The civil war will be common citizens vs. facsist police state gov't.
It has nothing to do with "Godless vs. God's children"
It has nothing to do with "Godless vs. God's children"
you used this same argument before, it did not hold water then either.
it is basically based on the premise that people seeing the monument would make the assumption since the monument is there some type of sanction of a particular religion is sanctioned and leave it at that.
many people are not that stupid. most would ask about it and be told that the freedom to put any type of monument exists. in the context of my house, my neighbors would ask about it and a great conversation on how what is today known as christianity is in fact a form of judaism.
using that same logic you presented, the new york museum of art must sanction christianity because the have statues, paintings, etc. that are christian themed. after all since they put them on display that is how they must believe...
however we both know that is not the case, why? because other art based on different religious views are on display as well.
yes, the government has set itself above it's own laws.
so if they do not convey the same idea, where does the redundancy you mention come from? you just hung yourself friend. and the following paragraph does not help you any.
LOL! are you actually being serious? there is a serious flaw in what you just said, can you spot it? i am sure you have, i am convinced your being obtuse on purpose, i truly believe that.(ahh! more redudancy from 2 things that are different yet still redundant when applied together!)
you know, you never would have made it to tim the enchanter.
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
sorry, the distraction from the topic is getting redundant anyway...
I've posted the races towards War in other threads. We are heading down down down. It's just a matter of what point and which group of people get fed up enough to launch a counter-strike against who they feel is opressing them the most.
In the case of the Religious War brewing, over the years many churches have been targeted such as being burned down etc, at some point if the Courts declare there is no God and anything referencing God must be removed then I would think Church going folks would target the Courts themselves and things get worse from there.
In the case of Politicians opressing the new form of people communicating, sharing art/music etc via the Computer, how many people being taken away from their MTV will it take to fight back I can't say either but most likely whatever group actually fires bullets first will be joined by the other groups and escalate into the Civil War.
It was the same way with the original Civil War, there was multiple groups/ideas that people felt so strongly about to kill each other over those beliefs. It wasn't just a battle of Southerners wanting to keep their slaves. The Southerners wanted autonomy from being told what they can and cannot do from Northerners (It's still that way now) and not just the slaves issue. There was a lot of Religion involved too. Not talked about much but the Northerners convictions were based mainly on European Religion such as Catholic, Lutheran etc while the South was mainly Baptist.
I can go on and on but in any case the idea is the same, different issues, same result.
Basically instead of a South wanting their own Country and a North fighting, it would mainly be the Citizens wanting to start a new Government over again, the existing one is so broken. It would become more like Europe with a lot of Countries instead of all these States that are not "United" anyway.
It would naturally be a Governmental fight because the States and the Federal level would immediately be forced to activate the National Guard.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
So would the Fundies resort to terrorist attacks? They couldn't take on the Government Forces with their puny weapons.Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
sorry, the distraction from the topic is getting redundant anyway...
I've posted the races towards War in other threads. We are heading down down down. It's just a matter of what point and which group of people get fed up enough to launch a counter-strike against who they feel is opressing them the most.
In the case of the Religious War brewing, over the years many churches have been targeted such as being burned down etc, at some point if the Courts declare there is no God and anything referencing God must be removed then I would think Church going folks would target the Courts themselves and things get worse from there.
In the case of Politicians opressing the new form of people communicating, sharing art/music etc via the Computer, how many people being taken away from their MTV will it take to fight back I can't say either but most likely whatever group actually fires bullets first will be joined by the other groups and escalate into the Civil War.
It was the same way with the original Civil War, there was multiple groups/ideas that people felt so strongly about to kill each other over those beliefs. It wasn't just a battle of Southerners wanting to keep their slaves. The Southerners wanted autonomy from being told what they can and cannot do from Northerners (It's still that way now) and not just the slaves issue. There was a lot of Religion involved too. Not talked about much but the Northerners convictions were based mainly on European Religion such as Catholic, Lutheran etc while the South was mainly Baptist.
I can go on and on but in any case the idea is the same, different issues, same result.
Basically instead of a South wanting their own Country and a North fighting, it would mainly be the Citizens wanting to start a new Government over again, the existing one is so broken. It would become more like Europe with a lot of Countries instead of all these States that are not "United" anyway.
