God is a requirement for a free world - You need Jesus.

[AMHOLIO]

Careful, @gang weeder is watching you and might call Immigration Services on you for that kind of wrongthink.

Oh boy, I've always wanted to get culturally enriched!

 

[Wormy]

It's difficult for me to see any other way to correct our course when the vehicle that is society has already left the road.

Trading one set of chains for another still doesn't make you free. And I wouldn't object so strongly if your idea wouldn't fuck me over massively. If this were all about individual experiences and enlightenment, you'd get not a peep from me, but you're dragging the law I live under into it. You made it my problem.

 

[Osmosis Jones]

Trading one set of chains for another still doesn't make you free.

A golden age does not come without a period of darkness.

And I wouldn't object so strongly if your idea wouldn't fuck me over massively. If this were all about individual experiences and enlightenment, you'd get not a peep from me, but you're dragging the law I live under into it. You made it my problem.

And here I stand before people like you: Leftists. The people who, on the whole, want children to learn about nuanced and inappropriate content like sex and orientation, who support a government that is not hypothetical or imaginary that is actively working against the interests of its people, and who really have no foundation of belief other than rejecting everything that isn't part of or accelerating the enshrined minority groups. No, you and people like you made it my problem.

 

[Wormy]

A golden age does not come without a period of darkness.

Easy to say and dismiss when you get to be the one holding the whip.

 

[AMHOLIO]

Real talk: how do we enforce the word of god? What if someone says "God told me to do this" as a defense for an action, or a justification for a movement? How can we tell if God is speaking to them for real to make sure they're speaking to the actual ultimate authority?

 

[Wormy]

Real talk: how do we enforce the word of god? What if someone says "God told me to do this" as a defense for an action, or a justification for a movement? How can we tell if God is speaking to them for real to make sure they're speaking to the actual ultimate authority?

Gang Weeder had the idea of making all non believers basically live as non-citizens, but that's all I've been able to pull out of the thread so far.

 

[Mothra1988]

Human civilization only works with God, that's true not just of America but of any functioning civilization in history.

Every single human culture, even the most obscure tribes in the jungle develops Religious beliefs because that's literally just how the human psyche is wired, nothing else works.

Only if morality is predicated on a higher power above human authority can morality work at all, otherwise if it's totally subjective, it will always boil down to wanton degeneracy which will ultimately destroy a civilization such as what we're seeing happening in real time now.

If you have trouble accepting the idea of God as a conscious entity, just think of God as a metaphor for simply the truth, nature, 2+2=4, that's God.

And 2+2=4 no matter what any human being says or thinks about it, that's the "higher power" beyond human authority.

Civilization may wrap up that fundamental truth in a lot of pomp, circumstance, myth, metaphor and parable, but it boils down to the fundamental truth that 2+2=4 and that is a higher authority than man.

Any civilization that can't acknowledge 2+2=4 is bound to collapse.

Now obviously some Religions are better than others and for some the emphasis is less on God and more on nature (but God and nature are one and the same), but the basic idea that they all have in common is there exists a fundamental truth to existence that is not in man's control, that's what we've turned our back on and what's destroying us.

I think I disagree with your premise. A system of morality can certainly exist without religious belief. Moralizing can take different forms. As dumb as SJWs are, they are currently trying to enforce a certain kind of morality in their own godless orbit.

It's not about the human psyche either. That's the easy answer for some people, but it's not that. It's sparked by information regarding the spirit realm that exists on Earth and transcends cultural boundaries. It's not a metaphor. If you gain occult knowledge and see it in action, you quickly learn why certain belief systems developed because it actually reinforces a lot of the major ideas and concepts that are in religious texts. I don't think it's really a question of is there a super natural layer to existence. It's more about who is more correct about it.

Part of growing up is decoding reality again after the left-leaning atheism that was brow-beat into you in school loses it's grasp on your point of view due to the effect of life experiences. Real life experiences and relationships should better inform people on the reality of human souls and the fact that there is deeper meaning and different forces at work than what is just immediately apparent if you go by people who only believe in what they learned in school or watched on Bill Nye.

 

[Osmosis Jones]

Real talk: how do we enforce the word of god? What if someone says "God told me to do this" as a defense for an action, or a justification for a movement? How can we tell if God is speaking to them for real to make sure they're speaking to the actual ultimate authority?

To the best of my knowledge, "I talked to God" is an evangelical phenomenon and the claims are usually produced in the way of a prophecy, not a defense for an action. God doesn't speak to you or me or anyone other than through the scripture.

 

[gang weeder]

Immigration status =/= the beliefs of someone born native to the land. I'm born native to this land, but you think I should have no rights because I believe the wrong thing.

