Latest from Jesusland

[Uncensored2008]

Oh great, another steaming stew of unconnected nonsense. Moving right along...

What a pathetic dodge.

Is that the best you've got?


Let's talk about biology - you of the fascist left are a hoot when you bluster as you deny facts.

Lewis Carol defined the basic premise of conversing with the Nazi democrats long ago;


“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

 

[Uncensored2008]

I love it when the devout cry because they're "persecuted" -- "persecution" meaning "I can't place the symbols of MY religion in public spaces, I can't have MY form of prayers spoken in public schools, I can't have MY beliefs taught as actual science in public schools," etc.

And yet YOU demand that YOU may put YOUR symbols in public spaces;

Many of the referenced cases in your lament involve non-Xtians denied the right to practice their own faith. See Comm. v. Trapp, 396 Mass. 202 (1985), S.C., 423 Mass. 356 (1996) (access to sweat lodges in prison for indigenous inmates); Egbert v. Nicholson, giving the families of deceased American veterans the right to use religious symbols on grave markers, including the Wiccan pentacle.

So you may put your symbols in government building and on streets, but the Christians at to be denied? Non-Nazis are denied the right to display their symbols.

Civil liberty is too important for you fascists to left just anyone have it.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

LOL. You and I can agree it’s more despair than spreading hatred, but there’s definitely hatred of others.

Nah. He's just expressing his honest opinion of people like me and you who choose to live a different sort of lifestyle, in very different places. I'm a woman of the forest and the north; he's an urban dude. But he doesn't hate me anymore than I hate him. Differences in opinion do not always equal hate.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

So you may put your symbols in government building and on streets, but the Christians at to be denied? Non-Nazis are denied the right to display their symbols.

Civil liberty is too important for you fascists to left just anyone have it.

Whatever, Betty Lou. I hope you can find some comfort and release for your insane rage tonight, there among your kind. Here's some now! In the very same America where you fascists are ever so persecuted.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Your need to lie about Trump to take the heat off of your failure to debate is, well, pathetic.

Now Bill Clinton was on the Lolita Express and Pedo Island MANY times. BUT he's a Reich member, so you say nothing about that - since you're a fucking hypocrite, as well as a liar.

Such is the way of you Nazis.

No shit, you fucking moron. I’ve been saying that for years. Pedo Don and Slick Willie were Pedo Buddies. They were also both draft-dodgers, adulterers and impeached along with being pedophile buddies of Jeffrey Epstein. Get a clue, dumbass.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Nah. He's just expressing his honest opinion of people like me and you who choose to live a different sort of lifestyle, in very different places. I'm a woman of the forest and the north; he's an urban dude. But he doesn't hate me anymore than I hate him. Differences in opinion do not always equal hate.

One post is just one post. A few dozen posts of spreading hate or demeaning someone is a pattern. Switch out his labels with a racial epithet and tell me you feel the same way.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

One post is just one post. A few dozen posts of spreading hate or demeaning someone is a pattern. Switch out his labels with a racial epithet and tell me you feel the same way.

I've seen a lot of ppl accuse you of spreading hate too, you know.

 

[Cypress]

My moral dilemma on the runaway train thought experiment is what if the one person tied to the one track is Mother Teresa, and the three people tied to the other track are Don Trump Jr , Tucker Carlson, and Steve Bannon.

Atheists and believers have a moral compass, just not the same one.

In some aspects, the moral compass was incredibly alike between the two groups; they both highly rated fairness and protecting the well-being of vulnerable people, for instance, and both highly endorsed liberty but not oppression. However, the groups diverged when it came to matters of group cohesion, such as valuing loyalty and respecting authority, the study found

"Virtually everyone", atheists and believers alike, scored high on these two values, showing that they valued protecting the vulnerable and being fair toward others; and they saw these values as moral issues, Ståhl said. However, he found differences between believers and disbelievers on the other three values: authority (respecting authority figures, such as police, parents and teachers), loyalty (being loyal to one's group, such as a country — not burning a country's flag, for instance) and sanctity (not doing anything perceived as degrading, usually in a sexual sense, such as being promiscuous).

"Those three values are thought to be serving group cohesion, keeping the group together," Ståhl explained. "When it comes to the binding values, there's a dramatic difference [between the groups]. Religious people score much higher on those — they view [them] as much more relevant for being moral compared to the disbelievers."

In contrast, "atheists don't really think of [these three values] as relevant for morality to the same degree," he said.

In a difference, Ståhl found that atheists were more likely than believers to base their judgments about what is or isn't moral based on the consequences of their actions. For example, in the hypothetical trolley problem, a person has to decide whether to let a runaway trolley kill five people stuck on the track ahead of it, or whether to pull a switch to divert the train, but kill one person stuck on the alternate track.

"In that situation, the disbelievers are more inclined to say 'flip [the] switch and kill the one person rather than five,' because they are assessing the relative harm," Ståhl told Live Science. "Whereas believers are more icky about that because they feel like they're actively killing someone, and they shouldn't kill. So, they are less comfortable with those calculations."

https://www.livescience.com/moral-compass-atheists-believers.html

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I've seen a lot of ppl accuse you of spreading hate too, you know.