It would naturally be a Governmental fight because the States and the Federal level would immediately be forced to activate the National Guard.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So would the Fundies resort to terrorist attacks? They couldn't take on the Government Forces with their puny weapons.Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
sorry, the distraction from the topic is getting redundant anyway...
I've posted the races towards War in other threads. We are heading down down down. It's just a matter of what point and which group of people get fed up enough to launch a counter-strike against who they feel is opressing them the most.
In the case of the Religious War brewing, over the years many churches have been targeted such as being burned down etc, at some point if the Courts declare there is no God and anything referencing God must be removed then I would think Church going folks would target the Courts themselves and things get worse from there.
In the case of Politicians opressing the new form of people communicating, sharing art/music etc via the Computer, how many people being taken away from their MTV will it take to fight back I can't say either but most likely whatever group actually fires bullets first will be joined by the other groups and escalate into the Civil War.
It was the same way with the original Civil War, there was multiple groups/ideas that people felt so strongly about to kill each other over those beliefs. It wasn't just a battle of Southerners wanting to keep their slaves. The Southerners wanted autonomy from being told what they can and cannot do from Northerners (It's still that way now) and not just the slaves issue. There was a lot of Religion involved too. Not talked about much but the Northerners convictions were based mainly on European Religion such as Catholic, Lutheran etc while the South was mainly Baptist.
I can go on and on but in any case the idea is the same, different issues, same result.
Basically instead of a South wanting their own Country and a North fighting, it would mainly be the Citizens wanting to start a new Government over again, the existing one is so broken. It would become more like Europe with a lot of Countries instead of all these States that are not "United" anyway.
It would naturally be a Governmental fight because the States and the Federal level would immediately be forced to activate the National Guard.
Didn't say it wouldn't be a slaughter.
At least there would be less unemployment since there would be less people.
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
sorry, the distraction from the topic is getting redundant anyway...
I've posted the races towards War in other threads. We are heading down down down. It's just a matter of what point and which group of people get fed up enough to launch a counter-strike against who they feel is opressing them the most.
In the case of the Religious War brewing, over the years many churches have been targeted such as being burned down etc, at some point if the Courts declare there is no God and anything referencing God must be removed then I would think Church going folks would target the Courts themselves and things get worse from there.
In the case of Politicians opressing the new form of people communicating, sharing art/music etc via the Computer, how many people being taken away from their MTV will it take to fight back I can't say either but most likely whatever group actually fires bullets first will be joined by the other groups and escalate into the Civil War.
It was the same way with the original Civil War, there was multiple groups/ideas that people felt so strongly about to kill each other over those beliefs. It wasn't just a battle of Southerners wanting to keep their slaves. The Southerners wanted autonomy from being told what they can and cannot do from Northerners (It's still that way now) and not just the slaves issue. There was a lot of Religion involved too. Not talked about much but the Northerners convictions were based mainly on European Religion such as Catholic, Lutheran etc while the South was mainly Baptist.
I can go on and on but in any case the idea is the same, different issues, same result.
Basically instead of a South wanting their own Country and a North fighting, it would mainly be the Citizens wanting to start a new Government over again, the existing one is so broken. It would become more like Europe with a lot of Countries instead of all these States that are not "United" anyway.
It would naturally be a Governmental fight because the States and the Federal level would immediately be forced to activate the National Guard.
Let's be specific. If there's gonna be a war, you gotta be specific.
Religious
Is it going to be southern baptists against everyone else? A WASP union? Or just anyone who believes in religion versus anyone who does not? Will this battle be only fought on Sundays (i.e. you are in/not in church therefore a target?)
File Sharing/Pircay/Technical issues
All those folks who like MP3's are gonna get fed up and take up arms against.................the government? The RIAA? Federal, local, or state? Their local cable company?
"The People" versus "The Man" (i.e. the government or corporations)
Don't you understand that the government and coprorations ARE the same thing as "the people"? or are the 6% unemployed going to rise up against the 94% employed? Or is this going to be a french thing? We are going to gather up lawn tools and burn down gated communities? What $ amount do we determine we stop burning them down at? Houses under $300,000? Will we need a realtor or a county assessor (assuming we haven't already killed him/her) for a general to direct us to appropriate targets?