No they actually do tend to go together. Even in the US you are supposed to owe your allegiance to the nation and be of good moral character and yadda yadda if you want to naturalize and become a citizen. I suppose what you have in mind is being born into this hypothetical nation, being raised in it, then deciding when you grow up that you're an atheist. Yeah, in that case, you'd be encouraged to leave or else lose your political rights. That's how the Amish do it. You don't want to play ball, you don't have to stick around, and the community would prefer that you leave anyways if you're a non-believer.

If you think freedom of association being exercised in this manner is "hate," then again, you're delusional and projecting.

You want my rights taken away, jack, you ARE a threat.

Calm down. We're entertaining a hypothetical of how I, a random Internet sperg, would set something up, not discussing something that is anywhere near the realm of actual possibility. If you're that terrified of the heckin' christcucks, stick to liberal areas. I promise they won't get you there.

And you dance around the issue that what you advocate for, and what Gang Weeder DEFINITELY advocates for is antiethical to freedom. If we are not free to have or not have belief in the supernatural as we will without being punished by earthly authorities, what do we have?

We don't have that freedom now either.

There's too many breaks within Christianity to get a functioning Christian gooberment in America. Even if somehow everyone converted to Presbyterian at once as soon as two people read something in the Bible that has vague wording, shit will go south and we'll fracture again. It's not the end to have smaller sects, but it is worth to keep in mind small scale conflicts between small groups or large scale historical ones like Catholics vs Protestants.

Well yeah no doubt. I'd say America is already too big and bloated to function well even under its current system, never mind going off into the weeds and imagining actual shake-ups and regime change. Any scenario where the government changes meaningfully has to include the possibility of the union well and truly breaking up, and when you look at the state of things, I think a case for a mutually agreed-upon national divorce is pretty strong. Let the cuckservatives have their areas and the libtards have theirs and each can stop trying to destroy the other.

Of course, histrionic NPCs like our buddy Foxtrot will never let that happen peacefully, but one can hope.

Trading one set of chains for another still doesn't make you free. And I wouldn't object so strongly if your idea wouldn't fuck me over massively. If this were all about individual experiences and enlightenment, you'd get not a peep from me, but you're dragging the law I live under into it. You made it my problem.

You keep assuming that you will somehow be forced to live in this hypothetical badpeople society that you don't want to live in. It's terribly small-minded and again, I just have to assume it's projection how you can only go back to this same notion over and over even though it makes no sense.

 

[AMHOLIO]

To the best of my knowledge, "I talked to God" is an evangelical phenomenon and the claims are usually produced in the way of a prophecy, not a defense for an action. God doesn't speak to you or me or anyone other than through the scripture.

Makes sense. I'm trying to figure out how to get the Catholics and Mormons on board considering that their authorities speak to God. Even taking the reasonable proposition from @gang weeder of dividing things up, I could see a sect declaring Jihad on each other over something, from just disliking the nonbelievers to trying to get the resources another sector of the split up union has. I think we're stronger together- I'd be more in favor of strengthening of state or regional rights since we pile our resources better than to break up the whole union. I don't know how well the new countries would do at playing nice with each other even with an amicable break up or a hang out - see the EU.

 

[Wormy]

Calm down. We're entertaining a hypothetical of how I, a random Internet sperg, would set something up, not discussing something that is anywhere near the realm of actual possibility. If you're that terrified of the heckin' christcucks, stick to liberal areas. I promise they won't get you there.

Too late, I've adapted so long to being behind enemy lines I wouldn't know what to do with myself in a liberal city at this point. Keeping my fucking religious beliefs to myself out in meat space is something I've gotten REAL good at.

I suppose what you have in mind is being born into this hypothetical nation, being raised in it, then deciding when you grow up that you're an atheist. Yeah, in that case, you'd be encouraged to leave or else lose your political rights. That's how the Amish do it. You don't want to play ball, you don't have to stick around, and the community would prefer that you leave anyways if you're a non-believer.

Yea, your world fucking terrifies me if all it takes is not buying into a particular supernatural package means I lose everything.

We don't have that freedom now either.

So who's stopping you form having it and how?

You keep assuming that you will somehow be forced to live in this hypothetical badpeople society that you don't want to live in.

Yea. If America comes under the rule of people like you and Osmosis, that's exactly what. I've got no passport, no connections in other countries, this is all I know.

To the best of my knowledge, "I talked to God" is an evangelical phenomenon and the claims are usually produced in the way of a prophecy, not a defense for an action. God doesn't speak to you or me or anyone other than through the scripture.

Then how do you deal with someone who claims they have? Who are you to say they haven't?

Of course, histrionic NPCs like our buddy Foxtrot will never let that happen peacefully

Ah, NPC, another term that now just means "You disagree with me, so you can't think for yourself."

Anyway, what do you think I'll do against it? The worst case scenario is that I'll put a bullet into myself. I will make sure you never take me alive to some reeducation camp or thrown into a country I have no roots or prospects in.

