You DO listen to nazi bands though such as Storm.
Bruce's Bunker
- Thread starter John Uskglass
- Start date
Corpse
Mildly Dipped
That does not mean I share their radical views.
There are lots of people like Bruce I've met. Hes really not that bad though, getting drunk and playing with firearms and explosives while making fun of people you don't like is hardly the worst thing people do in their free time. I'm pretty amused by how badass they think they are though.
I'm usually pretty amused with the American obsession of firearms as well, and these guys are a good example of why. I own and use guns as well, but those guys just seem to like shooting their guns because it makes a loud noise. They are like little children.
When will they ever really need even half of the weapons they own and think they know how to use? Most likely never, although in my mind, thats not a bad thing. I'm pretty glad I live in a country where the neccessity of owning and using weapons like that is pretty low on the list of priorities.
also
Hmmm.
I'm usually pretty amused with the American obsession of firearms as well, and these guys are a good example of why. I own and use guns as well, but those guys just seem to like shooting their guns because it makes a loud noise. They are like little children.
When will they ever really need even half of the weapons they own and think they know how to use? Most likely never, although in my mind, thats not a bad thing. I'm pretty glad I live in a country where the neccessity of owning and using weapons like that is pretty low on the list of priorities.
also
ConstipatedCraprunner said:
Karl Marx said:
Hmmm.
Corpse said:
Maybe you establish them, dunno. Either way you should stop listening.
Why do you own firearms, Lauren?
And Karl Marx was teh nasty in comparisons. He even exceeds me it seems.
Corpse
Mildly Dipped
Don't see why, I don't care what they sing about.
The religious stuff, yeah.Lord Inquisitor Baboonius said:
The morality of actions and/or opinions is entirely subjective, so the concept of knowing makes little sense in that context.
Well, see your discussion with Corpse about the morality of listening to radical music.
Butters said:
I'm sure Descartes would love to hear that.
Whoops! Was he the physics geek that invented that whole "modern optic science" thing?
He was a great mathemagician too. Probably a pr0n fiend though.
Obviously, you are right. I mean, the conclusion that the goal is to get rid of mankind from...ehh....what, exactly? Where do you conclude this rational thought from?Ehe. Possibly, yeah. But this is completely beside the point. The point was that goals were love (sex) or power, and hence not the destruction of mankind. Get to a point.
More or less, yes. Why? Because man needs some form of goals to base their actions, rational or not, on. And you can't derive goals via rationality (not correctly, anyway).
PS: Philosophy is only mental masturbation to those convinced they've found the answer to life, or convinced that the answer is impossible to find.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Commissar Lauren said:
Unfortunitly, bruce seems to be the sterotypical redneck. Also unfortunite is that the sterotype is based on a true segment of the population.
Agreed, they treat deadly tools (which can be fun, true) as toys. Their disregard for firearms saftey (such as the pic on their site showing them drinking while shooting) is quite annoying, as all of the people I know that regulary go shooting take saftey quite seriously, and it was part of how I was raised with regards to gun saftey.Commissar Lauren said:
Commissar Lauren said:
Agreed, although its not even a prioriity, but rather a luxury.
Commissar Lauren said:
Amazing, I never thought I would find myself agreeing with Marx.................
calculon000
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
ConstipatedCraprunner said:
You're telling me the USA isn't violent society?
Give me ANY society that doesn't/didn't have some sort of religion.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
You call the palestenian society peaceful CCR ?
How about India ?
Moderate/tolernt religous societies are peaceful, you cant ignore those peskey radicals.
How about India ?
Moderate/tolernt religous societies are peaceful, you cant ignore those peskey radicals.
The Vault Dweller
always looking for water.
PsychoSniper said:
THANK YOU!
Its all about how they view others. If they believe their "way" is not only the only way to salvation, but that other "ways" represent evil that must be stopped then their will be violence or at least bad-feelings. You can have a "way" to peace...just practice it yourself. After all if everyone else is a sinner then them living their sinful life is a good example as to how NOT to live, so the religious have no reason to try to convert one another.
I cant think of a time one of the prophet's attempted conversion in a violent way. They all just spread the word they felt was right and LET the people COME to them. They never shoved it down anyone's throat as that would go against being nice...
Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
calculon000
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
I'm with PsychoSniper and The_Vault_Dweller on this one.
quietfanatic
Ancient One
CCR, are you saying that human's should rationally destroy ourselves because we are greedy, selfish, short sighted, ignorant and flawed people (who will probably destroy our selves anyway), or that God would want us to die for some strange reason? Most people want to survive and succeed, even if their actions to not meet their intentions. You are trying to take the position of a personified Earth given human morality (probably christian too).
It is obvious that people have spiritual needs, which are expressed in different ways, whether it be through relationships with absent all-knowing powers, abstract concepts or even other people, be it a partner or a cult figure (like Hitler) who is more similar to the traditional monotheistic God. However, I see all these systems of beliefs and values as part of humanity and useful to people at different times, in their different manifestations. As long as they do not try to force their beliefs on to me, then I do not care much for what they think, even if most of it is stupid superstition with no grounding in fact.
The danger is that people are nearly always affected by power, and people with the same beliefs will usually form a hierarchy, with god(s) or whatever at the top, and then the high priest, priests etc. going down, usually leaving the normal citizen down the bottom. The priesthood is corrupted by power, and tries to gain more politically. It is able to pacify the masses through illogical, blind faith. In an almost unchallenged position of power, it can redefine the boundaries of the religion and even go beyond or reinterpret scripture. Thus organized religion is there to be abused and this is dangerous because now faith and a lack of reason can hurt me. There is little room for negotiation, because the fundamentalists are powerful. They act radically and mercilessly in the name of their religion and are not challenged because it is easier to just accept than to challenge and actually think things through logically. The masses ar infected with religious zeal and unquestioningly support those who are really just manipulating them for personal gain. The strength of the religion lies in its inability to compromise, but this is what makes it vulnerable to abuse. If the dogma (and superstition) is challenged, such as through moderation or reinterpretation of the scripture, the faithful risk splitting into a thousand warring factions. This slippery slope into fundamentalism or extreme conservatism is far too easily created and its effects such as loss of freedom are well known e.g. the Spanish Inquisition.
In most wars, religion is mostly a morale booster and pretext for gaining power and territory, and is mostly unimportant as a motivation for hostility, compared to the competition for trade and resources. However if factions do emerge or different cultures meet they can engage in terribly bloody religious wars where all logic is lost and the emphasis on power sees religious orientation taking precedence over mutual well being. Normal people's passions are inflamed by their beliefs and they are driven to acts of incredible cruelty and evil because they are convinced that the heathens are worth nothing. If they were just fighting for territory they would be less likely to have such an intense hatred of each other.
CCR would know, as I think he is descended from the Huguenots, how religious belief can create situations of illogical and disgusting horror. The competition between the French Protestants and the Catholics had been increasing, and hostility was high. This culminated in the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, in which thousands of Protestants were murdered with unimaginable ferocity, just because they had a slightly different system of beliefs. This sparked years of chaos and war in France, which ended after much bloodshed when people finally realized that it was best to tolerate other's perspectives and work together. Otherwise all that would happen would be the loss of power, peace and security for all those involved. The conflict was (like all wars) a stupid waste of life, but it was made all the worse and more fierce by the influence of religion and extremism.
The paradox is that measures which were designed to strengthen a religion and control people eventually also control the fundamentalists of the priesthood who have gained supremacy, and they make self-destructive decisions based on the same dogma as everyone else, with little reason or logic. Stupidity is now official and it is very difficult to stop.
To be fair, it is not that religion is inherently bad, but that it makes it easy to control and disempower people, so that they do not think for themselves. It is people's fault for abusing the system, but I dislike religion because it is too easy for extremism to gain power and support, and use dogma and faith when it is false. Religions would be safe from such things if most people were reasonable, tolerant, intelligent and selfless. But they aren't.
Any sort of extremism or system of authority is equally dangerous if it works in a similar way. The cults of Stalin and Hitler were similar to religion in that unquestioning belief in the leader created a dangerous fanaticism, which although closer to loyalty than usual, was still a manifestation of spirituality. Stalin's religion had a theocracy which calls its self secular because it doesn't believe in a creator and the values of desert nomads, so much as in a powerful ideology, Communism. Stalin tried to become a living God for propaganda purposes and he achieved devotion in too many people. Communism was a religion in a new socio-political context and a new form, but with the same problems. He didn't kill millions of people because he was an Atheist but because he was a power-hungry, paranoid dictator who had no qualms about removing any possible threat. If he did believe in God, he would most likely not have changed a bit. If any ruthless person in a position of power has thousands of enemies and the means to dispose of them, whether they read Jesus, Mohammed or Lenin, they will do so. Just as Islamic terrorists would happily use an atomic weapon to kill millions of those American infidels.
Actually, Hitler believed that he was the chosen one by divine providence who would lead Germany to glory. Again the totalitarian version of religion was useful, but this time he eventually started to believe his own propaganda. He really was invincible and infallible, and there was no way he could lose. He had gone totally nuts really and God was not doing anything to stop the Russians from smashing through his defenses.
"God is on my side" "No he's on my side" "Well I have 20 gods on my side"
God(s) just cannot be on everyone's side. This arrogance and lack of reason comes from man, but is given power through organised religion.
