Can't you debate your point without resorting to insults?
The removal of "under god" from the pledge is being debated in Massachusetts supreme court!
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
Yeah.
It is.
Just because you don't identify with the same version that some of the larger religious groups do, you DO ascribe things to that god and things that god is responsible for.
No.
I can't.
Religious people in 2013 MUST know how utterly regressive they are to humanity.
Its embarassing that I have to poke holes in the most elementary arguments because people failed to pay attention in simple science classes, much less lack common sense.
m!ght as well.........
so people made up a moral code but !t doesnt ex!st???? we made up human r!ghts but they dont ex!st??? so s!nce we made up laws ! guess they dont ex!st e!ther r!ght??? & WE as a soc!ety d!d not collect!vely dec!de these laws, the m!nor!ty (not race) !n power & author!ty d!d, we just adjust them...
then you say l!fe has no mean!ng but we g!ve mean!ng to !t ourselves???? contrad!ct youself much breh????
theres a reason n!h!l!sts are bunched !n w!th anarch!sts breh....
This doesn't make any sense.
I can accept that life is meaningless but still move to change things and the way things are ordered in life.
There are people who accept that the matrix is present but who don't stop participating in it.
Morality DOES NOT exist.
"better" ayyye there u go using terms not fit for a nihilistic such as ur self
Someone is angry
Funny that u say this is all bout the law of the "books"
When the very foundation of the constitution lies in this statement
"We hold these truths to be self-evident...all men are... endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men."
The same creator that is referenced in the Pledge...the irony that u are trying to remove what the constitution is founded on
Back then they got it...
Human rights were something that could not exist in your worldview and when u no longer acknowledge that foundation, everything falls apart
THEIR CREATOR.
What does that mean?
Is that "god" or simply their parents?
You tell me.
Human rights don't exist. We made them up in the enlightenment as some basic things we though each person would need to live a decent life. They're the result of consensus, not innate rights.
You can make up arbitrary rules so long as you understand that the rules themselves ultimately don't matter.
This is what you don't understand.
How about the Supreme Court debate the laws that allow for White men to go around shooting unarmed black boys in cold blooded murder and claiming Stand Your Ground? How about they debate the law that allows for Cops to interrogate a black mother after her child was shot and killed POINT BLANK by a white man, keeping her in a cop car while her son bleeds to death in the middle of the street? How about the Supreme Court debate the circumstances behind an unarmed black man being murdered by a POLICE OFFICER and said officer only serves 11 months in jail?
I could give a fukk about "one nation under God" it's "One Nation Under These Cacs" that's the real problem
I could give a fukk about "one nation under God" it's "One Nation Under These Cacs" that's the real problem
THEIR CREATOR.
What does that mean?
Is that "god" or simply their parents?
You tell me.
Human rights don't exist. We made them up in the enlightenment as some basic things we though each person would need to live a decent life. They're the result of consensus, not innate rights.
You can make up arbitrary rules so long as you understand that the rules themselves ultimately don't matter.
This is what you don't understand.
Ur moving away from the topic
U said that the gripe and the motivation behind this thread is that the current pledge does not comply with the "law of the books"
I then say that those "law of the books" are founded on a statement that imply human rights given to all men by their creator apart from what culture, state or govt dictate.
That was the belief and that is the foundation of the "law of the books" you're, in your head, are trying to validate
"decent"..there u go using adjectives in ways that dont comply with the nihilistic belief
So again what is ur argument besides "i dont like it so we need to do it this way"
Cuz as you've so eloquently made clear..the whole motivation of this thread isnt one that revolves or even consider human rights or preserving a sense of right and wrong because you dont believe in such things
ALl this comes down to is an issue of "I want it to be like this so we should make it like this"
So what exactly is the argument you can give to these people about this issue, while complying with the worldview you claim to hold
Ur moving away from the topic
U said that the gripe and the motivation behind this thread is that the current pledge does not comply with the "law of the books"
I then say that those "law of the books" are founded on a statement that imply human rights given to all men by their creator apart from what culture, state or govt dictate.
That was the belief and that is the foundation of the "law of the books" you're, in your head, are trying to validate
"decent"..there u go using adjectives in ways that dont comply with the nihilistic belief
So again what is ur argument besides "i dont like it so we need to do it this way"
Cuz as you've so eloquently made clear..the whole motivation of this thread isnt one that revolves or even consider human rights or preserving a sense of right and wrong because you dont believe in such things
ALl this comes down to is an issue of "I want it to be like this so we should make it like this"
So what exactly is the argument you can give to these people about this issue, while complying with the worldview you claim to hold
Your argument caries no weight at all.
When you start throwing religious terminology in OFFICIAL commentary from the government, its not secular anymore. It becomes government reinforcement of theology.
This whole "endowned by creator" bullshyt doesn't even mean anything and the fact is that religious people take that to mean more than what it says
I love how oyu love to pretend that nihilists who actually do walk around and live their lives should just wallow in their shyt and sit in corners. I REALIZE life is pointless but it doesn't mean I therefore am obligated to sit there and waste it.
And this thread IS NOT about human rights. Its about legality and consistency of the law.
The law has stated several times that the government WILL NOT take sides when it comes to religion...YET using "under god" in the pledge explicitly does that.
Not to mention that congress has SEVERAL times in the past passed resolutions to ensure that "god" remains in the bill knowing damn well that its religiously motivated and with explicit ignorance of the higher law of the constitution.