Agreed; mostly I’m accused of hating Pedos, Nazis, White People and Trump. They’re wrong, of course, since I don’t hate anyone. Stopping people from committing crimes or inciting harm to innocent Americans is not hate.

 

[Cypress]

Nah, it's just the type of thing that gets hypocritical Christophobic bigots yapping on the interwebz.

Tell you what - you knock off the 20,000 acts of censorship by Marxist universities and we'll stop the single act of censorship by a Christian college.

You might have a point if banning Neo-nazi guest speakers were the moral equivalent of banning people based on their romantic interests.

But they're not morally equivalent.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

My moral dilemma on the runaway train thought experiment is what if the one person tied to the one track is Mother Teresa, and the three people tied to the other track are Don Trump Jr , Tucker Carlson, and Steve Bannon.

The greater good is served by saving Mother Theresa….even though she died in 1997.

 

[Cypress]

The greater good is served by saving Mother Theresa….even though she died in 1997.

That's what I think. Killing one person is not necessarily morally better than five, but if one has to make a blind calculation it's probably better to flip the train track switch.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

That's what I think. Killing one person is not necessarily morally better than five, but if one has to make a blind calculation it's probably better to flip the train track switch.

The article stated that the religious would reason that just flipping the switch would be killing, i.e. murder. I maintain that if that is true, then not flipping the switch murders five rather than one. Flipping the switch is both the moral and the logical thing to do.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The article stated that the religious would reason that just flipping the switch would be killing, i.e. murder. I maintain that if that is true, then not flipping the switch murders five rather than one. Flipping the switch is both the moral and the logical thing to do.

It’s not murder since it’s a runaway train. The choice isn’t to murder one or murder five but to save one or save five. The point Cypress is making is “It depends upon the five”. On a pure numbers basis, all things being equal, yes, better to prevent five deaths by flipping a switch causing less deaths.

However, the morality of those being saved is a consideration. If the year is 1938 and the single person is Anne Frank while the five are all SS officers, is it better to sacrifice one to save five?

 

[Cypress]

The article stated that the religious would reason that just flipping the switch would be killing, i.e. murder. I maintain that if that is true, then not flipping the switch murders five rather than one. Flipping the switch is both the moral and the logical thing to do.

thanks

In the absence of any other information, the logical thing to do is flip the switch.

As a moral decision, I do not claim it is necessarily the more moral choice. The five saved could be rapists, child abusers, miscreants. The one killed could be the medical scientist who someday invents a cure for cancer. Just my two cents

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

It’s not murder since it’s a runaway train. The choice isn’t to murder one or murder five but to save one or save five. The point Cypress is making is “It depends upon the five”. On a pure numbers basis, all things being equal, yes, better to prevent five deaths by flipping a switch causing less deaths.

However, the morality of those being saved is a consideration. If the year is 1938 and the single person is Anne Frank while the five are all SS officers, is it better to sacrifice one to save five?

I personally would be fine with saving just the one, assuming I knew beyond a doubt that the doomed were killers who would go on killing if allowed to live. But what if *all* of them were "bad"? Or if you had no clue as to the morals of any of them? Logic dictates that you try to save as many as possible. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one." -- Spock, Wrath of Khan

 

[Cypress]

I personally would be fine with saving just the one, assuming I knew beyond a doubt that the doomed were killers who would go on killing if allowed to live. But what if *all* of them were "bad"? Or if you had no clue as to the morals of any of them? Logic dictates that you try to save as many as possible. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one." -- Spock, Wrath of Khan

But to throw another wrinkle into it, what if we knew the one person is our sister or brother, and the other five are random strangers.

What's the moral and logical choices?

That is a real conundrum to me.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

Florida college cancels singing group's concert due to 'lifestyle that contradicts scripture'

Debates are churning after a Florida college abruptly canceled an appearance by a prominent singing group due to at least one member's sexuality.

The King's Singers are a highly regarded British a cappella ensemble with more than 50 years of history. The all-male group performs a range of songs, including pop music, classical arrangements and sacred music.

The group says a February 11 concert at Pensacola Christian College was canceled with "two hours' notice" because of "'concerns' about the 'lifestyle' of members of our group."

"It has become clear to us, from a flood of correspondence from students and members of the public, that these concerns related to the sexuality of members of our group," a statement from the group, shared on social media, reads.

Pensacola Christian College, a private independent Baptist institution, released a statement with their reasoning.

"PCC canceled a concert with The King's Singers upon learning that one of the artists openly maintained a lifestyle that contradicts Scripture," the statement reads.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/02/15/us/kings-singers-pensacola-christian-college-cec/index.html

this is not my teaching.

let he who is free of sin cast the first stone.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I personally would be fine with saving just the one, assuming I knew beyond a doubt that the doomed were killers who would go on killing if allowed to live. But what if *all* of them were "bad"? Or if you had no clue as to the morals of any of them? Logic dictates that you try to save as many as possible. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one." -- Spock, Wrath of Khan

All things being equal or simply unknown, then it’s a numbers game. Save the five.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

this is not my teaching.

let he who is free of sin cast the first stone.

Fredo, you’re one of the biggest rock throwers on JPP and you always throw at African-Americans, Jews and anyone who disagrees with you.