Customer Discussions > Religion forum

Socialists - deluded demonic pawns or altruistic angelic partisans


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 101-125 of 347 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 6:47:36 PM PDT
In the 19th century, many Socialdemocrats were highly anticlerical and antireligion because of long-standing and widespread clerical privileges, abuses and corruption. In the aftermath of World War I, many members of the clergy became politically involved with Socialdemocratic parties--e.g. the Presbyterian minister Norman M. Thomas became head of the Socialist Party of America, the Baptist minister Tommy Douglas became the leader of Socialdemocrats in Canada, Prairie Giant: The Pastor Tommy Douglas Story . Thomas Lewis Nugent, who had studied for the Methodist ministry, was almost elected governor of Texas. According to http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fnu02 :

"Nugent came in third behind James Stephen Hogg and George Clark in 1892, when he polled 108,483 votes or 25 percent of the total. The People's party renominated him for governor by acclamation in 1894, and he lost to the Democratic candidate, Charles A. Culberson. His poll of 152,731 votes, or 36 percent of the ballots, made the People's party the major opponent to the Democratic party for the remainder of the 1890s."

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 1:17:53 PM PDT
S. Kessler says:
EI: Jesus, to the best of my understanding, only recommended others to help the poor based on their own free will, but he stopped short of compelling them to do so, nor empowering others to compel them.

SK: I always laugh at this rationalization for why Jesus would be against government programs to help the poor. The social organization of 1st century Judea is hardly the same as the complex, mostly urban communities we have today. One of the reasons Jesus supposedly condemned the leadership of the community (and I say supposedly for a reason) is that they were shirking their biblical duty to organize community welfare for the poor, orphaned, and widowed. In Judaism, then as now, assistance for the poor was an organized activity, the responsibility of the whole community, not just of individuals who "felt like it". Individualism, in fact, is a very late development is the history of homo Sapiens, and didn't really develop as a philosophy of social organization (or lackof it) until a few hundred years ago. It's beginnings we're in the Reformation when salvation became the responsibility of individuals in their relationship to God, and the notion was fully developed during the enlightenment. The United States was probably the first society in the history of humanity that exalted the individual above society and the old-time social hierarchies.

So the idea that Jesus was actually telling individuals that charity was an individual and not a community responsibility in which all individuals should take an active role, is patent nonsense.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 1:07:38 PM PDT
S. Kessler says:
Howdy! (As we Murikans say.). I'm back from an excellent conference of my peers from different universities. Taking a slow day today after 3 full days of constant work-socializing and paying attention to panel discussions. Not to mention eating. Boy, did they feed us good! And drinking, but the less said of that,he better. Personally, I'm a rather cheap drunk, anyway. Open bars are kind of wasted on me.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 11:57:03 AM PDT
Redcrowdog, Since its inception in 1935, lobotomy was a mainstream procedure for more than two decades, prescribed for psychiatric (and occasionally other) conditions-this despite general recognition of frequent and serious side-effects. (like death)
The heyday of its usage was from the early 1940s until the mid-1950s. By 1951, almost 20,000 lobotomies had been performed in the good old United States.

The American neurologist and psychiatrist Walter Freeman, (somewhat mad) formulated a new procedure called the transorbital lobotomy. This new procedure became known as the icepick lobotomy and was performed by inserting a metal pick into the corner of each eye-socket and moving it back and forth, severing the connections to the prefrontal cortex (he practiced on a watermelon) in the frontal lobes of the brain. He performed the transorbital lobotomy surgery for the first time in Washington D.C. on a housewife named Sallie Ellen Ionesco. (She had a socialist sounding name so no consent was required and beside she was poor.)

This transorbital lobotomy method did not require a neurosurgeon (saving lots of capitalal) and could be performed outside of an operating room without the use of anesthesia by using electroconvulsive therapy to induce seizure.
The modifications to his lobotomy allowed Freeman to broaden the use of the surgery, which could be performed in state mental hospitals throughout the United States that were overpopulated and understaffed.

In 1950 Walter Freeman's longtime partner James Watts left their practice and split from Freeman due to his opposition to the cruelty and overuse of the transorbital lobotomy. but he was probably a socialist.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 7:48:32 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 14, 2012 7:49:33 AM PDT
JagdTiger says:
That is absolutely horrible!!!

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 6:58:27 AM PDT
mornin' Jody

" Those blokes ( and sheilas, i s'pose) would sell ya a turd sandwich and tell ya they just et three of 'em."

Would explain why they're full of $ hit

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 6:43:43 AM PDT
Small chief : Well, that would depend on whether or not the Lobotomy scraps were approve by the FDA for use in packaged meats, sausages and hot dogs .

