How does anyone know what a guy in a closed van shouted in the middle of traffic? I call bullshit.

that sounds like your personal bible xD

not all religions are anthropocentric

some don’t even require deities

i also... differentiate suffering from pain. pain being the physical thing you can’t do a thing about, suffering the mental torment and gnashing of teeth— guilt and remorse, fear and anxiety, etc etc

i get your rage but it seems to me it’s oversimplified and oversimplifying

i know im doing the same to your arguments btw— my excuse is i’m typing this in short breaks from work on a clock

again, you are making the false assumption that when one religion is described the person is referring to ALL religions.

I define a religion as a set of dogmatic beliefs, codified by a select group of "chosen" pendejos, created to "help" humans worship a "god" of some sort.

Buddhism, in it's initial form, was not and is still not, a religion. Philosophies about how to live life are NOT religion. Confucianism is not a religion. Veganism is not a religion.

If you read the Bible without the early brainwashing to set up catholic religion's lies, you can see that Jesus preached the dissolution of organized religion, the dissolution's of the priesthood/rabbinical order that kept the poor and low under their control by force feeding them what "YHVH" supposedly wanted from them. Jesus even preached the dissolution of the family structure, basically the same type of caste system that India is trying to erase, where what you were born into is what you were to be and what your children were to be. Jesus said all that shit was WACK, and the RELIGION/STATE killed him out of fear for their deep pockets and cushy whores.

and of course, just a few hundred years or so later, a bullshit organized religion full of priests and a head infallible Pope aligns w3ith the Roman emperor Constantine to make this new religion the "state" religion, and the hundreds of genocides, wars, massacres, persecutions, and terror commited in the name of Jesus began.

IT IS ALL A LIE. we are all, each of us, together in this life, and we are all, each of us, deeply alone in this life AT THE SAME TIME. That is life. There is no need for religion to explain it.

According to police reports he yelled "Allahu akbar" when he stepped out of the truck with a bb gun and a pellet rifle, trying to commit suicide-by-cop. he got his ass shot. The press headlines are that he yelled it AS he killed people. gotta follow the script!

remember when the white kid yelled "God is great!" while murdering 8 people in a church bible study?

ahhhh... that’s a poor definition though. you need a better word. organized religion? institutionalized religion? something like that. in my earlier post i called them “cults.” not saying it’s a great definition, just a way to differentiate.

but before i was talking about religion in the broadest sense, i.e., the ideas and practices that connect/reconnect one to “the big other” as zizek calls it (ha ha ha, “the big other”— so accurate).

this is a necessity of the human mind though. because the human mind is limited and grasps only so much of “reality,” it needs some sort of additional crutch or support to make sense of the rest of it all.

so throughout our evolution we have developed sets of beliefs and practices and rituals to help us cope with our limited understanding, each with different levels of ridiculousness. but some are also somewhat sensible and useful, in whole or parts. hence there is a practical value in them regardless of their truth value as william james argued.

now, whether some predatory pendejo exploits that human need socially and commercially for power and wealth is another story. that’s the baby/bathwater problem. distinctions are important.

and i get that you mean a certain word in a certain way and someone else means it differently which is why it’s important to clarify definitions upfront. i now get your definition of religion, but it’s not mine. though we hate the same things, we call them something else. hence the misundertandings.

eta: my point is that the need of the human mind to make sense of the big unknown and connect with it is not garbage. but we often go wrong the wrong way about fulfilling this need no doubt.

eta:


that is a religious statement, btw. (per my definition anyway). eta: because it provides an answer to religious questions. and moreover, it does so categorically and without any hint of doubt.

And how about the white kid who flushed the dog down the toilet?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eZPCQB1Qyk

DICK!! (Him, not you).

You realize that you’re describing the *religion* of Rob Instigator here. You have everything except organization and a group component. Get one person to agree with you, talk about how you agree, and boom, you’ve got yourself a religion, baby.

You’re saying this like it’s a fact, but it’s not. I’ve heard compelling arguments from Philosophy profs that American baseball can be viewed as a religion.

The strict definition of religion is constantly in flux because of how diverse religions are. Atheism is a religion, some would argue, because it has a group component and contains a central theory about how creation did/didn’t come to be.

Buddhism is philosophical, but you’re batty if you think it’s not a religion by a majority of the basic criteria for what a religion is. Not saying it definitely is, just saying it’s dumb to say it definitely isn’t.

Scientology is a religion based on bad science fiction novels. The definition for what a religion can be is far broader than you’re implying.

Science can be reasonably viewed as a religion for fuck’s sake.

Anyway, I think you’re picking and choosing here. Writing off all religions while kind of half-defending others by saying they’re not religions. I’m not sure what kind of logical fallacy this is, but if it isn’t one then I think you’ve invented a new one.

Big time false equivalency. Rob didn't post answers to the "meaning of life" nor to what happens after you die. He simply described natural facts, and his opinion that they're enough by themselves and we don't need an imaginary friend to make sense of them does NOT a religion make.

he didn’t argue them but rather expressed them as categorical statements of belief.

hence, religion.

That's an unsustainable position. Under your definition, EVERYTHING would be religion unless one is a candyass about it. :)

a lot of human interaction is based on blind bullshit and bluster

that’s how your boyo trump got into power

“believe me”, etc.

zero analysis

fuck your lot

Oyyyy... Come on. I didn't say rationality was optional; quite the opposite. In fact, the sanest among the religious will admit that their belief is irrational. Which puts them in an impossible predicament, but more power to 'em.

That’s kind of what I’m saying. Looking back at all the college religion classes I took, a common opinion was that a FUCKTON of things can be considered religions/religious. There is no one umbrella definition that meets all cases unless you simplify it to just be a belief system about that which can’t be known, soecifically what our purpose is and why we are here, with a certain amount of organization or community or ritual. Unitarianism is a religion that doesn’t have a solid position on the afterlife... most Unitarians surely believe there is one, but it’s not in the bylaws. Ideas on creation diverge too. Which leads me to assert that belief, organization and “big ideas” are basic elements of religion. Hence the baseball analogy. Rob offered up all of the above, except for organization. But it sounds like you’re on board, so...

Not a false equivalency. Rob was making blanket statements about what life/existence is/isn’t, presenting them as truisms. That’s one of many (countless) characteristics of “religion” as a construct.

If religion is a thing, it’s a system of belief about life and creation and whatever is or isn’t beyond (before/after) existence. Rob has a religion cookin’. Believe it.

Really in order to discuss it productively, we need to establish a definition for the purposes of our discussion that meets the requirements of all involved. My opinion is that Rob has about 80% of a religion at this point.

Religion is irrational. If "the thing" is not irrational, it's not religion.

i had a priest admit to me in high school that there was no rational proof of god. he said that his faith was born not from reason but experience. that was an honest fucking priest.

the only rational position in this discussion as far as i can see is agnosticism. everyone else taking a position in this matter is “the faithful,” regardless of orientation.

Well human beings are irrational and rational by nature, simultaneously. All of us. We are not “rational beings,” we are being with the ability to reason, who usually choose not to do so.

So rationality is kind of optional. It’s certaibly not mandatory. We all do irrational things every day. Just sayin’

People are irrational. People are *mostly* irrational. What’s yer point?

You're all wrong. The universe is just a complex computer simulation running on some hyper-dimensional alien nerd's computer. He doesn't even know that humans exist yet--he's too busy working on a new prototype universe to fix all the bugs in this one. Probably once he figures out he'll shut this one down.

Texan brand......we have our own brand?

:D :D :D

well not saying this exclusive to texas but evangelical churches are very dominant in your state in a way that it’s not in others i think. and texas is the largest/most significant/most representative of the bible belt states.

some random samples (not in the statistical sense, just colloquial)

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/...e.html?start=1

http://documentaryvine.com/video/lou...rn-christians/

Texas definitely had a corner on televangelist/megachurch/“Get-to-heaven” water bottle selling religious nutbag freakshows. Maybe not a “brand,” but said stuff and nonsense is certainly not off-brand for the state that is basically just Austin surrounded by hell.

No disrespect to the parts of Texas that aren’t horrible. Like you, Bytor, or Rob, or Beyoncé. Also, way to go Astros!

Evangelical churches are prominent throughout the country, but more so in the South. Nashville has big azz steeple churches on every corner. Missouri and Kentucky have more hell fire radio preachers than you can shake a stick at.

YES - Texas has seemed to perfect the art of mass communication......and while it’s tied to religion, it is in no way an accurate reflection of Christianity.

Said churches, especially the smaller community churches were / are key to helping the community recover from Tropical Storm Harvey. From feeding those in need, dispensing goods and arranging muck-out groups, no doubt churches helped many in need. I did NOT notice the First Islamic Society or Hindu Nation stepping up......the Mormons did!!!

Springer, Bregman and Altuve were on SNL last night.

Sad News for a church outside San Antonio this Sunday morning.

It sure it a fucked up state of affairs when incidents like this are so common that it's hard to even act surprised. The one thing that might fix the issue--tighter gun control laws--seems to be a political impossibility in the USA, so unfortunately it seems like there's no end in sight to the current epidemic of mass shootings.

o man. that is awful. even kids?

unfortunately it’s true about guns being the other texas religion

e.g, see: http://www.emoaf.org/Christians-and-...-answered.html

and yes check their contact page for their address—it’s texas

meanwhile their governor sent “thoughts and prayers”— of course— what else?

Jesus Christ, just read about this Texas thing. Un-fucking-believable.

like a scene from Bone Tomahawk. That primitive. That ugly

Yeah, I really don’t have words anymore. Just kind of a primal anger at all the reps and senators who absolutely refuse to *ever* modify or change their position on gun control, no matter how often this happens. It’s godsamn sickening. If anyone wanted to actually make guns illegal or “take them away,” that person would probably be me — never shot one, not interested in whatever high one gets from obliterating a living thing — but I’m not for that. Just, y’know, maybe more intensive background checks aren’t the WORST idea in the world when mass shootings are ramping up like this. Fuck’s sake!

