Ten points to everyone who is done with this thread since the Gawd fanatics derailed it. I win!
I never made an argument, so there is no fallacy. But my concern in that post is the last sentence, not what preceded it.
Ten points to everyone who is done with this thread since the Gawd fanatics derailed it. I win!
Sure. Do I get tickets to trade in for like a rubber super ball at the counter or anything?
“Ten points to everyone who is done with this thread since the Gawd fanatics derailed it. I win!”
Did you expect religious people to not post in here when you belittle/strawman their beliefs because you have different a priori beliefs then they do?
My argument wasn’t even addressed to religious people, if you actually read the first post; and I don’t care a whit what they believe because I am not interested in debating with people who believe in sorcery.
Properly understood Buddhism and certain brands of Satanism are libertarian.
What the hell does sorcery have to do with its truth value? Care to elaborate? Oh, wait…
Nah, like with Christianity you can cherry pick Buddhism to make it sound libertarian, but its actual believers and various doctrines contradict it. Tibet was a violent theocracy under the oppressive rule of warring groups of priests, no offence Richard Gere.
Satanists might be tolerant of libertarianism, but they’re egoistic and pretty ambivalent on law and rights.
MrSchnapps, from an atheistic perspective, when I die I guess I would have to ask Yahweh why he made belief in Yahweh so difficult that I had to study philosophy rigorously for years on end and get a doctorate in philosophy to finalliy understand Plantinga’s axiological ontological argument and get a proper education on the effects of material / “non-material” causation. And then after that, I would have to study the history of the church and then rigorously study theology for years when other people are taking the non-intellectual easy road into heaven by saying they have faith that Yahweh exists .
Lol, your essentially calling theists non-libertarian. What exactly did you expect? It seems like the discussion you were hoping to get would have been more productive for you on an athiest forum, not here.
that is exactly my point. he claims to not care what people believe in, but yet calls them un libertarian if they aren’t atheists… Clearly, there are obvious examples of atheism being very Statist (Fascism, Communism, Socialism), so clearly, atheism may have Statist roots to them. He reminds me of the objectivists, he is quick to judge one on their religious belief and if you have such a belief, you must be retarded and dismissed. what nonsense is that? Rick James Moore should just leave Libertarianism and go to the Objectivist side, he would fit right in
that is exactly my point. he claims to not care what people believe in, but yet calls them un libertarian if they aren’t atheists.
This is a straw man, I never said any such thing. I said no religion is libertarian. The fact that you lack either the mental ability or will to seperate these two statements is exactly why I don’t care about arguing with you.
assuming your claim as true, you sure are implying it then
I believe that all individuals who’s names begin with the letter R are anti-libertarian and pro-statist. Though I am not interested in any reasoning they may put forth to argue otherwise. I would certainly not expect them to defend themselves from such an assertion.
If you take the statement “no religion is libertarian”, this is correct if you carried it to encompass all religious and spiritual choices/paths. I agree, that no religion is libertarian, and that libertarianism is not a religion. Outside of that, what’s your point? If we lived in a politically libertarian society, how would my religion effect you? How are the things you seem to have a problem with in religion, the myths, stories, spiritual beliefs, history, and the culture, not libertarian? How is a product of culture not libertarian? What exactly makes something not libertarian?
So you only consider “actual” believers of Buddhism to be the ones that fit your viewpoint.
Outside of that, what’s your point? If we lived in a politically libertarian society, how would my religion effect you?
I didn’t say it would. My point was a scholarly one. I don’t really care about religious people, they’re wacky but far less annoying and dangerous than Commies. I would much rather deal with Jeffrey Tucker or Gary North than Christopher Hitchens, that doesn’t mean I think that their views on Christianity are any more correct than Hitchens’.
How are the things you seem to have a problem with in religion, the myths, stories, spiritual beliefs, history, and the culture, not libertarian?
The only ‘problem’ I have with religion are that it is nonsense and its apologetics, such as trying to ‘prove’ that Christianity or Hinduism is libertarian to fit with the religious person’s political tendencies. I don’t know where you people are getting this notion that I am ‘attacking’ religion; I think it’s bogus but my point was that trying to paint this hodge-podge of myths and barbarian folk beliefs as ‘libertarian’ is historically and philosophically ridiculous.
I could care less whether or not someone thinks my views are “libertarian”. I don’t try to fit my beliefs to some politial ideology. Your ignorance about religion reveals the arrogance of your position.
lol, I know a lot more about Christianity and the Bible than most Christians I’ve ever met. You’re just upset because I don’t care about your sorcery.
It takes real ignorance to believe in magic.
Interesting, but I’m not a Christian. Your ignorance shows more and more. I don’t believe in any “magic” or “sorcery”.