I'm done talking with you at this point.
I'm an existential nihilist. Life doesn't mean shyt...but since i'm here, fukk it. Lets make something out of it.
That being said, that doesn't mean I should just NOT GIVE A fukk ABOUT ANYTHING.
The law matters and as such, its all we have to determine how countries ultimately rule themselves. You can't have INTERNAL contradictions like this and still hope to be remotely successful as a nation.
I'd love to see you defending this shyt and committing ad hominems (which is all this is since you're attacking the source of the argument [unsuccessfully] and not the argument itself) when muslims become a sizable population and start to replace the word 'god" with Allah everyhwere.
Let me see how much you love that.
Remember this kids.
Any time someone attacks the source of the argument and not the argument itself, they don't have any point.
Any time someone attacks the source of the argument and not the argument itself, they don't have any point.
Uh oh...i sense all the homotion coming from you
Im not pretending nothing nor do I have a misconstrued view on how claimed nihilists act..
Rather Im aware of how they do behave and im quick to point out the contradiction it has with the worldview they claim
And uh oh..the nihilist strikes again
"wasting life"..something must have a purpose for u to "waste" it..according to your worldview though we have no such thing so there is no such thing as "wasting your lives"But okay Mr. "Nihilist"..lets get to it
You say that statement doesnt mean anything not realizing that statement is the whole foundation to the constitution you are attempting to appeal to
The statement found in the DOI is one that gives strength to the Constitution
The Constitution's purpose is the preservation of these endowed qualities from the Creator...you can be indifferent to that but thats simply the case whether u like it or not
The whole moral scope of the constitution is an appeal to divinity and its relationship to us..so technically all the laws are "theologically" driven and thats because it assumes the things and aspects your worldview denies
Now lets no longer acknowledge that statement...lets say things like human rights, and right and wrong, are mere illusion
Then the government really has nothing to preserve...
Because these rights are no longer a reality, all things are permissible ...which just exposes an even deeper contradiction in the laws of the nation
But I wont even get into that
According to you the Law doesnt matter...you inquire for what you like and its simply that and thats fine..u can go on with that
But as i look in this thread and see u use terms and phrases not fit for a nihilist such as "improve" or "wasting of life" or living "decent lives" its "wrong" or "its right"
And many other cases where u make appeals that dont comply with your nihilistic worldview..I have to wonder
You're a nihilist u can do whatever u want..u dnt have to sit by while things go on that u dnt like...but thats all it comes down to...
"I dnt like it I want it to be this way"
And sure u dnt have to respond to me but...Im gonna stick around and get my puter puting in this thread for the fck of it
CashmereThoughts
Veteran
Alot of people give a shyt, there's people up in arms...
Secondly, if your religious freedoms were being disrespected everyday blatantly to all the children in your family you wouldn't have this nonchalant attitude about it.
Bottom line, everybody don't believe in your god, and everybody shouldn't be force indoctrinated everyday at school with what SOME people believe in.
An you think the wheels of common sense and dare I say justice are supposed to stop because of some other bullshyt going on elsewhere? FOH
Last edited:
Uh oh...i sense all the homotion coming from you
Im not pretending nothing nor do I have a misconstrued view on how claimed nihilists act..
Rather Im aware of how they do behave and im quick to point out the contradiction it has with the worldview they claim
And uh oh..the nihilist strikes again
But okay Mr. "Nihilist"..lets get to it
You say that statement doesnt mean anything not realizing that statement is the whole foundation to the constitution you are attempting to appeal to
The statement found in the DOI is one that gives strength to the Constitution
The Constitution's purpose is the preservation of these endowed qualities from the Creator...you can be indifferent to that but thats simply the case whether u like it or not
The whole moral scope of the constitution is an appeal to divinity and its relationship to us..so technically all the laws are "theologically" driven and thats because it assumes the things and aspects your worldview denies
Now lets no longer acknowledge that statement...lets say things like human rights, and right and wrong, are mere illusion
Then the government really has nothing to preserve...
Because these rights are no longer a reality, all things are permissible ...which just exposes an even deeper contradiction in the laws of the nation
But I wont even get into that
According to you the Law doesnt matter...you inquire for what you like and its simply that and thats fine..u can go on with that
But as i look in this thread and see u use terms and phrases not fit for a nihilist such as "improve" or "wasting of life" or living "decent lives" its "wrong" or "its right"
And many other cases where u make appeals that dont comply with your nihilistic worldview..I have to wonder
You're a nihilist u can do whatever u want..u dnt have to sit by while things go on that u dnt like...but thats all it comes down to...
"I dnt like it I want it to be this way"
And sure u dnt have to respond to me but...Im gonna stick around and get my puter puting in this thread for the fck of it
NIHILISM is not APATHY
What the fukk do you not understand?
One is what you understand, the other is how you behave.
This is so fukking stupid of you and I'm perplexed what or why you don't understand.
We AS A SOCIETY made these rules we want to follow. They don't exist without us enforcing them.
If RULES that we made are ALL that we have, then we shuold try our best to live by them.
Currently, including "god" in the pledge does not uphold our aim to have a society that lives as close as possible to those rules.
Mr. Somebody
Friend Of A Friend
He crushed you, friend. Just give up.
Mr. Somebody
Friend Of A Friend
Does that remind you of your great great great great grandather?sounds disturbingly familiar, friend
nah, he was woodworking in finland