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 6:33:56 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 14, 2012 6:37:02 AM PDT
Smallchief says:
RCD says: a Swedish Television documentary reveals that Sweden lobotomized perhaps 4500 "undesirables," in some cases without the consent of their families:

Smallchief replies. Uhhhh. Many states in the US also lobotomized people 50 or so years ago. About 40,000. Perhaps you werent aware of that? Are lobotomies in the US attributable to socialism? Were we socialists in the 1950s? Or were lobotomies performed in the U.S. justifiable capitalistic lobotomies?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 6:19:01 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 14, 2012 1:44:59 PM PDT
Donny Rosa: see that's the thing about " satanism " it always looks good on paper - i mean you wannah take the word of a Poly science guy with a symbolic Bible Coded name like " Olof RUIN " over mine then fine, that's your business but thanks your lucky stars that the Swedes never conquered Scandanavia or the enite population of Norway wouldah been " lobitomized " by now !

Forget the Gubberment handouts and cheap Healthcare, the early retirement , the better wages, the better social security, safety, education, wealth distribution and life extension : you gottah be here in the the Good ol USA to get the lowdown on all the suicides, abortions and cavities caused by these atheisticalish socialisms :

" Unfortunately, sterilizations are just the tip of the iceberg. As the Irish Times and Agence-France Presse reported on April 7, 1998, a Swedish Television documentary reveals that Sweden lobotomized perhaps 4500 "undesirables," in some cases without the consent of their families:

Some 500 lobotomies were conducted on patients who were not from mental hospitals...including a seven-year-old boy in Umeaa in northern Sweden in 1949. Diagnosed as "mentally retarded, hyperactive", he died during surgery."...One man featured in the documentary, who was lobotomised in 1963, is now 67 and has no concept of time, still believing that his children are small. "

In part, the benevolent socialist government of Sweden hoped to discover whether "lobotomies could cure alcoholics and criminals."

" Sweden also "forced hundreds of `mentally deficient' Swedes to let their teeth rot after being force-fed candy in dental experiments."
Apparently these allegedly "benevolent" Swedish social democrats had a rotton sweet tooth. "

{ Plus they don't -far as i know - got Quiznos in Sweden - though they do have more Buldiburger owned McDonalds than any other European country -it's Olofs Lutefisks with rarakor or somthin - }

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 5:13:25 AM PDT
Dinkum, Shakey.

Those blokes ( and sheilas, i s'pose) would sell ya a turd sandwich and tell ya they just et three of 'em.

and they were delicious.

9r

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 5:09:07 AM PDT
G'day littlebig,

Hairy pwankum.

I think i was saying something near a page or so ago.

i still agree.

071V8

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 5:54:23 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 13, 2012 6:01:28 PM PDT
Ashwood says:
Jeremy Crockett says: So, in your estimation, would it have been better to support Iran? Neither Iran or Iraq?

Ash : The basic rule of thumb is support the nation being invaded rather than the aggressor (who used chemical weapons in the war BTW). However, Iran didn't need our help and probably wouldn't have wanted it.

Jeremy Crockett says: I, honestly, lean more towards isolationism at this point in my life. The problem with that is that we use oil.. a lot of it. And we buy it from people who hate us but are very happy to have our money and we seem to be equally happy to give it to them. If we wish to get off the Middle-Eastern teat, we need to open up drilling at home.

Ash : Or we could change our lifestyle to use less oil. It would be inconvenient, but inconvenience for us does not justify causing suffering to people who are already living in conditions worse than the inconvenience we would have to deal with. It would take a large investment of money, but we spend just as much or more on our military to defend the flow of resources. And it would be an INVESTMENT, every year things would get better, while the money we spend on the military only maintains the rather unpleasant status quo.

Jeremy Crockett says: International relations seem to be a very dirty business, indeed. Such is the fallen nature of mankind.

Ash : It will never be perfect, but we can work to make it better and more fair.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 5:40:34 PM PDT
ErikR says:
"Pirates are saintly by comparison."

I don't know about saintly, but at least they don't lie about what they're doing.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 5:37:56 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 14, 2012 9:20:10 AM PDT
Ashwood says:
Jeremy Crockett says: To posit that the Somali pirates are an example of capitalism is nonsense. Capitalism recognizes ownership of private property. Piracy does not.

Ash : The Somali pirates got started because respectable corporations were fishing in Somalian territorial waters and dumping toxic waste. "Illegally" of course, but nobody was concerned about enforcing the rules until it was westerners getting the short end of the stick.

*A United Nations report and several news sources have suggested that piracy off the coast of Somalia is caused in part by illegal fishing.[6][7] According to the DIW and the U.S. House Armed Services Committee, the dumping of toxic waste in Somali waters by foreign vessels has also severely constrained the ability of local fishermen to earn a living and forced many to turn to piracy instead.[5][8] 70 percent of the local coastal communities "strongly support the piracy as a form of national defense of the country's territorial waters", and the pirates believe they are protecting their fishing grounds and exacting justice and compensation for the marine resources stolen.[9][10][11] Some reports have suggested that, in the absence of an effective national coast guard following the outbreak of the civil war and the subsequent disintegration of the Armed Forces, local fishermen formed organized groups in order to protect their waters.* -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy_in_Somalia

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 4:51:52 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 13, 2012 4:53:31 PM PDT
and yet the "gangsters of Wall Street" are people who purchase stocks, sell stocks and trade them.