I think you'll find our country is so integrated that there are damn few "lines" to be drawn. About the only "line" I can ever remotely imagine is a race war. And that becomes less and less likely as more blacks and latinos enter the middle/upper class.
Even the severest scenarios you envision are nothing more than radical acts of terrorism. You need to get out a little more
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
Not at all. The government is doing what the Founding Fathers meant them to do.
so if they do not convey the same idea, where does the redundancy you mention come from? you just hung yourself friend. and the following paragraph does not help you any.
LOL! are you actually being serious? there is a serious flaw in what you just said, can you spot it? i am sure you have, i am convinced your being obtuse on purpose, i truly believe that.(ahh! more redudancy from 2 things that are different yet still redundant when applied together!)
you know, you never would have made it to tim the enchanter.
You are distorting the word BELIEF. Do you believe (have faith) that I am being obtuse? Do you confess your belief that I am being obtuse through prayer? No of course not. Belief (faith) is not the same thing as belief (supposition).
You as a religious person needs to have faith and belief in your religion. I'm sure you are utterly convinced that God exists. An Atheist does not need to have faith and believe in his religion, simply because he has no religion and he cannot by defintion have a religion. He is convinced there is no God so there is no need for a faith based system of belief. The Atheist DISBELIEVES the existance of God
You are equating Atheistic disbelief with Atheistic belief which (as Red Dawn pointed out) is preposterous. You are saying that disbelief and belief is the same thing.
DISBELIEF is not the same thing as BELIEF (FAITH). You cannot apply FAITH to DISBELIEF. They are mutually exclusive. DISBELIEF in this context is the absence of faith.
Neither is BELIEF and CONVICTION the same thing. CONVICTION (certainty) is settled, it is what comes after belief. BELIEF (supposition) does not come after CONVICTION. This is your logical fallacy. CONVICTION is what makes you answer - YES - to a question. BELIEF can be faith but BELIEF (supposition) can also be lack of certainty, which is when you anwser - MAYBE, I BELIEVE SO - to a question. If somebody asks you: Did you go shopping today? You don't answer: Maybe, I believe (suppose) so - unless you are confused. You answer: Yes I did, or - No I didn't, depending on whether you did or did not.
You cannot say: He was certain, he believed (supposed) - as you tried to do with your example. But you can say: He was certain, he believed (faith).
So:
He was certain, he believed (supposed). I am utterly convinced there is no God, I believe so (I suppose so).
This sentence does not work, it is a logical fallacy. You cannot be both utterly convinced and not certain at the same time.
He was certain, he believed (faith). I am utterly convinced there is a God, I believe! (I believe in God!).
This sentence does work and is perfectly logical.
Which leads us to:
I am utterly convinced there is no God, I believe (I have faith).
This sentence is also nonsensical. You cannot believe (have faith) in something you are convinced does not exist (there is no God).
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
sorry, the distraction from the topic is getting redundant anyway...
I've posted the races towards War in other threads. We are heading down down down. It's just a matter of what point and which group of people get fed up enough to launch a counter-strike against who they feel is opressing them the most.
In the case of the Religious War brewing, over the years many churches have been targeted such as being burned down etc, at some point if the Courts declare there is no God and anything referencing God must be removed then I would think Church going folks would target the Courts themselves and things get worse from there.
In the case of Politicians opressing the new form of people communicating, sharing art/music etc via the Computer, how many people being taken away from their MTV will it take to fight back I can't say either but most likely whatever group actually fires bullets first will be joined by the other groups and escalate into the Civil War.
It was the same way with the original Civil War, there was multiple groups/ideas that people felt so strongly about to kill each other over those beliefs. It wasn't just a battle of Southerners wanting to keep their slaves. The Southerners wanted autonomy from being told what they can and cannot do from Northerners (It's still that way now) and not just the slaves issue. There was a lot of Religion involved too. Not talked about much but the Northerners convictions were based mainly on European Religion such as Catholic, Lutheran etc while the South was mainly Baptist.
I can go on and on but in any case the idea is the same, different issues, same result.
Basically instead of a South wanting their own Country and a North fighting, it would mainly be the Citizens wanting to start a new Government over again, the existing one is so broken. It would become more like Europe with a lot of Countries instead of all these States that are not "United" anyway.
