Oh yay, another political thread! (Prop 8, gay marriage stuff)

[Predator]

Hatred and bigotry seem to bee thrown around quite a bit here, but maybe the reason it didn't pass is more along the lines of ignorance and fear. Is the fear founded? no, but fear is fear. There are still people that have only been exposed to homosexuals on TV and they aren't always portrayed in a positive light. I'll grant that some votes were cast based on hatred and bigotry, but many were cast out of ignorance. Some people seem to still believe that same sex marriage will destroy what "conventional" marriage stands for. I can say that my marriage will mean no less when (I say when because it will become legal) two men are legally married. Education is key, show people why they are wrong rather than just protesting and yelling that they are hate filled bigots.

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by Predator

Hatred and bigotry seem to bee thrown around quite a bit here, but maybe the reason it didn't pass is more along the lines of ignorance and fear.

Hatred and bigotry are usually the product of ignorance and fear.

[jibber]

Originally Posted by Predator

Hatred and bigotry seem to bee thrown around quite a bit here, but maybe the reason it didn't pass is more along the lines of ignorance and fear. Is the fear founded? no, but fear is fear. There are still people that have only been exposed to homosexuals on TV and they aren't always portrayed in a positive light. I'll grant that some votes were cast based on hatred and bigotry, but many were cast out of ignorance. Some people seem to still believe that same sex marriage will destroy what "conventional" marriage stands for. I can say that my marriage will mean no less when (I say when because it will become legal) two men are legally married. Education is key, show people why they are wrong rather than just protesting and yelling that they are hate filled bigots.

great point, I completely agree that the solution to hatred and bigotry is with education, and yet I can not absolve the people who voted this in of blame. This is not a backwater village in a third world country. education, enough education rather, is available for those who want it, and who value it. Your right that the problem is fear, but I just can't acquit people of having a lack of human decency if they voted in a proposition to deny someone a right that will have no effect on them whatsoever.

[TheBig3]

"To whom should propaganda be addressed? … It must be addressed always and exclusively to the masses… The function of propaganda does not lie in the scientific training of the individual, but in calling the masses' attention to certain facts, processes, necessities, etc., whose significance is thus for the first time placed within their field of vision. The whole art consists in doing this so skilfully that everyone will be convinced that the fact is real, the process necessary, the necessity correct, etc. But since propaganda is not and cannot be the necessity in itself … its effect for the most part must be aimed at the emotions and only to a very limited degree at the so-called intellect… it's soundness is to be measured exclusively by its effective result". (Main Kampf, Vol 1, Ch 6 and Ch 12)

They had a shot of Hitler once, and he had his arm around the bust of Nietzsche with this "atta boy" face on. Thats about as emotional as you'll get from hitler.

If Nietzsche is your guy, i don't know that we need to look much further. Zarthustra or otherwise.

That quote I'm citing likely tells you that what hitler says isn't always the truth. Should we look to Chamberlin and his...

"I have in my pocket a letter from Chancellor Hitler; there will be no land war in Europe"

to prove that point?

As I've stated prior, we have people who see an idea they identify with being show for what it is (atheism) and they are suspending logic to defend it to the death.

Come again friends, I'm ready for your fight because you're wrong.

So wrong that you've started trusting the written word of Hitler.

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

"To whom should propaganda be addressed? … It must be addressed always and exclusively to the masses… The function of propaganda does not lie in the scientific training of the individual, but in calling the masses' attention to certain facts, processes, necessities, etc., whose significance is thus for the first time placed within their field of vision. The whole art consists in doing this so skilfully that everyone will be convinced that the fact is real, the process necessary, the necessity correct, etc. But since propaganda is not and cannot be the necessity in itself … its effect for the most part must be aimed at the emotions and only to a very limited degree at the so-called intellect… it's soundness is to be measured exclusively by its effective result". (Main Kampf, Vol 1, Ch 6 and Ch 12)

They had a shot of Hitler once, and he had his arm around the bust of Nietzsche with this "atta boy" face on. Thats about as emotional as you'll get from hitler.

If Nietzsche is your guy, i don't know that we need to look much further. Zarthustra or otherwise.

That quote I'm citing likely tells you that what hitler says isn't always the truth. Should we look to Chamberlin and his...

"I have in my pocket a letter from Chancellor Hitler; there will be no land war in Europe"

to prove that point?

As I've stated prior, we have people who see an idea they identify with being show for what it is (atheism) and they are suspending logic to defend it to the death.

Come again friends, I'm ready for your fight because you're wrong.

So wrong that you've started trusting the written word of Hitler.

The argument you have set up here is that we really can't trust anything Hilter said or did because it's all just propaganda and manipulation, and there really is no way of knowing what he actually believed in his heart of hearts. And then you claim to know he's an atheist based on some photo-op with a bust of Nietzsche. Does it occur to you that having his photo taken with a bust of one of Germany's most famous philosophers might also be an example of propaganda? Your argument undermines itself. If we really have no way of knowing what he believed based on anything he did or said, then you have to basis for making the claim that he was an atheist.

[TheBig3]

Originally Posted by Janszoon

The argument you have set up here is that we really can't trust anything Hilter said or did because it's all just propaganda and manipulation, and there really is no way of knowing what he actually believed in his heart of hearts. And then you claim to know he's an atheist based on some photo-op with a bust of Nietzsche. Does it occur to you that having his photo taken with a bust of one of Germany's most famous philosophers might also be an example of propaganda? Your argument undermines itself. If we really have no way of knowing what he believed based on anything he did or said, then you have to basis for making the claim that he was an atheist.

I'm basing that claim in the fact that he tried to create a church where he was essentially christ.

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

I'm basing that claim in the fact that he tried to create a church where he was essentially christ.

I never heard that before. Do you have a source to back that claim up? Also how would thinking he's divine make him an atheist? I would think that would make him religious.

But assuming this claim of yours is true, what you are saying is that he used a religion to further his evil agenda. This just supports the notion that religion has been one of the primary sources of hatred and violence throughout history.

[TheBig3]

Originally Posted by Janszoon

I never heard that before. Do you have a source to back that claim up? Also how would thinking he's divine make him an atheist? I would think that would make him religious.

But assuming this claim of yours is true, what you are saying is that he used a religion to further his evil agenda. This just supports the notion that religion has been one of the primary sources of hatred and violence throughout history.

To be honest this was something from back in my college days, so i'm going to need to go find it again. Contrary to popular belief, I don't have all my gethered knowledge at my finger tips.

Your second point is fairly well played, but we're going to get back into word play here.

If we're going to take Hitlers failed religion (it never really caught on) as "religion." We're going to have to make some huge steps.

Firstly, that religion would now include not just the three world religions and possibly the lesser, remote ones but anyone who claims to be Christ. You can't pick and choose, so now we're going to have to include homeless people, Tom Cruise, anything really.

And then we're going to have to look at how we want to define this use of religion. Because we'd have to agree that hitlers church was just his ideas reinforced as he was now they ultimate being.

religion doesn't seem to work that way.

But as I write I realize we've taken the argument off the path. I never said religion didn't cause major evil acts, and since I believe that they have commited horrible acts, i don't think i ever would make that assertion.

My point is, that people who claim to be atheists are just as likely, if not more likely to think less of religios people than the religious are of atheists. Its within most religions that conversion is a noble act. The idea that conversations need to happen, or in Islams case "reverts", means there is an obvious an accepted idea that all people aren't religious.

Atheists however generally find the idea of God foolish, with everything from mutating common colds to...the holocaust as proof that "if god was real, he wouldn't allow this."

Because atheists are generally more keep-to-themselves, non-grouped creatures, it would be hard to blame them for much since they don't operate in groups.

The religious however do, and its easier to target them because their a unified front.

This almost lends itself to my point, that because their easier to target, they are more often target. I don't know under what situation outside of the O'Reilly factor would atheists be balmmed for anything now that Jerry falwells dead.

Edit: I'm using a different computer at work today and this keyboard sucks, sorry for the out of place lack of captitalization.

[Double X]

[Tobias]

I know my views have already been stated beofre, but I figured I'd state them in my own words. Here goes...

I'm against Prop 8. Which means i'm for *** marriage. No I'm not ***, I just feel that everyone should have the right to marry whoever they want, and however many times, or however many people.

Polygamy or Monogamy, doesn't matter, ***, straight, don't care. Everyone should have the right to a sacred union, no matter who they are, what they stand for, or who they are sleeping with.

I honestly think that it is no ones business but those getting married. government and religion should stay out of it, to a certain extent.