 

[Osmosis Jones]

If America comes under the rule of people like you and Osmosis... ...I'll put a bullet into myself.

@gang weeder I'll rule with you for this cause

 

[Wormy]

@gang weeder I'll rule with you for this cause

Least I get to die on my terms in my own home and not in a prison cell or some foreign hellhole.

Anyway. I've said as much as I can for this, so I'll leave you in peace. Enjoy having this as your new normal once you get into power, folks, but I'll won't be around to suffer through it with you.

 

[mrolonzo]

Where's the autism rating when you need it?

I see Autism banded about here alot. Is this a good or a bad thing?

Because Christian values were the basis for raising children. Even if you later became a Christian rationalist, most people if not all people in America held and demonstrated those values, the same way modern Americans are indoctrinated into and espouse wokeness.

Yes, leaving the pro government, anti government speech. One sees how easily people are herded into one thought pattern or another and then some still try to insist that people are free.
In the end most people I.e. normies will believe exactly what they're told to believe.

 

[AMHOLIO]

I see Autism banded about here alot. Is this a good or a bad thing?

It usually means you're thinking in a simplified or one sided way, or are thinking in a way removed from social norms. This poster is trying to say this thread is filled with autistic theoreticals and weird solutions.

The best way to understand autism as used on the forum is to read and see if it means "You need to go outside", "You're crazy", "You're a massive moron for your insane ramblings," or "This is a load of things no one but the most dedicated of thunkers would thunk about". Sometimes it is a complement, like being autistically detailed or driven, but that's usually what they mean. This post is autistic since I just sat down and explained a social norm to someone else.

 

[mrolonzo]

It usually means you're thinking in a simplified or one sided way, or are thinking in a way removed from social norms. This poster is trying to say this thread is filled with autistic theoreticals and weird solutions.

The best way to understand autism as used on the forum is to read and see if it means "You need to go outside", "You're crazy", "You're a massive moron for your insane ramblings," or "This is a load of things no one but the most dedicated of thunkers would thunk about". Sometimes it is a complement, like being autistically detailed or driven, but that's usually what they mean. This post is autistic since I just sat down and explained a social norm to someone else.

Yes thanks for your Austism. From recall, the term was a positive initially on the net, because it meant people were drilling down into the details which is finer point of internet communication. On /pol/ it remains a compliment. Here it seems alot less so. I guess thus the two different cultures are apparent.

 

[Osmosis Jones]

Yes thanks for your Austism. From recall, the term was a positive initially on the net, because it meant people were drilling down into the details which is finer point of internet communication. On /pol/ it remains a compliment. Here it seems alot less so. I guess thus the two different cultures are apparent.

It's kinda like that, except when we say you're being autistic it means you're drilling into something that has no substance. This conversation and post ultimately will go nowhere and result in nothing for any of us except some backpats so even posting in this thread is autistic as fuck.

It's why people like Foxtrot are so funny. I make a schizopost and they think I'm literally installing a white Christian ethnostate.

 

[AMHOLIO]

Yes thanks for your Austism. From recall, the term was a positive initially on the net, because it meant people were drilling down into the details which is finer point of internet communication. On /pol/ it remains a compliment. Here it seems alot less so. I guess thus the two different cultures are apparent.

No problem, and what Osmosis Jones said. Catch up on more Christory and autism and you'll see why - the site was built off him. There's still users who will call each other autistic endearingly of course, and most people aren't actually going to be mean to autistic people IRL here.

 

[Otterly]

Humans seem hard wired for religion, and I think everyone has a religion. For some it’s Christianity, or Islam or another, and for others it’s consumerism, or the cult of progressiveness.
The last few years has made me rethink a lot of things and one of them is the role of religion in society. I now don’t think that moving away from Christianity in the west has been a positive thing. I think it’s been a disaster. It’s left a void that’s been filled by extremely destructive ideologies

 

[mrolonzo]

No problem, and what Osmosis Jones said. Catch up on more Christory and autism and you'll see why - the site was built off him. There's still users who will call each other autistic endearingly of course, and most people aren't actually going to be mean to autistic people IRL here.

This is all very strange. I just want people to be honest and forthright rather than avoiding offence. Irl Autism is obviously different.

Humans seem hard wired for religion, and I think everyone has a religion. For some it’s Christianity, or Islam or another, and for others it’s consumerism, or the cult of progressiveness.
The last few years has made me rethink a lot of things and one of them is the role of religion in society. I now don’t think that moving away from Christianity in the west has been a positive thing. I think it’s been a disaster. It’s left a void that’s been filled by extremely destructive ideologies

Yes but christianity itself is a very very limited belief system in every sense. It has no real point to it. It's fundamentally a just so story. It's not even a way of life, and it's not really a universe spanning concept.

So it couldn't last.