It would naturally be a Governmental fight because the States and the Federal level would immediately be forced to activate the National Guard.
Let's be specific. If there's gonna be a war, you gotta be specific.
Religious
Is it going to be southern baptists against everyone else? A WASP union? Or just anyone who believes in religion versus anyone who does not? Will this battle be only fought on Sundays (i.e. you are in/not in church therefore a target?)
File Sharing/Pircay/Technical issues
All those folks who like MP3's are gonna get fed up and take up arms against.................the government? The RIAA? Federal, local, or state? Their local cable company?
"The People" versus "The Man" (i.e. the government or corporations)
Don't you understand that the government and coprorations ARE the same thing as "the people"? or are the 6% unemployed going to rise up against the 94% employed? Or is this going to be a french thing? We are going to gather up lawn tools and burn down gated communities? What $ amount do we determine we stop burning them down at? Houses under $300,000? Will we need a realtor or a county assessor (assuming we haven't already killed him/her) for a general to direct us to appropriate targets?
I think you'll find our country is so integrated that there are damn few "lines" to be drawn. About the only "line" I can ever remotely imagine is a race war. And that becomes less and less likely as more blacks and latinos enter the middle/upper class.
Even the severest scenarios you envision are nothing more than radical acts of terrorism. You need to get out a little more
You take enough Lollipops out of enough kids mouths you will have a playground brawl.
Try attending the Rallies or any other News events and you'll see for yourself.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
Attending Rallies by Lunatic Fringe Groups doesn't necessarily mean there is a grass roots movement among a large percentage of the population for a revolution. Hell they have them all the time in Northern Idaho. Now that they have access to the Internet in their compounds they can try and spread a message of revolt but the vast majority of people in the country, especially Christians, do not adhere to their messages. They would rather use their vote to change things or organize Boycotts like the one that was successful in Austin Texas regarding the building of the Planned Parenthood building. Armed insurrection goes totally against the teachings of Christ and most other religions and they would want no part of it. Besides, Americans are for the most part Patriotic and the thought of taking up arms against the government of the United States would be totally out of the question for them.
To be honest, I really don't know why I even care about this topic so much, but at some point after hitting a brick wall with people who seem content (and quite convinced it's a good idea) to march us down the road to theocracy you just have to give up. I mean, we're basically a Christian Nation anyway, why not just have the government come out and admit it? Our president deems himself "annointed by God," we have bible beaters out in the streets screaming and carrying on in order to keep their "holy monuments" in our public and government buildings. Our government tries to legislate their Christian morality on the public via laws against abortion, gay marriage, etc. Why NOT just have an official church of the U.S.?
Frankly, I'll just leave it to the courts to decide these cases since if it was left to the likes of Shad0hawK and dmcowen674, we'd have Jesus' crucified body looking down on us in every DMV, the mighty Moses and his top 10 preaching to us from every courtroom and classroom of the virtues of "having no other gods before me" and "not coveting my neighbor's ass."
Hey, if we go far enough, we could have religious police that could arrest those in violation of this country's moral laws. Perhaps we could give the Christian Church real power and ironically wonder why we left England in the first place!
Frankly, I'll just leave it to the courts to decide these cases since if it was left to the likes of Shad0hawK and dmcowen674, we'd have Jesus' crucified body looking down on us in every DMV, the mighty Moses and his top 10 preaching to us from every courtroom and classroom of the virtues of "having no other gods before me" and "not coveting my neighbor's ass."
Hey, if we go far enough, we could have religious police that could arrest those in violation of this country's moral laws. Perhaps we could give the Christian Church real power and ironically wonder why we left England in the first place!
If you are going to quote me or use my posting, please be accurate. I do not condone the placement of anything religious in the Courthouse. If you would pay attention I said I also don't agree with the whole forcing people to place their hand on the Bible thing and swear an oath either.
My posts on this are that Historically the U.S. was founded by Theists or whatever you want to call them and re-writing Hostory is wrong. The Founders did an excellent job and people are doing their best to tear down what they built over 200 years ago and that is sickening.
Actually, I think it is going to be a civil war between the hackers and Microsoft. Big battle coming!!!
