and Obama's solution was to inflate it done more do it didn't pop under his administration. Trump railed against him, but once he got in office he continued to inflate it so it didn't pop under his administration.
"He respected every sector and demographic of society. He was probably the best president since Harry Truman (the real one not the kid on this forum)."
The guy who collapsed the economy?
"Yeah, everyone has a right to their opinion no matter who they are or what their age is, but their opinions aren't worth a hoot if it is based on far right propaganda and they haven't had ANY responsibilities in the short life."
Your bullshit is based on far left propaganda, and you paint anyone right of Joseph Stalin as 'far right' to discredit them.
Obama saved this nation from the Bush administrations screw up of starting to illegal and unnecessary wars and cutting taxes for the rich.
Look at all ten charts.
http://money.cnn.com/gallery/news/economy/2017/01/06/obama-economy-10-ch...
The "bubble' was caused by Bush not enforcing bank and financial regulations and financial institutions illegally issuing predatory loans and other illegal activities.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR200802...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?mcubz=3
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/post_263_n_312379.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_policies_and_the_subprime_mortg...
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2008/2/14/457009/-
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21707830-How-the-Bush-Administration-Pr...
https://www.dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc.cfm?doc_name=fs-110-2-171
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/study-bush-administration-blocked...
https://spectator.org/42211_true-origins-financial-crisis/
I didn't drop out of high school, I graduated with honors ranking 14th in my class of over 600 graduates. I did drop out of college in my sophomore year and joined the USMC. I attended college while in the Corps when I could and where I could. When I retired I had my bachelors degree and went on to obtain my master's degree.
Trump is dead set against the environment.
https://spectator.org/42211_true-origins-financial-crisis/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-infrastructure/trump-infras...
Republicans hate the environment:
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/08/republicans-environment-h...
Republicans believe in trickle down economics which doesn't work and only holds wages down while making the rich even richer.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2015/03/06/household-income-growth...
http://www.faireconomy.org/trickle_down_economics_four_reasons
Yes, Jim Crow was enacted by southern Democrats but those same people are republican now. Conservatives and racists have been democrats and republican. During the Civil War conservatives were Democrats up until Teddy Roosevelt. After that time the Democratic party was changing even though the southern Democrats were not. The racist conservative Democrats became republicans.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2007/08/why-did-the-south-t...
Democrats enacted the Civil Rights Bill, The Voting Rights Bill and gave women the vote.
Reagan did nominate Ruth Ginsburg because he thought she was a conservative. She has been a solid supporter of the Constitution and a Liberal ever since she has been on the Supreme Court. Look at her record!
The freedom caucus voted against Trumpcare because it didn't go far enough right and that is the only reason.
http://www.businessinsider.com/conservative-freedom-caucus-against-trump...
Hillary has been accused of many things and guilty of nothing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/21/us/statement-by-independent-counsel-on...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/whitewater-case-closed/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/counsel/office/other.html
I could go on knocking down all of your immature inane bullshit but I just don't want to waste my time today. It's fair to say that you just don't know what you are talking about. You don't actually know the circumstances of any issue and you are just parroting propaganda that you heard, saw, or read.
Obama kept fighting and actually escalated all the wars Bush fought, he even put more troops in Afghanistan after promising to withdrawal.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/politics/obama-as-wartime-presiden...
Bush cut the top tax rate from 39% to 35% and that remained the top tax rate through Obama's administration:
https://bradfordtaxinstitute.com/Free_Resources/Federal-Income-Tax-Rates...
The housing bubble was caused by Alan Greenspan's loose monetary policy:
https://mises.org/library/evidence-fed-caused-housing-boom
The term trickle down economics was a straw man fallacy coined by Bush Sr to refer to Ronald Reagan's Economic policies. The reality of the matter is investment creates jobs, that's where jobs come from, you can deny it and call it 'trickle down' all you want, but that doesn't somehow erase the undeniable fact that every job in existence was created through investment.
The racist Southern Democrats remained Southern Democrats until they died off and Southern Republicans took their place. Though Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Johnson tapes revealed that he didn't care about civil rights, and he only passed the Act as a token, and ' Well have those n***ers voting democrat for the next 200 years!' It's all on tape Bob. Also, the 19th Amendment which gave women the right to vote, was proposed by the 66th congress, when the Republicans had a majority.
@Harry Truman
Obama had no choice but to fight those wars. No, the bubble was caused by unregulated financial practices.
