(August 30, 2023 at 5:22 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: Not sure.  I find it hard to calculate what causes the most suffering overall over time.  If Nazis were the only ones feeding the hungry, would it be better to let the poor starve or support Nazis and end up with a holocaust.  Difficult conundrum.

I just hope we never reach such a stage where the only people ever willing to help anyone are harmful ideologies and their supporters.  I hope that human empathy and a decent socialist state would be enough.

What is clear, though, is that religion is harmful, feeding the poor is good, and you can do one without the other and so should ideally aim for that.  On that we can agree, at least, yes?

When presented with hypotheticals, the respondent is not generally permitted to add provisos of his own. Once more:

If ONLY religions organizations were allowed to feed the hungry, would you support letting poor people starve to death?

Boru

Addendum: Nazis are not part of the equation.

OK, so to rephrase without Nazis and just an example of a religious group:

Not sure. I find it hard to calculate what causes the most suffering overall over time. If the Taliban were the only ones feeding the hungry, would it be better to let the poor starve or support the Taliban and end up with a the mistreatment of women and gays. Difficult conundrum.

I just hope we never reach such a stage where the only people ever willing to help anyone are harmful ideologies and their supporters. I hope that human empathy and a decent socialist state would be enough.

What is clear, though, is that religion is harmful, feeding the poor is good, and you can do one without the other and so should ideally aim for that. On that we can agree, at least, yes?

(August 30, 2023 at 5:46 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: OK, so to rephrase without Nazis and just an example of a religious group:

Not sure.  I find it hard to calculate what causes the most suffering overall over time.  If the Taliban were the only ones feeding the hungry, would it be better to let the poor starve or support the Taliban and end up with a the mistreatment of women and gays.  Difficult conundrum.

I just hope we never reach such a stage where the only people ever willing to help anyone are harmful ideologies and their supporters.  I hope that human empathy and a decent socialist state would be enough.

What is clear, though, is that religion is harmful, feeding the poor is good, and you can do one without the other and so should ideally aim for that.  On that we can agree, at least, yes?

You said earlier that you would not want religious people to vote according to their religious dicta when it comes to caring for the poor. Now you say you’re ‘not sure’ if it’s okay for religious people to care for the poor.

Even though you keep dodging my question, I call that progress.

Boru

I wouldn't want religious people to vote according to their religious beliefs.

I wouldn't want them to do anything motivated by religion, including feeding the poor.

However, given the hypothetical choice between millions starving or supporting the Taliban my response is, 'I'm not sure'.

I'm glad you think you've accomplished something by having me say what I believe and think. That's cool. I disagree that I've dodged anything.

Talking of dodging, how do you respond to my questions to you?

(August 29, 2023 at 4:40 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: How (if at all) does your atheism, theism, materialism, whatever, inform your political opinions?

My atheism does not inform my political opinions. Quite the opposite in fact.

(long time no see, folks)

(August 30, 2023 at 6:23 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: I wouldn't want religious people to vote according to their religious beliefs.

I wouldn't want them to do anything motivated by religion, including feeding the poor.

However, given the hypothetical choice between millions starving or supporting the Taliban my response is, 'I'm not sure'.

I'm glad you think you've accomplished something by having me say what I believe and think.  That's cool.  I disagree that I've dodged anything.

Talking of dodging, how do you respond to my questions to you?

I’m not dodging them, I’m ignoring them. Huge difference.

Boru

Is it a huge difference? Meh. It doesn't matter.

Fair enough.

Why are you ignoring them?

(August 30, 2023 at 3:11 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: No, you misunderstand.  

My key value here isn't people who strongly feel their own view is right are ok to have their view, it's that my view specifically held by me only is right.  That can't be wielded against me nor can I be hypocritical with such a view.  Special pleading I already admitted to, and dismissed as irrelevant.

I'm not appealing to personal morality.  I saying X is right, society should be based on X not Y.  There is no appeal to anything except my own opinion.

"[...] my key value here is 'my view is right'."

Not only do you need to demonstrate that your views on anything are really right, you also need to justify imposing them by law. Otherwise you look like any other self-deluded twatwaffle.

I'm re-reading The Gulag Archipelago right now. You have no idea how similar your thinking is to the revtribunals. You probably don't know what that is at all.

(August 30, 2023 at 4:23 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: By supporting the hungry with a religious organization you supported religion.  Same as if I helped in a 'insert ideology here' foodbank I would, indirectly, be supporting 'ideology'.

Bullshit. I gave precisely $0.0 to any religious organization. I forced no people to attend church.

(August 30, 2023 at 3:35 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: Do you think, as someone whose WV is reason, that society would be better without religion?

Of course. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

(August 30, 2023 at 2:45 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: Murder can easily be part of a WV.  

Yes, I believe putting a religious WV into political action is bad for humanity.  I believe lots of things are bad for humanity and would rather they didn't exist.

Why do you get to act on your beliefs and they don't? And none of this according to your standards bullshit because that's just another way of claiming that your beliefs have privileges that theirs don't.

Do you even understand what hypocrisy is?

The religious think that your standards and worldview are dangerous just like you see theirs.