Now on a serious note, what the hell is the thread about? Besides some serious fringe element nuts, actual fighting is not going to happen. I would not hold my breath for some US civil war or revolution in our lifetimes.....
Now on a serious note, what the hell is the thread about? Besides some serious fringe element nuts, actual fighting is not going to happen. I would not hold my breath for some US civil war or revolution in our lifetimes.....
So it's really not a religion thing? It's an 'accurate history' thing? Let me see if I follow you. The Bible-Belt people, the Christian Organizations, etc, are going to spill blood over an 'accurate history' thing, right? So everybody, athiests too, should be against this? It's not going to be a war of Christians vs Heathens...it's going to be a war of 'accurate historians' vs 'revisionists'. Athiests and Christians will be fighting side by side against those damn revisionists.
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
sorry, the distraction from the topic is getting redundant anyway...
I've posted the races towards War in other threads. We are heading down down down. It's just a matter of what point and which group of people get fed up enough to launch a counter-strike against who they feel is opressing them the most.
In the case of the Religious War brewing, over the years many churches have been targeted such as being burned down etc, at some point if the Courts declare there is no God and anything referencing God must be removed then I would think Church going folks would target the Courts themselves and things get worse from there.
In the case of Politicians opressing the new form of people communicating, sharing art/music etc via the Computer, how many people being taken away from their MTV will it take to fight back I can't say either but most likely whatever group actually fires bullets first will be joined by the other groups and escalate into the Civil War.
It was the same way with the original Civil War, there was multiple groups/ideas that people felt so strongly about to kill each other over those beliefs. It wasn't just a battle of Southerners wanting to keep their slaves. The Southerners wanted autonomy from being told what they can and cannot do from Northerners (It's still that way now) and not just the slaves issue. There was a lot of Religion involved too. Not talked about much but the Northerners convictions were based mainly on European Religion such as Catholic, Lutheran etc while the South was mainly Baptist.
I can go on and on but in any case the idea is the same, different issues, same result.
Basically instead of a South wanting their own Country and a North fighting, it would mainly be the Citizens wanting to start a new Government over again, the existing one is so broken. It would become more like Europe with a lot of Countries instead of all these States that are not "United" anyway.
It would naturally be a Governmental fight because the States and the Federal level would immediately be forced to activate the National Guard.
if it comes to civil war, most likely it will be a combination of issues, i know one thing that does not sit well is the leftist democrats basically running the country through judges like we are seeing now, due process of law does not matter anymore. the liberals are basically undermining the the system by undoing anything the legistlature does, and they insure they get the judges appointed they want by blocking those that are not politically alignied to thier view. to "interpret" the law as they see fit or as in the case of the new jersey senate election, totally ignore it.
very few people realize how dangerous this is
I never quoted you or used your posting. What are you talking about?
To be perfectly frank, I really don't think you understand your own position, Dave. The ten commandments are religious. They're straight out of Judao-Christian mythology. The commandments are not a historical document, they're a religious one. You've posted numerous times about how you feel the commandments are OK in courthouses and elsewhere. Perhaps you should review your own posts on the subject in this thread and others.
<<...at some point if the Courts declare there is no God and anything referencing God must be removed then I would think Church going folks would target the Courts themselves and things get worse from there.>>
Actually, I'm wondering if Dave thinks that the one begets the other. I don't know about anyone else, but if the courts ever decide to remove all references to God, I don't think it'd be because they declared there is no God.
Actually, I'm wondering if Dave thinks that the one begets the other. I don't know about anyone else, but if the courts ever decide to remove all references to God, I don't think it'd be because they declared there is no God.
Personally, I don't understand the logic that equates "no stance on religion" with "there is no god." Meaning, if the government is devoid of any religious sentiment, that somehow that is "pushing the atheist belief system." When in fact, if atheists REALLY got their way, the government would have "God is Dead," or the equivalent, on our currency and on our monuments.
I wonder if the reason that Shad0hawk refuses to answer my simple question is the same reason he refuses to address your "There is no God" question? In Shad0hawk's defense though, he did respond with a "That's just another strawman so I'm not answering it" response to your question.
the only way possible, by taking no stance at all, if people want monuments or not in a courthouse, it should be decided and paid for on the local level.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter