If there was ever a Libertarian religion, this is it.

[heavenlyboy34]

Most of those devoutly religious weren't white christian Europeans.

Printing presses had been used since the Tang Dynasty in China

White Christians did not invent the number zero known as Shuunya in sanskrit.

White Christians did not invent the republic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahajanapada

White Christians did not invent Hindu Arabic Numerals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu%...numeral_system

White Christians were not the first linguists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pāṇini

And Western Civilization did not produce the highest quality of artwork. Siddham Calligraphy and Mandalas produced in China and Japan are far better and require a greater degree of effort than anything produced between 500 AD and 1500 AD.

Totally subjective. More elaborate=/=better. The serialist works of the second Viennese School are more elaborate and theoretically complex than anything produced in the classical period, but most audiences wouldn't pay to hear it because it's incredibly dissonant and unpleasant to most people's ears. Siddham Calligraphy and Mandalas are flat perspective. Highly elaborate, but not more "sophisticated" than Western art. see Byzantine iconography from the ancient world, developing into linear perspective in the Renaissance-the ability to create the illusion of depth for the first time in known history.

[Muwahid]

How about teaching values to your children without threatening them with eternal damnation in hell and telling them that apostasy merits death and teaching them all sorts of impossible fables about the universe instead of what we know to have happened based on archaeology, geology, history, cosmology etc..

That's nothing more than a strawman argument.

First of all being a theist does not mean being a creationist. I would posit that most theists are not creationists. Once you realize nature law and order can be products of a God, you do not need to invoke mysticism over natural law. Furthermore there are limitations to what natural law can explain, i.e., it cannot explain itself. For naturalists to have a cohesive worldview they need to concede that some thing is an eternal facilitator, then the only difference between the theist and atheist is whether that thing has a conscious or not.

That being said, you can use loaded terminology if you want, "threatening with eternal damnation", rather than speaking of the punishments invoked on those who are evil and the rewards for the selfless.

We don't teach kids this to scare them into submission. If we really believe what our faith professes, then we teach them it in the hopes they stay on the path to salvation. That's the duty as a parent.

And as a side note, you seem to be lumping all doctrines into one basket. In Islam the requisite for paradise is an atoms weight of faith. The slightest inkling of there could be a God will save you. And eternal damnation is reserved for only those who sold their faith and soul (after knowing better) for the fruits of the earth (power, money, greed).

And even then there are minority opinions in Islam that don't even believe there is eternal punishment and that the flames of hell fire will extinguish, people like Ibn al Qayyim al jawziyyah held this opinion. It could be plausible in the sense of how could you punish someone eternally for a finite sin, but that's a debate for scholars.

The broad brush in which you paint does not accurately represent whats taught in most mainstream faiths. I sure as hell will teach my children what I believe in the hopes they maintain it because I truly believe it. If I didn't do that and I'm right on what I believe, then I did my children a huge disservice by not guiding them in that direction and I will be accountable for that when I'm gone.

[Lamp]

Totally subjective. More elaborate=/=better. The serialist works of the second Viennese School are more elaborate and theoretically complex than anything produced in the classical period, but most audiences wouldn't pay to hear it because it's incredibly dissonant and unpleasant to most people's ears. Siddham Calligraphy and Mandalas are flat perspective. Highly elaborate, but not more "sophisticated" than Western art. see Byzantine iconography from the ancient world, developing into linear perspective in the Renaissance-the ability to create the illusion of depth for the first time in known history.

How is saying that Linkin Park is bad in comparison to say...muddy waters, not a form of subjectivity?

Oh and no, no I don't don't consider Greek artists from the middle ages intentionally painting Christ as an ugly baby to be attractive or good looking by any standard.

Indian insipired art from East Asia actually adheres to some form of geometric pattern or mathematical rule.

[Lamp]

A mandala (Sanskrit: मण्डल, maṇḍala; literally "circle") is a spiritual and ritual symbol in Buddhism, representing the universe.^[1] In common use, "mandala" has become a generic term for any diagram, chart or geometric pattern that represents the cosmos metaphysically or symbolically; a microcosm of the universe.
The basic form of most mandalas is a square with four gates containing a circle with a center point. Each gate is in the general shape of a T.^[2][3] Mandalas often exhibit radial balance.^[4]
The term appears in the Rigveda as the name of the sections of the work, and Vedic rituals use Mandalas such as Navagraha mandala to this day. Mandala is also used in Buddhism.

Example

[Lamp]

I don't consider Byzantine art to be good by most objective prerequisites since it fails to make me feel a genuine sense of captivation and the paintings look lifeless and distorted. It doesn't adhere to any sort of bone, muscle, curve structure resemblance that other art forms use. Though you are free to think that it is good if you want to.

[Influenza]

That's nothing more than a strawman argument.