Also, refusing to ever reconsider one’s opinion or belief system no matter what new evidence or information comes into play might as well be the definition of stupid. And it’s how a majority of our politicians think.

It’s religious binary thinking mixed with greed.

i live in a ranch and have guns and everyone has them around here— there are no cops

but for fucks sakes i wish it was a little harder to get one. i would not have minded at least taking a test, like i did to get my driver’s license. everyone around here drives a truck too— but needs a license.

not that passing a test would prevent this sort of insanity, but— man.

yes yes i get it- it’s a right not a privilege. but still. wtf happened with “well regulated militia”.

Well, the country kept the “militia” part, the NRA turned away from its original objective and became the world’s most influential lobbying group, and “regulated” was slowly turned into a four-letter word by every republican since 1980. So we’re left with small groups of outspoken, eager, organized and fully legal domestic terrorists, and God knows how many lone wolf would-be murderers, and the regulative ability of the government has been amputated.

Again, I hate guns but I’m not about to suggest “taking them away.” I’m goddamn glad certain people in my life own them. But I do not consider gun ownership a “right,” even if it technically is one. It’s not inalienable. It can be taken away. Unlike, say, the guarantee of treatment at an ER, which cannot be taken away and is given to everyone from homeless people to death row inmates, yet can’t be considered a “right” because whatever fucking reason is currently being taunted by insane people. Hm.

And yes, the idea that operating a vehicle or owning a business, or fucking HUNTING is more regulated than actual gun ownership makes no goddamn sense. I am surrounded by people who hunt, it’s part of life, so is preparation and self-defense... but anyone who opposes stricter gun control/regulation legislation — opposes tests to weed out the potentially unfit to own, or background checks to weed out individuals with histories of mental illness or violence, is not really worried about protecting gun rights because that position is simply shaking a powder keg that will one day explode in an even more major way. If we people really wanted to protect the supposed sanctity of gun ownership, they’d want to make damn sure guns never fell into the wrong hands, by ANY MEANS necessary.

Fucking painkillers are in the verge of being labeled a national emergency. Painkillers! But NEVER guns. If someone wants to get fucked up and kill themselves, we need to make it hard(er) for EVERYONE to get access to *literal medicine* but if someone wants to purchase a weapon to slaughter 50 people, no such luck. Just lots and lots of motherfucking “thoughts and prayers.”

ETA: Just to be clear, I’m surrounded by people who own guns. I understand the conservational necessity of hunting. I understand the practical necessity of self-defense. I may be personally anti-gun, but I am not politically anti-gun. Just pro-sanity.

We need more citizens with guns!

My church has had a parking lot security team for about 15 years now. It started as a response to a few cars getting broke into, it has evolved into members open carrying. So many churches are now providing their own security anytime things are taking place.

Wow that’s a great solution. Especially in Texas. Can’t think of anything that could possibly go wrong. To get rid of violence, we need more people to be more equipped to inflict violence.

And yes, citizens! Because the government is clearly responsible for all the mass shootings, so absolutely. More guns in the hands of more people... totally the answer.

The fuck.

^^^there is no getting rid of violence. there is no getting rid of guns.

evil people will continue to do evil things.

owning a gun doesn’t guarantee protection, the same as wearing a seatbelt doesn’t guarantee survival of a car crash......here in Texas, we choose to buckle up!

dude, that is so wrong. Austin is a fucking shithole of redneck racism and extreme segregation. EXTREME. Just like LA, the product pushed out (music in asstown, and movies in LA) makes people think that the cities themselves are liberal and progressive when they are most certainly NOT.

Austin is a fucking SHIT HOLE.

Why do people/politicians always ask that "god" be "with" those who survive tragedy, when "god" was not there to stop the tragedy? #questionforMonday

You know what is pathetic? something like 90% of all murderguns (pistols, rifles, etc.) are owned by around 20% of the population. That means that those who own guns usually own more than a dozen each. who doesn't love a great collection of killing implements? How big is the ratio of these multiple-gun owning white people as opposed to multiple-gun owning brown people?
I wonder.

Guns and a,mo and maintenance are all expensive.

Also, they ask Mr. God to be with those who barely survive earthquakes and floods, even though you have to "conclude" :rolleyes: it was him who either "sent" said natural disasters or just created a shitty planet and let it play out. You shoulda seen the amount of mooks here running to mass after the axis-shifting earthquake of 2010...

in the interest of random statements
we have
a bb gun from my wife’s childhood (for pests)
a 22lr rifle (used to be for pests, needs repair, but bb is safer, so not sure i wanna fix)
a 20ga shotgun (for the home— only thing i’ve shot is a rattler)
a magnum .357 revolver (for “home defense” and late-night highway travel because trust me 911 does not work in the ghetto).

and i have considered an AR, yeah. the caliber/ low recoil is a lot more user friendly than either shotgun or revolver. .223 is like buttah