• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

This is my philosophy - agree with it or no?

Nietzsche

The Last Prussian
Premium Member
I didn't talk to you, my friend.

Though, I think if advancement would only happen if children are taken from families and I did come with a cause.

Bigotry, racism, religion are usually from families. Families with their outdated worldviews teaches children that evolution is wrong for no apparent reason other than it conflicts with Creationism.

These children grow up with these brainwashing ideas and become the product of their parents. Ignorance is like a virus, it spreads to your next generation.
Agreed. But they should only be taken from "problem" families. A loving family who holds no such views should be allowed their children. You risk breeding needless animosity that way for honestly little to no gain.

During the age of 5, children are usually at the age of starting to understanding the world and rejecting fairytales and accept reality, thus, we should present them the reality rather than fairytales such as Young Creationism or that Black people are talking apes compared to "humans."

A government wouldn't be so opinionated and teach the child from an impartial perspective, we must deviate them from the families then, in order to succeed this.
Again, there is too little reward for the risk. You're going to be needlessly upsetting perfectly decent people otherwise. The bond between parent & child is intense. You can achieve all these things through proper schooling, there's no need to take their children. Again, excepting neo-nazis, Biblical-literalists, and other such grossly reactionary and backwards schools of thought.

About cultures, the various will be remembered in history, just like Red Indians and Scotsmen. While the best will be continued with some diversity with other good cultures, as long as it is compatible to main point of my philosophy; promoting knowledge.

Thus, multiculturalism will be promoted, we wouldn't cultureless. The worst of the best will be eradicated and the best of the best of any culture will be incorporated with the main country's society.
Culture is far more fluid than I think you realize. This sort of society could not come about with the more extreme policies you're promoting. You'll have people rejecting it just to be contrary or worse, seeing the things we're against as being better because the government is going through such means to wipe it out.
 

Slaedi7324

Member
Agreed. But they should only be taken from "problem" families. A loving family who holds no such views should be allowed their children. You risk breeding needless animosity that way for honestly little to no gain.


Again, there is too little reward for the risk. You're going to be needlessly upsetting perfectly decent people otherwise. The bond between parent & child is intense. You can achieve all these things through proper schooling, there's no need to take their children. Again, excepting neo-nazis, Biblical-literalists, and other such grossly reactionary and backwards schools of thought.
I will change on that dogma in our society if I had to.

While, there might exist good families, in terms of love. They are not good in terms of source for knowledge. These families have different ideologies, very dangerous and rebellious to my philosophy and ideology.

I'm not saying this should be forever, but just until every inhabitant of that one and only country is native to that nation and that ideology.

A person that don't know how the world was before the declaration of the country. A person born in that state. Every persons born in that state.
 

Slaedi7324

Member
Insulting again?
I didn't insult you. If you are that sensitive to consider such thing for an insult, then "A facetious OP against education and knowledge, using red herrings and straw men and other fallacies, how brilliant" is a hate crime. Take it maturely or hypocritically. Your choice.
We know you are a mulism, that makes your whole post POE.
"Religion: Apatheist"
That fits me best. Religiously speaking, I am more than just a Muslim, I am also an adherent of several Chinese folk religions, some Dharmic as well. Also, POE? What?
You are very transparent and intention obvious.
That quote was so incoherent that I am left confused.
 

Slaedi7324

Member
How honest is that, when you stated this below previously??????????????
I am, did you read what I said?
"Religion: Apatheist"
That fits me best. Religiously speaking, I am more than just a Muslim, I am also an adherent of several Chinese folk religions, some Dharmic as well.

You act as if I rejected myself to be a Muslim, I did not. I am though, not a theistic Muslim. Apatheist/atheist/agnostic does not equate to irreligion.

Reading comprehension, I have advised you it for so many times. Learn it.
 
Last edited:

Slaedi7324

Member
Reading comprehension, learn it and you would find out.

Also, don't be sad that I ridiculed your mythological faith. I was pretty much just speaking in general, not directly towards Judaism.
 

FunctionalAtheist

Hammer of Reason
....Some would call it for a dictatorship, but I suppose, this would be a true utopia. A pacifist world.

Do you agree with my worldview? I know that the leaders of the country could eventually become corrupt, but if we imagine a theoretical leader that will never become corrupt nor his successors. What do you think then?
I suppose you have the best of intentions. What you propose is nothing more than a dogmatic autocracy draped in delusion of knowledge. See North Korea for an example of you philosophy at work today. It is actually a very peaceful nation. No uprisings or dissent at all.

How do you propose to reveal the one truth, without giving people the freedom seek knowledge?
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
I know that the leaders of the country could eventually become corrupt, but if we imagine a theoretical leader that will never become corrupt nor his successors

th
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Though, Quran, whose author is God,

amazingly miraculous reason why Quran always word itself carefully unlike other religions

God's time is different from ours.

God and His Angels

I am a Muslim.


What about the contradiction in Apatheist, and all the statements above????????????


apatheist
Someone who just doesn't care whether God exists or not and realizes that such a fact won't effect their life anyway
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
. Some would call it for a dictatorship

Because it is a dictatorship. I thought you
were being facetious on RedCommies introduction thread when you said that you were a Nazi. But I guess not.

Yuck. That's what I think of your "philosophy". It's evil.

Tom
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Agreed.

But in the context of obvious facetious POE. The OP is shining with hatred of others beliefs fallaciously using "evil" as a tool
Is the OP facetious? I don't know. I regularly get accused of not believing what I post. But I know better, & it reflects poorly on the accuser.
 
Top