Karl Marx, Yesterday and Today

[Audie]

Shouldn't we be interested in reality? In reality, atheists and theists alike are ignorant of these matters. That you or I may feel that one group or the other represents a greater share of that pool...how does that contribute anything of value to the objective of searching out the best answers for building society?
I am aware of the differences but am disinterested in making them the object of focus.
I am.
What difference does the origin of rights make if everyone agrees on what they are, and agrees to secure them from infringement?
I'm not interested in discussing anyone's flaws; I'm interested in discussing how every person in society may more fully enjoy his or her rights, which demands a discussion about the foundations of society.

Reality. And you think " god" is real?

 

[Unfettered]

My edict will be the elimination of men

OK, so if the foundation upon which society would be built were left to you, it would be upon the principle of "elimination of men." Eliminate how?

Reality. And you think " god" is real?

How is that relevant to the discussion?

 

[Audie]

OK, so if the foundation upon which society would be built, were left to you, would be upon the principle of "elimination of men." Eliminate how?

No violence. Just no more being born.
The biomed peeps can work out how.

 

[Unfettered]

It appears that everyone is interested in it.
But how to discern it differs.
A believer once told me that Christianity isn't a religion. It's simply reality.

That's nice, but we're not discussing Christianity, and we're not discussing atheism.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's nice, but we're not discussing Christianity, and we're not discussing atheism.

That poster's claim illustrates how believers
see reality, ie, that their religion is it. Morality
& rights stem from that. That tendency differs
fundamentally from atheists, who see humans
as creating their own morality & rights.

 

[Unfettered]

No violence. Just no more being born.
The biomed peeps can work out how.

OK. So you're not going to kill the living men. That means that you'll have to wait for them to die, or you'll have to eject them out of the bounds of your society. Any preference there?

 

[Audie]

OK. So you're not going to kill the living men. That means that you'll have to wait for them to die, or you'll have to eject them out of the bounds of your society. Any preference there?

I already said

 

[Unfettered]

That poster's claim illustrates how believers
see reality, ie, that their religion is it. Morality
& rights stem from that. That tendency differs
fundamentally from atheists, who see humans
as creating their own morality & rights.

I understand. And I've asked, and ask again, what difference does it make if theists and atheists are divergent in their understanding of the origin of the rights, if everyone agrees on what they are, and on society's relationship to them?

 

[Unfettered]

I already said

I didn't see it. Can you quote it or say it again?

 

[Audie]

OK. So you're not going to kill the living men. That means that you'll have to wait for them to die, or you'll have to eject them out of the bounds of your society. Any preference there?

I already said.

But if you simply must have details, we'd only
kill the dead ones.

Non violently.

 

[Revoltingest]

I understand. And I've asked, and ask again, what difference does it make if theists and atheists are divergent in their understanding of the origin of the rights, if everyone agrees on what they are, and society's relationship to them?

But there is much disagreement.
This happens even between believers & believers,
& between atheists & atheists.

 

[Little Dragon]

My edict will be the elimination of men

I know how you feel dear.

 

[Unfettered]

I already said.

But if you simply must have details, we'd only
kill the dead ones.

Non violently.

OK. Thanks for explaining.

So all the men are gone, and through biomedical means no male babies will be born.

Is that it? There is no other foundation upon which you'd build society?

 

[Little Dragon]

But if you simply must have details, we'd only
kill the dead ones.

Kill the dead ones? Me not understand.

 

[Unfettered]

But there is much disagreement.
This happens even between believers & believers,
& between atheists & atheists.

Indeed. I'm asking if you believe that atheists and theists must agree on the origin of rights before any of the other disagreements may be addressed.

 

[Little Dragon]

Is that it? There is no other foundation upon which you'd build society?

Futuristic amazonians...noice.

 

[Unfettered]

Futuristic amazonians...noice.

LOL, maybe. I'm guessing there's more, but I sincerely don't know.

 

[Revoltingest]

Indeed. I'm asking if you believe that atheists and theists must agree on the origin of rights before any of the other disagreements may be addressed.

No one must agree with anyone else.
But agreement can be useful....when it comports with what I want.

 

[Unfettered]

No one must agree with anyone else.

Well, I admit that I don't understand how you see society forming and adhering in a healthy way if no one agrees with anyone else.

 

[Little Dragon]

No violence. Just no more being born.
The biomed peeps can work out how.

I wouldn't bother, the human Y chromosome is probably on it's way out anyway.

"The human X and Y chromosomes evolved from a pair of autosomes approximately 180 million years ago. Despite their shared evolutionary origin, extensive genetic decay has resulted in the human Y chromosome losing 97% of its ancestral genes while gene content and order remain highly conserved on the X chromosome"

Extinction of chromosomes due to specialization is a universal occurrence - Scientific Reports

The human X and Y chromosomes evolved from a pair of autosomes approximately 180 million years ago. Despite their shared evolutionary origin, extensive genetic decay has resulted in the human Y chromosome losing 97% of its ancestral genes while gene content and order remain highly conserved on...

www.nature.com