First of all being a theist does not mean being a creationist. I would posit that most theists are not creationists. Once you realize nature law and order can be products of a God, you do not need to invoke mysticism over natural law. Furthermore there are limitations to what natural law can explain, i.e., it cannot explain itself. For naturalists to have a cohesive worldview they need to concede that some thing is an eternal facilitator, then the only difference between the theist and atheist is whether that thing has a conscious or not.

That being said, you can use loaded terminology if you want, "threatening with eternal damnation", rather than speaking of the punishments invoked on those who are evil and the rewards for the selfless.

We don't teach kids this to scare them into submission. If we really believe what our faith professes, then we teach them it in the hopes they stay on the path to salvation. That's the duty as a parent.

And as a side note, you seem to be lumping all doctrines into one basket. In Islam the requisite for paradise is an atoms weight of faith. The slightest inkling of there could be a God will save you. And eternal damnation is reserved for only those who sold their faith and soul (after knowing better) for the fruits of the earth (power, money, greed).

And even then there are minority opinions in Islam that don't even believe there is eternal punishment and that the flames of hell fire will extinguish, people like Ibn al Qayyim al jawziyyah held this opinion. It could be plausible in the sense of how could you punish someone eternally for a finite sin, but that's a debate for scholars.

The broad brush in which you paint does not accurately represent whats taught in most mainstream faiths. I sure as hell will teach my children what I believe in the hopes they maintain it because I truly believe it. If I didn't do that and I'm right on what I believe, then I did my children a huge disservice by not guiding them in that direction and I will be accountable for that when I'm gone.

It's not a strawman at all. I'm not saying that you necessarily do those things. Many millions of religious people, however, do. Over a billion people believe the Quran to be the word of god. Quran 33:64-65 very clearly says that disbelievers in Allah and Mohammad will abide in hell forever. Obviously Mr. Ibn al Qayyim al Jawziyyah didn't read the quran very closely.

If you teach that the quran is the word of god (which you definitely would), and your children read that verse, wouldn't you be indirectly threatening them with eternal hellfire if they disregard the arbitrary laws contained in the quran?

My mom works at a muslim school and some of the people teach retarded $#@! like shooting stars are thrown by god to chase away eavesdropping devils. Luckily I wasnt brainwashed that badly.

[Lamp]

this is good art.

[heavenlyboy34]

I don't consider Byzantine art to be good by most objective prerequisites since it fails to make me feel a genuine sense of captivation and the paintings look lifeless and distorted. It doesn't adhere to any sort of bone, muscle, curve structure resemblance that other art forms use. Though you are free to think that it is good if you want to.

1) There aren't "prerequisites". There is only the goal of achieving unity of elements. (see gestalt theory of art and design) 2) the non-linear perspective of Byzantine is supposed to tell a story instead of be just a fancy work of art. I suppose it's a matter of learning to appreciate it. You could say Japanese classical art is also lifeless and distorted if you don't understand art.

[Lamp]

1) There aren't "prerequisites". There is only the goal of achieving unity of elements. (see gestalt theory of art and design) 2) the non-linear perspective of Byzantine is supposed to tell a story instead of be just a fancy work of art. I suppose it's a matter of learning to appreciate it. You could say Japanese classical art is also lifeless and distorted if you don't understand art.

I don't consider Japanese classical art to be good either.

[Lamp]

Sorry. what I meant to say was I don't consider Ukiyo-e paintings to be aesthetically pleasing.

[Influenza]

but this is aesthetically pleasing? jeez lol
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...2/Taizokai.jpg

[Lamp]

but this is aesthetically pleasing? jeez lol
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...2/Taizokai.jpg

No $#@!. What I meant to say is that unity of the various elements put into the copious and vexing design of hand bra jeans are aesthetically pleasing..............

[Influenza]

ok back to work then

[Lamp]

ok back to work then

It's a joke man. Let me have my satisfaction just this once..

[Lamp]

I personally find the the rigid geometric proportions of the mandala representing the universe to be aesthetically pleasing

[RJB]

You strike me as a person who will miss with his first jab and then dance around the ring like he won the fight.

You don't even know what the word secular means, lmao.

You generalize a lot about religion. Why can't I generalize about you? I actually like the secularism of the US society. However it is secular with a Christian majority. Mao didn't ride in and say, we will kill 100 million Buddhists, Falon Gong, etc. Stalin, Trotsky, and Lenin didn't claim they would kill 50 million Christians either. Religions tend to be less violent in secular society than Atheism, at least in the last century.

Neither china nor the soviet union are/were secular.

See above again.

Secularism wants religious institutions to remain separate from the state, not that the state bans religions or dictates which are or aren't okay.

But most people who claim to be secularists in this country these days are indeed very leftist. The definition may be in the process of changing. I will call you an Atheistic secularist if that makes you happy.

All you are doing is setting up an idiotic strawman.

As you are setting up an idiotic strawman saying that religion has done more bad than good. There are murders in both Atheistic and religious groups. However in the last century, Atheists are the grand champions. Congrat, Influenza, I guess...

I said that religions are responsible for millions of deaths.

And in the last century Atheism beat out religion!

This is an indisputable fact.

As is my fact that I stated above.

Nowhere did I suggest that communism is therefore better.

Actually you give very little facts but stick to suggesting very broad opinions. So I am taking guesses about you here.

I have only supported secularism,

I haven't seen that, but rather a strong dislike for any religion in general. Living in a state of hate isn't healthy, flu.

which has nothing in common with communist dictatorships. In fact, you are living in a secular country right now.

Again, Stalin didn't start with Gulags.

Although Roy Moore, the christian taliban, and its idiotic supporters wish it wasn't.

You really should research the Taliban, bro lol.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

but this is aesthetically pleasing? jeez lol
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...2/Taizokai.jpg

Perhaps you prefer the "art" of crucifixes submerged in urine at taxpayer expense.

[Lamp]

You strike me as a person who will miss with his first jab and then dance around the ring like he won the fight.

You generalize a lot about religion. Why can't I generalize about you? I actually like the secularism of the US society. However it is secular with a Christian majority. Mao didn't ride in and say, we will kill 100 million Buddhists, Falon Gong, etc. Stalin, Trotsky, and Lenin didn't claim they would kill 50 million Christians either. Religions tend to be less violent in secular society than Atheism, at least in the last century.

See above again.
But most people who claim to be secularists in this country these days are indeed very leftist. The definition may be in the process of changing. I will call you an Atheistic secularist if that makes you happy.

As you are setting up an idiotic strawman saying that religion has done more bad than good. There are murders in both Atheistic and religious groups. However in the last century, Atheists are the grand champions. Congrat, Influenza, I guess...

And in the last century Atheism beat out religion!

As is my fact that I stated above.

Actually you give very little facts but stick to suggesting very broad opinions. So I am taking guesses about you here.

I haven't seen that, but rather a strong dislike for any religion in general. Living in a state of hate isn't healthy, flu.
Again, Stalin didn't start with Gulags.

You really should research the Taliban, bro lol.

I disagree. I find that countries like Czechia, Estonia, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea without a Christian or religious majority tend to be relatively free.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I disagree. I find that countries like Czechia, Estonia, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea tend to be relatively free.

Singapore?!

[Lamp]

Singapore?!

In terms of trade and adherence to capitalism. Its a rich country.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I know what we shouldn't do: indoctrinate kids into religion/convince others to join your religion with a thousand lies by omission. Both of which probably account for 99%+ of the believers of any religion.

Who is "we?" I wasn't aware of the US government using force to make one join a religion.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

In terms of trade and adherence to capitalism. Its a rich country.

I think that is offset by what's on that shirt.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

How about teaching values to your children without threatening them with eternal damnation in hell and telling them that apostasy merits death and teaching them all sorts of impossible fables about the universe instead of what we know to have happened based on archaeology, geology, history, cosmology etc..

How about minding your own business?

[RJB]

I disagree. I find that countries like Czechia, Estonia, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea without a Christian or religious majority tend to be relatively free.

Maybe so. I've been recently reading a lot about the red revolutions and I might be a little on edge in this moment.

As for Christianity, I was referring to the secularism of the US. But, yes I have lived in both South Korea and Japan. They are secular but also based on ideals from their traditional religions. For the record, although I am a Christian, I do respect Buddhism. However we can discuss enlightenment, salvation, etc. over a beer on another thread.

[Lamp]

I think that is offset by what's on that shirt.

Alright forget it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Singapore

[heavenlyboy34]

but this is aesthetically pleasing? jeez lol
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...2/Taizokai.jpg

In the sense that geometric art is, yep. It certainly has unity of design.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Alright forget it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Singapore

I see what you're saying, but it seems Singapore goes from one extreme to another. I once looked in-depth at the three major (at that time) reports evaluating global freedom. Singapore was # 1 by one measure, but that organization was only measuring economic factors of freedom.

[RJB]

I know what we shouldn't do: indoctrinate kids into religion/convince others to join your religion with a thousand lies by omission. Both of which probably account for 99%+ of the believers of any religion.

Who is "we?" I wasn't aware of the US government using force to make one join a religion.

The "we" is one of the reasons why I responded to flu as if he were a communist. I would never say he should raise his child as I (or "we") wished.

And NCliberty, I agree with what you said in the PM.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

This is both art and a summertime religion!

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Luckily I wasnt brainwashed that badly.

I know a lot of Democrat progressives like you, and some people consider them brainwashed. A lot of progressives practically worship government and treat gov as their god.