It is obvious that people have spiritual needs, which are expressed in different ways, whether it be through relationships with absent all-knowing powers, abstract concepts or even other people, be it a partner or a cult figure (like Hitler) who is more similar to the traditional monotheistic God. However, I see all these systems of beliefs and values as part of humanity and useful to people at different times, in their different manifestations. As long as they do not try to force their beliefs on to me, then I do not care much for what they think, even if most of it is stupid superstition with no grounding in fact.
The danger is that people are nearly always affected by power, and people with the same beliefs will usually form a hierarchy, with god(s) or whatever at the top, and then the high priest, priests etc. going down, usually leaving the normal citizen down the bottom. The priesthood is corrupted by power, and tries to gain more politically. It is able to pacify the masses through illogical, blind faith. In an almost unchallenged position of power, it can redefine the boundaries of the religion and even go beyond or reinterpret scripture. Thus organized religion is there to be abused and this is dangerous because now faith and a lack of reason can hurt me. There is little room for negotiation, because the fundamentalists are powerful. They act radically and mercilessly in the name of their religion and are not challenged because it is easier to just accept than to challenge and actually think things through logically. The masses ar infected with religious zeal and unquestioningly support those who are really just manipulating them for personal gain. The strength of the religion lies in its inability to compromise, but this is what makes it vulnerable to abuse. If the dogma (and superstition) is challenged, such as through moderation or reinterpretation of the scripture, the faithful risk splitting into a thousand warring factions. This slippery slope into fundamentalism or extreme conservatism is far too easily created and its effects such as loss of freedom are well known e.g. the Spanish Inquisition.
In most wars, religion is mostly a morale booster and pretext for gaining power and territory, and is mostly unimportant as a motivation for hostility, compared to the competition for trade and resources. However if factions do emerge or different cultures meet they can engage in terribly bloody religious wars where all logic is lost and the emphasis on power sees religious orientation taking precedence over mutual well being. Normal people's passions are inflamed by their beliefs and they are driven to acts of incredible cruelty and evil because they are convinced that the heathens are worth nothing. If they were just fighting for territory they would be less likely to have such an intense hatred of each other.
CCR would know, as I think he is descended from the Huguenots, how religious belief can create situations of illogical and disgusting horror. The competition between the French Protestants and the Catholics had been increasing, and hostility was high. This culminated in the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, in which thousands of Protestants were murdered with unimaginable ferocity, just because they had a slightly different system of beliefs. This sparked years of chaos and war in France, which ended after much bloodshed when people finally realized that it was best to tolerate other's perspectives and work together. Otherwise all that would happen would be the loss of power, peace and security for all those involved. The conflict was (like all wars) a stupid waste of life, but it was made all the worse and more fierce by the influence of religion and extremism.
The paradox is that measures which were designed to strengthen a religion and control people eventually also control the fundamentalists of the priesthood who have gained supremacy, and they make self-destructive decisions based on the same dogma as everyone else, with little reason or logic. Stupidity is now official and it is very difficult to stop.
To be fair, it is not that religion is inherently bad, but that it makes it easy to control and disempower people, so that they do not think for themselves. It is people's fault for abusing the system, but I dislike religion because it is too easy for extremism to gain power and support, and use dogma and faith when it is false. Religions would be safe from such things if most people were reasonable, tolerant, intelligent and selfless. But they aren't.
Any sort of extremism or system of authority is equally dangerous if it works in a similar way. The cults of Stalin and Hitler were similar to religion in that unquestioning belief in the leader created a dangerous fanaticism, which although closer to loyalty than usual, was still a manifestation of spirituality. Stalin's religion had a theocracy which calls its self secular because it doesn't believe in a creator and the values of desert nomads, so much as in a powerful ideology, Communism. Stalin tried to become a living God for propaganda purposes and he achieved devotion in too many people. Communism was a religion in a new socio-political context and a new form, but with the same problems. He didn't kill millions of people because he was an Atheist but because he was a power-hungry, paranoid dictator who had no qualms about removing any possible threat. If he did believe in God, he would most likely not have changed a bit. If any ruthless person in a position of power has thousands of enemies and the means to dispose of them, whether they read Jesus, Mohammed or Lenin, they will do so. Just as Islamic terrorists would happily use an atomic weapon to kill millions of those American infidels.
Actually, Hitler believed that he was the chosen one by divine providence who would lead Germany to glory. Again the totalitarian version of religion was useful, but this time he eventually started to believe his own propaganda. He really was invincible and infallible, and there was no way he could lose. He had gone totally nuts really and God was not doing anything to stop the Russians from smashing through his defenses.
"God is on my side" "No he's on my side" "Well I have 20 gods on my side"
God(s) just cannot be on everyone's side. This arrogance and lack of reason comes from man, but is given power through organised religion.