SD: Purchase selling and trading sound very sensible and proper... truth is the guys on wall street......

Buy stock with other peoples money, bundle it in derivatives and sell them to anyone they can get leverage on. Credit default swaps and toxic assets are the name of the game, lie through your teeth get your bonus , screw the clients and bail with a golden handshake. Even if a sound, well capitalized institute originated some credit default swap, the contract could be sold on multiple times (each time at a profit) to a non-so-sound company that can't cover the cost of default. CDS's toxic derivatives and straightforward lying about asses profits and liabilities. Pirates are saintly by comparison.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 1:07:09 PM PDT
In the context of this discussion, your post makes no sense. You are saying that theft is a legitimate aspect of capitalism and yet the "gangsters of Wall Street" are people who purchase stocks, sell stocks and trade them.

You'll need to do better than that, Brian.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 12:52:14 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 13, 2012 12:52:24 PM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
"Capitalism recognizes ownership of private property. Piracy does not."

So, when pirates steal someone's property, they then throw it overboard and sail away? No, Jeremy; pirates recognize private property just fine--they just use slightly more direct methods than the gangsters of Wall Street in obtaining it.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 12:11:55 PM PDT
The problem here becomes what is "decent" and "just"? Who, specifically, is defining those terms is of paramount consideration.

I see no problem with the government making sure that rat poop is not in the sausage.
The problem arises when one bureaucrat decides that anything over 16oz of Mountain Dew is poison.

To posit that the Somali pirates are an example of capitalism is nonsense. Capitalism recognizes ownership of private property. Piracy does not.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 11:09:40 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 13, 2012 11:12:47 AM PDT
Smallchief says:
Classical economics is quite clear on this point. Mankind is ingenious and avaricious. Classical economics is based on those two principles.

Marxist economics, by contrast, is based on the notion that mankind is perfectible. Wrong.

Therefore conservatives should accept that, mankind not being perfectible, ingenuity and avariciousness will prevail if mankind is left to his own devices. Government controls and regulations are needed to maintain a decent and just society.

An excess of ingenuity and avariciousness is unbridled capitalism, contemporary examples of which are Somali pirates and Mexican drug wars

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 11:06:33 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 13, 2012 11:06:51 AM PDT
ErikR says:
"The initial state would be as described in Genesis 1 & 2"

And reincarnation is described in the Bagavad Gita, but I somehow don't think you'll accept that.

"The evidence is within in us as we KNOW there is a way one OUGHT to behave and yet we continually fail to do what we OUGHT."

That's no evidence for a non-fallen initial state, it's only evidence that we, as humans, have the analytic capability to mentally construct an idealized state of how we could/should be. There is no evidence in history, archaeology or anthropology of such a state ever having existed.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 11:01:51 AM PDT
LW -- Are you under the illusion. JC, that no one has ever risen out of poverty, sometimes by themselves,
more often with aid.

No I'm not. I don't know where you got that idea from. I'm guessing you cannot dispute the accuracy of my statement so you only have insults to offer.

LW -- Great dig.

Looks like my guess is correct.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 10:59:34 AM PDT
ER -- people are sometimes ruled by their baser nature...

People are ruled by their selfish nature. This is true whether one is engaged in private enterprise or government enterprise. With very few radical exceptions, I do not personally know of many anarchists. Your point (The Conservative... idea that people, if left alone, will magically work things out seems contrary to the notion of a "fallen" mankind). Not magically, laws are in place to restrict our impulses. We do violate those laws and suffer the consequences. I do not personally know of any conservative that espouses lawlessness.

I think the bone of contention (if I am discerning the thrust of your posit rightly) is whether or not laissez faire capitalism is sufficiently self-correcting.

ER -- you need to describe the initial state and then provide evidence that it ever existed.

The initial state would be as described in Genesis 1 & 2. Wherein man enjoyed direct communion with the Living God. Genesis 3 details the Fall and the results of that choice. The evidence is within in us as we KNOW there is a way one OUGHT to behave and yet we continually fail to do what we OUGHT.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 10:22:07 AM PDT
You go Lillo.

Here's a chore.

I grew up from 2 years old to 20 years old in a Newcastle, New South Wales, suburb named Windale post(zip?)code 2306.

Look it up.

And i wouldn't choose different if I had it to do again.

071V8

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 10:17:49 AM PDT
Luv you, Lily

8.)

9r

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 10:16:07 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 13, 2012 10:25:17 AM PDT
But they DO, Jeremy.

OK add edit.

Do you not see the cycle, or pendulum, JaySee?

jaybee
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Religion forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  36
Total posts:  347
Initial post:  Jul 5, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 24, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions