"CHRISTIANS": It's Time To Put Up or Shut Up

well, then, it's not really freedom, is it? if you have to inhibit your behavior, your not free. lol. tangential irrelevancies are fun.

 

Here YOU go, again....

 

see, man, you actually have a philosophy to defend. i don't. i can go where the wind blows without any need to defend it.

 

Yes, I do have a philosophy. But, it's share-based, not coercive. No condemnations, netherworld threats, and such.

 

Any criticism would have no meaning, cuz ur basis are ur basis, they are good since its yours, you chose them

One of my basis is trust

I have questions:
Is it possible for you to not be free because of yourself, I mean one could be its own jail

When you say "think for yourself", you mean you own your thoughts?
(your thoughts are to be used by you?)

or did I miss the point ?

 

Here's an example:

I believe in hedonism, but responsibly. For example: I can consume much alcohol, but I always know my limit. I ALWAYS stop at my limit.

I have quit drinking irresponsibly, smoking cigarettes, consuming caffeine irresponsibly, weaned myself from prescription drugs, all due to WILLPOWER.

Being free to drink is not the same as being an alcoholic, for instance. Alcoholics are dependent--addicted to something, thus they are not truly free.

Responsible Freedom or Civil Hedonism is essentially my philosophy. Be free, be responsible, be respectful to others.

 

but what about the person a little further down the line who thinks that your philosophy is too restrictive? you have to place legal restrictions upon that person if only to protect yourself.

and yeah, i quit hard drugs with a coloring book and some crayons and a lot of willpower. however, i know and love several people who needed more. they needed a set of rules and steps and a governing order. it's unavoidable for us to establish a pattern for our existance. in the absence of a governing philosophy or law, one will be established by our own minds or we'll not be able to function. and if your personal philosophy is not controlling enough for those who need it, and there's more of those than there are of people like you and i, those people will seek and cling to a leader who provides the order they need.

 

Of course, it is not perfect...what is?

But, I see it as much beneficial than the current social philosophy.

There are three types of people who find this "restrictive":

1- Religious zealots - who feel the need to rule over others
2- Fascists - who feel the need to rule over others
3- Psychotic criminals (serial killers, rapists,etc.) - who feel the need to rule over others.

And I disagree with your other comment, only true freedom can come when there is no coercion...if one finds that restrictive they don't believe in equal freedom.

 

i only see it as beneficial for people who actually possess some degree of self control. most other people do require controllers such as religion, law, culture. without it, they go down in flames. when everyone has the same belief, terrifying things get done. dissent is essential, and various religions provide this to one another. various cultures provide this to one another. i think it's overly simplistic and sentimental to believe that human beings are deserving of peace, gentleness and non-violence any more than your average cow.

 

so they don't believe in REAL freedom anymore than people who don't believe in burning witches believe in Christianity?

 

Good try...too bad it was a logical fallacy.

If you say you believe in freedom and then try to take away someone else's...you're full of shit.

Christianity is based on a book FULL of inconsistencies, a history FULL of horror, and a philosophy based on false freedom, false reward, false punishment and F-E-A-R of netherworld threats.

It is geared to CONVERSIONS, INTERPRETATIONS and esoteric ramblings, not freeing the mind...but enslaving it.

 

you gotta remember that it's also a basic history of a people. frankly, i don't think freedom exists, especially if you're not free to take someone else's. that's just a loophole so that people who go about it differently than you and commit attrocities can be written off as people who "don't believe in real freedom."

 

and what i've taken from your worldview is that if we don't release our attachment to varying faiths and philosophies, we will be doomed to an eternity of killing each other. i'm saying that all of these faiths, philosophies and lack thereof have their place in the world, and none of them are bad, because they all serve a purpose. bad or good is a matter of our perceptions of them. yeah, i think the crimes against the native americans were truly horrible, but if not for the trail of tears and the poor treatment of the irish during their mass immigration, my grandparents wouldn't have met, and i wouldn't be here. my being here has a truly beneficial effect on my husband, and i'm glad i'm here.

 

You misunderstand the concept of freedom, then.

If you take away someone else's freedom HOW can you say you believe in FREEDOM?

Freedom includes everyone's right to it.

 

No, I am saying that religion and belief in fairy tales is cute and all for children, but unnecessary for the progress of humanity. Educating people in ways to help themselves and others hold no need for fantasies of nether rewards and punishments.

Well, now you are getting into all this cyclic philosophical material and that's fine and all...say are you a determinist? But, we are talking about a philosophy and whether it is or is not applicable to the progress of mankind.

I say it is not perfect, but is applicable to the progress of mankind. The status quo is certainly a failure.

 

but that makes freedom a esoteric belief subject to interpretation, doesn't it?

 

No, it doesn't.

Look... The philosophy of FREEDOM means being free--for everyone. If I am free to murder you, you aren't free.

Freedom is the opposite of Initial Coercion.

Being able to coerce goes against the philosophy of freedom.

We're talking freedom here, not omnipotence.

 

it may not be necessary for the progress of humanity, but it's a part of our biology nevertheless. i have no idea what a determinist is, unless it's a person who will argue with everything you say whether i agree or not, just for shits and giggles.

everything humans experience is put into categories of good or bad. that which brings pleasure is good, that which brings pain is bad. so any promise presented by a new philosophy will be put into those categories. it's unavoidable. you say religion is fairy tales, i say the human animal is ultimately unchangeable, and therefore even your own presentation is a fairy tale as well.

 

"Religion" is not part of our biology. It is a "conditioning" which stimulates certain neurons in the brain. No one is born believing in religion... Ahh...whatever...

Where exactly are you going with this?

What do you mean the "human animal is unchangeable"? Is that a "philosophy" I detect?

 

everyone has a philosophical bent, i guess. it's natural.

human beings weren't born with religious training, but somehow every group of society had managed to develop one at some point in time or other. therefore i consider it a function of our natural brains, which way we go with it is the matter of conditioning.