Trickle down doesn't work. It didn't cause investment. What it caused was GREED!
BULLSHIT, they didn't die out. Strom Thurman was a southern Democrat until he became a republican and that is just one example. You don't know what you are talking about.
You are the one who doesn't know what he is talking about Bob. Obama could have just walked out of the middle east, but instead he perpetuated Bushes wars and started some of his own too. No one forced him to put more troops in Afghanistan that was his dad choice.
You can claim that the housing bubble was caused by a lack of regulation all you want, but the act is, there are almost 100,000 pages of Federal Regulations on the books, and about 90,000 when the Bubble popped, it wasn't caused by a lack of regulation, it was low interest rates and cheap money.
Trickle Down isn't an economic theory, it's a straw man fallacy used to refer to supply side economics, which are just basic realities. Implementing policies based on those realities didn't cause 'greed,' Which is at this point a buzzword with little meaning.
@Harry Truman
Ah, the lies of misguided youth.
Predatory lending caused the bubble but since you never bought a house or probably never even paid rent you wouldn't know anything about that.
I don't know "Bob" is.
Obama never started any wars. Where the fuck did you get the idea that Obama took any advice from his dad, let alone putting more troops in Afghanistan? That is just stupid. Of course, you like to revise history to fit your narrative.
Nope "trickle down" was a real thing and it didn't work. Reagen deregulated everything he could get away with which caused hostile take overs and the greed generation.
100,000 regulations? You made that up. You continue to display that you don't know what you are talking about.
Lies of misguided youth? Mykbob, you are the one peddling bullshit, I posted the 100% fact of the matter, and your response is to put your fingers in your ears and spout out propaganda you hear somewhere else, whilst accusing me of doing that exact same thing. Like it or not, the Housing Bubble was created by Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the Fed at the time. He inflated the money, and lent out cheap money, creating a bubble.
I thought Obamas dad was dead, if he were taking advice from him that would explain his terrible performance.
He did put more troops in Afghanistan:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/obama-sends-30-000-more-troops-to-afghanist...
"Nope "trickle down" was a real thing and it didn't work. Reagen deregulated everything he could get away with which caused hostile take overs and the greed generation."
Then we should have had rampant corruption and greed during the 1950's and 60's, because the total pages of Federal Regulations under Reagan exceeded those during the 50s and 60s.
If what you are saying is true, and everything turns to complete anarchy without at least 100,000 pages of Federal Regulation, then we must have been in the dark ages until the Bush Sr Administration, who increased Federal Regulations and undid everything Reagan did. Clearly, this is horseshit, and you know it.
"100,000 regulations? You made that up. You continue to display that you don't know what you are talking about."
100,000 pages of Federal Regulations, that doesn't include state or city regulations. And no, it is you who doesn't know what he is talking about:
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.dailycaller.com/2013/05/21/the-towering-f...
Nope! Freeslave(oxymoron) and Harry Truman you are both entirely wrong. The fact that you don't realize that is telling.
Can you spot the difference between the Libertarian and the 'liberal?' One makes coherent arguments and actual sources (not propaganda outlets) to back them up, the other arbitrarily declares the one wrong because he disagrees with him.
Bob, takes look at this leftist- he's a socialist, and a communist, just like you, and yet he is able to cone up with coherent arguments and never once resorts to insults or contradictions as a substitute for arguments. Just because you have brain trauma (I.e. leftism) does not mean you have to be a complete retard.
http://www.debate.org/capitalistslave/
A Libertarian wants to privatize everything and pays NO attention to reality.
I don't know who this Bob is and I really don't care. I am not going to another debate forum over an issue on this forum.
I am not a socialist nor a communist, you actually don't even know what that is.
And you can curb the insults junior.
"A Libertarian wants to privatize everything and pays NO attention to reality."
Damn mykcob, at least when I attacked socialism I properly defined what it is. Libertarians want the government to only serve the purposes clearly laid out under the constitution those established by John Locke and Thomas Paine and so on. We don't want to privatize everything, just the things that ought to be privatized, and our entire beliefs are reality- its yours which do not pay any attention to reality.
No, Harry, YOU want to define or should I say redefine the purpose of government laid out in the Constitution.
The Preamble states "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Libertarians are all for "provide for the common defense" but ignore "promote the general welfare."
Federalist Papers No 41
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed41.asp
When you attacked socialism you defined what you think it is. When I described Libertarianism, I described what every libertarian has told me. I described it from YEARS of experience.
Pages