It’s great to say these things and to hear someone say it. But also I wonder what the expectation is when you tell this to a fossil fuel company. Do you expect the CEOs to make a moral faceturn and close down their company entirely? Because that is in the end what we need. For fossil fuels not to go down, not for some trees to be planted to make up for carbon emissions, not a tax, but for them to literally not exist. And I don’t see how this will work with a free market and some guilty conscience. How this would work without a ruling and strong governments closing them down entirely.
Carbon tax is actually the best way to gradually get rid of fossil fuels without setting the whole economy on fire. That is why it is resisted and lobbied against far more than any other measure, such as electric car subsidies and why it probably will never happen.
The expectation is for other people (voters) to hear these things, realize that there are some (and can potentially be more) politicians who will do what is in their best interest, and change their voting patterns.
Many people do not believe things can change for the better because they have literally not seen anything in society change for the better in their entire lives.
The last time I saw something actually change for the better in a major way was the legalization of gay marriage. Since then it’s been nothing but manufacturing consent to wars, predatory tax laws that favor the rich, dismantling of protections against monopolies, dismantling of consumer protection laws, stagnant wages, failing to meet or entirely dismissing climate change goals, rolling back reproductive rights 50 years, etc. We’ve recently seen Biden’s Dept of Labor fight back a little bit against the economic stuff, but we’ve been backsliding since Reagan - not that we were really on the up-and-up before. And as for the other stuff, it doesn’t look good.
Voter apathy is a big issue because, even though voting is likely not sufficient for significant societal change, it is necessary for it to occur.
While discussing the imminent climate disaster with my elderly parents, they said they don’t care because they won’t live long enough to see it.
I asked, “What about your kids and grandkids?”
They asked, “Do you believe in God?”
I said, “No.”
They said, “If you Believe in God, then you’ll get to go to Heaven when you die.”
I don’t believe in God, so I won’t be going to Heaven (which I also don’t believe in), but if I did believe in God and Heaven, and expected to go there, why the hell should I and my children have to live through a post-apocalyptic shitshow before we die?
For the record, from what the church they made me go to taught me about God and Heaven, they should probably not expect to make the cut either. The God I was taught about was pretty anti-fascist. Kind of a socialist really.
What does believing in God have to do with the climate disaster? Are they saying to just accept ir, believe in God and you’ll go to heaven? That’s their answer?
God also did a lot of fucked up shit, like flooding the world because people didn’t pray to him enough. Yeah, nothing better than a vengeful God committing genocide.
The great flood “myths” exist in literally every culture. Not really surprising considering what we have discovered about the Younger Dryas Period. I wouldn’t blame that solely on EL/ Yahweh.
You see. I know the atheist movement ran high on Reddit and flamed out.
I’m typically the guy that’s very live and let live and if you asked me if there’s any danger to believing in a God I’d just say, “you do you”.
However, we get people that are in control or are being controlled that are making decisions that affect everyone based on this stuff. Stem cell research, abortions, sex work, gay rights, porn ID, climate change, evolution … like I just don’t know what to think.
People should be allowed to believe what they will, but never allowed to use their religion as an argument for why a certain policy must or must not be enacted. Separation of church and state is key
Religion is fine when you’re sticking to your own beliefs. The second it is forced on others, or making other people follow your religion’s rules, then we have a problem.
Your elderly parents should really check their God Positioning System to see if attitudes like “fuck my neighbours, fuck all future generations, I got mine” will set them on a course to Heaven…
Christianity is about as transactionary as it get since the Romans adopted the religion. You believe in Christ = heaven. That’s all there is and had always been.
Sorry about having to deal with that. I was raised in a similar environment and can very much empathize. At even an early age I started pointing out that what they were trying to teach me and what the book they told me to read were in complete opposition to one another. That didn’t go over well, and it continues to not go over well.
Thing is, according to their own scripture, God doesn’t need you to believe in him/them… just that you live righteously (a word that has different requirements depending whether you are ethnically Jewish or a gentile). Basically, be kind and generous to everyone, because God takes your treatment of others - especially the disadvantaged - very personally. Whether you believe in God (any flavor) or not, that’s just good universal philosophy… and one that Christians don’t just refuse to follow, but spit on.
So spitting on the futures of your own children and grandchildren… wow, according to their own “holy scripture” that’s a big problem.
I dunno the Bible passages I have read made me think god was a bit of a bipolar asshole and any entity higher than a human that went against god for the sake of humans would be punished too.
that said I also didnt get the impression any of these types of people would make the cut either.
I was listening to an NPR segment a couple months ago that talked about how a lot of Evangelicals don’t care about the environment dying. They actually embrace it as a quicker route to rapture or some such weird shit.
Honestly I don’t think climate change will wipe out mankind. It would just make everything crappy for everyone and will cause a lot of death and suffering.
Didn’t God instruct us to take care of the earth right after we were made?
Genesis 1:28 ESV
And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Genesis 2:15 ESV
The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.
Shouldn’t it be an incentive to take care of God’s creation with respect and love because He saw that it was good?
Genesis 1:12 ESV
The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
It seems more rational to exploit the earth since you only live once if there is no creator and you are an atheist versus believing there is a Creator and adhering to a religious belief that teaches that the Creator thought His creation was good.
Most Christians would rather believe in escapism and have cruel contempt rather than stewardship and kindness and love and acceptance. Even if it is part of the gospel we read.
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
Also, you expect them to know this because you assume they can actually read, which is required to know this. Instead they get some guy on every sunday who tells them who to vote for if they believe in god so that they can be tax exempt.
Always remember what religion actually is, a tool to control the minds of the people. Imagine being told your whole life that if you act a certain way that you will be rewarded with paradise after you die, and to believe and worship an entity whom you will never see or even have evidence of it’s existence? Sounds absolutely fucking nuts to me, especially considering the fact that over the course of history, all of these religions would kill you if you didn’t follow them in the lands of which they ruled, and oftentimes outside of that, all in the name of “god”
I think it’s a bit of a strawman to assume that churches are just political people looking to be tax exempt.
And I wouldn’t say there isn’t any evidence either. There was clearly a guy around called Jesus who was crucified and people testified to seeing him after he died, many in groups. And many of those people who testified about it died on that fact.
There are also many solid arguments as to why a higher power exists. After researching this subject, I came to the conclusion that those arguments for God are more compelling than the ones against, and Christianity carries the most solid and watertight explanation to who God is. I got baptised a few months ago, and the transformation this has made to my life is beyond words.
I’d love to hear those arguments. Are they just words or has someone presented evidence that God exists? I’m very happy for you if Christianity makes you happy. I hope you’ll be one of the Christians who actually lives the way Jesus taught people they should live, and not one of the ones who thinks they can live however they want and then say the magic words to go to heaven after a life of being a shitty person.
ones who thinks they can live however they want and then say the magic words to go to heaven after a life of being a shitty person.
I would actually argue that’s not Christianity, because the Bible never talks about it. Yes, repentance exists, but if you were actually truly repentant, then you would try not to be a disgusting person. There aren’t any specific magic words either, you can say what you want to others, but God knows your heart.
I think the origin of this comes from Luther’s idea of Sola Fide - justification by faith alone. However, this was moreso made as a response to the Roman Catholic idea of venial sins, mortal sins, works based salvation and legalism in general. He didn’t mean literally faith alone, but he meant that if you had faith and followed Jesus’ commandments with a true and repentant heart, you would have assurance of heaven, and not need to worry about accidental unconfessed sins or purgatory. As St James writes in his epistle:
James 1:26-27 ESV
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
James 2:18-19 ESV
But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!
As for arguments for God (not counting the whole Jesus thing as well)
Infinite numbers exist, infinity exists. For example, pi has an infinite amount of numbers following it that are preset in the laws of the universe. But the universe is finite, so such concepts can only exist in the mind of an infinite, ie, God.
Morality - We know the difference between right and wrong. For some reason, we think stealing from someone else is wrong even though it would make us better our survival. Or torturing a puppy. People who become ruthless have to override a moral instinct first to do that. If there is no God, then morality is subjective and what we say or do isn’t right or wrong. I am not saying that atheists aren’t moral, because they are as morality is naturally implanted in us by God.
Fine tuning - The chances of the universe existing as it is was so indescribably small, that I find it hard to believe this all came across by chance. I do believe in evolution, I’m not a young earth creationist. But I believe the whole process was designed to play out as it did.
Depravity - The Bible constantly talks about people falling into depravity and sin, and this is a pattern we see in the real world. We have people destroying the planet for profit and wars going on in Palestine where civilians are just murdered. Also past atrocities like the holocaust. I can see why God is angry at us and will judge us.
There are also many solid arguments as to why a higher power exists.
Bullshit. You can’t provide any, because they do not exist.
After researching this subject, I came to the conclusion that those arguments for God are more compelling than the ones against, and Christianity carries the most solid and watertight explanation to who God is.
What you call “research” I call cherry-picking until you find that which confirms what you already want it to.
I wish you’d looked for therapy instead of a religious pablum to find your peace.
Let me ask you an equally absurd question: Can you prove an invisible, intangible, pink elephant doesn’t exist? If not then it must right? Does that sound like reasonable logic to you?
But did this invisible intangible pink elephant come from a virgin, committed no wrong, performed miracles, was executed, then rose again from the dead and later on ascended into heaven?
Sure did. He also has three heads, controls your dreams, and lives in your underwear drawer when you’re not looking. I saw him. There, I’ve given just as much proof that the pink elephant exists as you have that your God exists. Also FYI the concept of infinity is not evidence that the specific book you choose to follow that was written by humans, not even that long ago on the scale of earth history, was in any way influenced by a higher power.
Do you have 500 people to attest to it and are you willing to be executed for your attestation?
Also FYI the concept of infinity is not evidence that the specific book you choose to follow that was written by humans, not even that long ago on the scale of earth history, was in any way influenced by a higher power.
This is not how the burden of proof works. “God exists” is an assertion that requires evidence to prove. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. It is not up to us to disprove something that doesn’t have evidence to support it in the first place, just like you don’t have to disprove that there’s an invisible purple dragon living in my garage when I claim there is. The claim never had any merit in the first place, so it should be dismissed.
I’ve been impressed by her ability to actually get things done. She’s been getting community programs funded in her district that accomplish Green New Deal goals but doing it silently without attaching Green New Deal wording anywhere. She got other representatives running similar programs in the same way. I respect someone who is willing to speak up but also believes in their mission enough to do it quietly if that’s what it takes.
She’s great, and she’s one of the few Democrats capable of hard hitting soundbites like this one. Buuuuut, she’s super controversial due to the constant attacks by the right. In a way, she rose to fame because of that, but they might have set her up to fail on any stage larger than her home district. I would love to be proven wrong there though.
She’s great, and she’s one of the few Democrats capable of hard hitting soundbites like this one. Buuuuut, she’s super controversial due to the constant attacks by the right.
Some of those attacks are even coming from Republicans.
The right can make anyone controversial in the right. Because they’re detached from reality. Completely untethered. We can’t really worry about that. I think if she continues in the path she’s currently on. Supporting labor and actually working in her community. That can go a long ways towards taking the name recognition she was gifted and building an even better structure on top of it.
She’ll never get the misogynist and the fascist that’s for sure. But she doesn’t have to. She just has to be better than what we’re used to.
… and this is where NPR and the New York Times step in and tell their audience they need to vote for Adam Schiff because AOC is too controversial and can’t win a general.
Look at how they handled Bernie '16 and drove Biden '20 in the primaries.
While NPR does have a definitive and visible right wing bias. They are much better than any other outlets. Though they will still entertain false questions in the name of pursuing a narrative.
I think the New York Times Etc have largely ruined what reputations they had. That we should never rely on a publicly traded company to inform us. The moment any company becomes publicly traded marks the decline and ultimate death knell of their reputation and reliability. Because even if the family or original owners retain a controlling amount. Eventually someone won’t care enough to hold on to it as tightly or it will be given away / diluted to the point it becomes meaningless. And then the shareholders will take over. And their bottom line is money not truth. Which is where a lot of the current problem resides. Too much focus on money and how to make more of it. With very little concern for facts or truth.
Add comment