Commentary on 9/11 atheist lawsuit

[TheouLive]

No you don't. What the hell were you reading?

That in the same way atheists are not considerate for other faiths in their statements, so individuals who are racist are especially not considerate, and intentionally offend other ethnicity's.

Define negative. My impression is that this world would be a rather stagnant place if we all went around disapproving of each other's negativity. Disapproval is negativity in and of itself. Let's be realistic here.

If you hurt anyone else physically, emotionally or mentally that is negative. If you are needlessly selfish, that is negative. If you abide in ignorance of knowledge, that is negative. However the last two latter are really only negative to the individual. I prioritize the first sentence as what should universally be seen as negative.

How does one make something a right for all of humanity? Are you suggesting world government of half-assers who are anti intangibles?

Sooner or later, a world government or collaboration on a global level will be needed to solve issues for the very survival of humanity on the basis that humanity is a growing population and we have limited resources.

[Shell B]

That in the same way atheists are not considerate for other faiths in their statements, so individuals who are racist are especially not considerate, and intentionally offend other ethnicity's.

So basically you can take meaning from a statement that wasn't there, have me question it and then use that to imply character traits that I don't possess. If you are comparing atheists to racists, I fear (hope), you will not make many friends here.

If you hurt anyone else physically, emotionally or mentally that is negative.

So, you propose that everyone be against anything that does the above? This is not feasible. Say a rapist wants to have at me (a stretch, I know), it pains him physically to deny himself sex, which is true for all of us. Should I feel bad if he doesn't get the chance to rape me because it was a negative thing for him? And if he does, then it is negative for me. You see? Opposing something as intangible as "negativity" is quite silly.

I prioritize the first sentence as what should universally be seen as negative.

Your first meaning the ridiculously absurd one I quoted. Yes, you shouldn't hurt people if you can avoid it, but sometimes, either way, something negative happens. You can't be so vague in your antiisms without eventually hating everyone. I really can think of no other word save silly.

Sooner or later, a world government or collaboration on a global level will be needed to solve issues for the very survival of humanity on the basis that humanity is a growing population and we have limited resources.

Oh, goodness. I can see it now. "World government bans negativity!" That's a headline I never want to write.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

However I feel the only way we can improve humanity is by making compassion a right.

The royal we? From where did you get the impression that others give a flying flunggle about your values and personal agenda? I certainly don't. I don't allow others to define my moral values and will resist/ignore anyone who tries. What arrogance.

Nor do I think it's possible to make compassion a right: Not only is there no common definition, I'd be fascinated to learn how you plan to change human beings from self interested animals into living Buddhas.

Your shallow New Age wankery is starting to get on my nerves.

[KichigaiNeko]

However I feel the only way we can improve humanity is by making compassion a right.

The royal we? From where did you get the impression that others give a flying flunggle about your values and personal agenda? I certainly don't. I don't allow others to define my moral values and will resist/ignore anyone who tries. What arrogance.

Nor do I think it's possible to make compassion a right: Not only is there no common definition, I'd be fascinated to learn how you plan to change human beings from self interested animals into living Buddhas.

Your shallow New Age wankery is starting to get on my nerves.

You have more patience today than I do pad.

What a tool!

[Faith No More]

If God intervened all the time, no one would learn. The life experience is meant to entail both the positive and negative. Only through negative experiences do you learn the most. Thus, humanity was given quite the lesson on that day.

By that logic, if I was to see a woman being raped, I could justify not intervening because it would be a 'learning experience' for her.

Also, why don't you ask the families of the victims of 9/11 if the lessoned learned was worth the cost.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

You have more patience today than I do pad.

What a tool!

Oh thank you; I thought I was being a bit harsh.

Apparently not. (that phrase always reminds me of the scene in Harry Potter one where he's buying his wand )

[Shell B]

Wait, did the new person just say negative experiences are the best way to learn? I'm pretty sure her/his other thread has something along the lines of "negativity should be banned." What a contradictory person.

[Cinjin]

Wait, did the new person just say negative experiences are the best way to learn? I'm pretty sure her/his other thread has something along the lines of "negativity should be banned." What a contradictory person.

He's all over the fucking map - every thread, every sentence. I don't know how he has time to breath during the day. It's like he's trying to cover every possible outcome of the human condition.

[5thHorseman]

What type of secularism is the USA? An occasional one?

Serious question. I have seen so many things about prayers in public schools etc.

[Faith No More]

Wait, did the new person just say negative experiences are the best way to learn? I'm pretty sure her/his other thread has something along the lines of "negativity should be banned." What a contradictory person.

I noticed that too. I'm not sure this guy has really thought his arguments out.