
Originally Posted by
Farnsworth,Luther P.
Never read it
Of course you didn't, that's obvious from what positions and ideals you falsely attribute to New Atheism. You're more than happy to write...what's the phrase? 'Regurgitated junk you got from somewhere else'.

Originally Posted by
Farnsworth,Luther P.
and I'm not a 'conservative'
I did not say you were, only that you possibly picked up certain ideas from Conservapedia. To be honest I've always found you to be more fascist than 'conservative', and that's coming from someone who uses that term carefully.

Originally Posted by
Farnsworth,Luther P.
Moral relativism is the root of 'left wing liberalism', which is why it isn't remotely related to real liberalism, but you wouldn't know that; maybe after you finally finish up that 7th year of 3rd grade and move on you'll learn critical thinking skills, but, that isn't likely, as it's too much work for you.
"Moral relativism" is about as mythical as the "real liberalism". Let me explain why: personal morality is a natural human trait. New Atheists have morals. Liberals have morals. Christians have morals. Some postmodern relativists, like the ethicists you mentioned, think that because morals are natural and fluid, there is a justification to remove them entirely from the equation and act 'functionally'. I'm not saying that's what all postmodernists think, or even that moral relativism is a conclusion of postmodernist logic, but that social liberalism and all left wing traditions cannot be relativist, given that they rest upon various assumptions and prejudices about the natural 'goodness' of humans and the ethical way to treat humanity. And, as I pointed out to a thankless Caddis in another thread:

Originally Posted by
Archaix
Socialism partly originated in Christian circles anyway (equality before God was a major aspect of the writing of Tom Paine, Ruskin, George Lansbury, etc), and some of the most prominent socialists today are Christians, like Tony Benn or Desmond Tutu … So the agenda of Marxists and socialists is not to 'replace God'. As far as social liberalism has been concerned, the object has been only to make the state 'neutral' in matters of religion -Richard Dawkins, for example, recently argued exactly this, and Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams has
argued, on the other side of the debate, that disestablishment protects religion from state manipulation.

Originally Posted by
Farnsworth,Luther P.
As for Ospama's support for infanticide, I've posted links to his speeches on the Illinois Senate floor, as well as pictures of what he supports, several times already, so if you missed them, tough, it's your problem.
Spare me your Powerboss-like determination to be as lazy as possible and make those links yourself, you gutless twerp. I'm sure if your posts are as vague and ill-constructed as this one there's no point in me reading them anyway; your concept of 'evidence' is about as shaky as your understanding of New Atheism.

Originally Posted by
Farnsworth,Luther P.
most Nazi platforms derived directly from 'Progressive Era' attempts at quantifying the 'social sciences', and also the works of Charles Darwin, and most especially, the works of Charles Davenport and the fashion for 'psychoanalysis' and the like. Google it yourself, if you're inclined to personal edifictation, or just be another Archaix and just repeat idiotic tropes and memes ad nauseam.
I'm not quite sure what the point of this is: are you saying that Nazi racism was inspired by progressive eugenics? Everyone was involved in eugenics in the 18th and 19th centuries -the work of Darwin merely accelerated the process by unlocking the machinery of evolution. The chief distinguishing features of Nazism (which it did not at all borrow from the left) was to add a racial dynamic to Darwinism, and misinterpret 'survival of the fittest' as 'survival of the strongest'.
I have to say, furthermore, that your own attitudes towards Arabian people (“The Israelis should show some respect for Arab and Islamic Tradition by massacring their Arab population until there are either none left, or keep maybe a hundred or so around in order to claim they are 'secular'”), and your well-known characterisation of gay people as mentally ill paedophiles (reminds me of your phrase “declaring dissidents as 'insane'”...), does not fill me with great confidence that you are in any way different from the fascists you apparently find appalling.

Originally Posted by
86Dùde
Everything to you collectivists is extreme right because your thinking is too far to the left and your commie friends have managed to move the right left of center so far that they are actually left but too stupid to know it. Well done. Mitt Romney is a great example of your successes in this pinko endeavor.
This is too fucking stupid to even address. You get more hosed up every day 86, you know that?
Show us not the aim without the way, for ends and means on earth are so entangled
That changing one, you change the other too; each different path brings other ends in view
Bookmarks