Aesa
-
Posts
492 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Aesa
-
-
"Socialist
Communist
Fascist
Marxist
Nazi
Christian
Muslim Terroist
Anti-semitic
Stupid
Born in Hawaii, Kenya and Canada"
Elphie, I'm sure you're aware that Socialism IS Nazism? Or did you just separate them for maximum effect?
-
It's very unfortunate, isn't it?
I see this sort of thing as very urgent for not only is oil a finite resource, it's also destructive to our environment.
Our society needs to begin a transition (meaning, moving toward while still using oil) as soon as is possible to renewable energy (regardless of the fact that it'll destroy the monetary system) if we're going to avoid terrible things in the future.
Thankfully, some areas are beginning this transition.
-
"The ultimate irony will be if today's Socialist stimulus proves tomorrow's Capitalist salvation."
It certainly would be because creating surges in debt goes completely against the possibility of "saving" the system.
-
If a society is not high stress, these things are unlikely to occur. The large majority of crimes such as those you describe are committed by those from low socio-economic backgrounds (just look at prison demographics).If a society can only be free if sexuality goes unmoderated, then does not your opinion indicate that you cannot have a free society if it has restrictions/laws against public nudity, rape, age of consent, etc?
A properly educated population, needs no control (and by that I don't necessarily mean "the a+ kids" but rather the kids that are lucky enough to be taught how to think, communicate with others, etc,). How many people do you know that, say work for universities or pioneer in scientific work that have committed acts of rape, etc,?
Nudity is not a bad thing, to my mind. There are plenty of cultures, such as those of Tahiti (well, pre-missionary) that didn't wear clothing and were quite fine. Granted, I'm not saying that people should 'go naked' in our culture - our value systems do not really attribute comfort to that, because we're raised wearing clothing.
The real "social control" lies in relevant education. Not taxes, not laws, not electric fences, not prisons, torture, etc,.
-
The reality is there are already options available which far surpass the energy producing capabilities of oil, such as geothermal energy (but, sustainability is not profitable).
"A 2006 report by MIT, that took into account the use of enhanced geothermal system, estimated that an investment of 1 billion US dollars in research and development over 15 years would permit the development of 100 GW of generating capacity by 2050 in the United States alone.[11] The MIT report estimated that over 200 ZJ would be extractable, with the potential to increase this to over 2,000 ZJ with technology improvements - sufficient to provide all the world's present energy needs for several millennia" Geothermal power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Just for comparison with the 200ZJ estimated available, the planets people use about 0.5ZJ per year.
Here's the MIT study: http://geothermal.inel.gov/publications/future_of_geothermal_energy.pdf
We have no good reason to be using oil, at all, in the face of renewable energy.
-
Well, this is where I will give an opinion.
In a free society, sexuality is an unmoderated expression.
That doesn't mean a (supposed to be) private institution such as a Church cannot legislate differently toward it's membership, though.
-
That's not my premise. I believe that a society flourishes when the family is allowed to be whatever it wants to be (but, that doesn't work in our system because it's high stress and the parents are too busy at their monotonous job to be much of a parent most of the time).
I'm asking YOU and everyone else what you think of it.
*sigh*
-
I haven't made this stuff up. Have you read any of the works of Plato/Socrates and Aristotle?Is the reason that you are "not interested in debating or going on with points here," because your points are made up and you can't defend them?
I charge that you just made made up "the fact that most of the elite had a wife and a homosexual relationship - and the rest of the population was largely bisexual."
Further, you fail to specify what you mean by ancient Greece.
Do you mean the Bronze Period? Greek Dark Ages? The Archaic era? Classical Greece?
Let's assume that you mean Hellenistic Greece. The answer is simple - it waddn't homosexuality - they were conquered by the Romans... who conquered everybody else and their dog; gay or not.
If you haven't, then I'll be happy to provide some quotations from some of the texts.
I'm not interested in debating because everyone here appears to very dogmatic, which is highly dangerous, and only leads to endless circular arguing.
That's not the direction I was hoping to approach this discussion from. Rather, just that from a Mormon view it would be a move away from the nuclear family which you view as the bedrock of society do you not?Well, the Romans must have been gay then, because their empire later fell too.
-
If it's a direct unapportioned (spelling?) tax it shouldn't be there because that is against free-market principles.
It's lawful, but it's unconstitutional also.
And if you want to keep taxes the same, then you're going to see them go up like crazy in the next 5 years (and onward) to serve the debt levels.
-
Well, it is taught in philosophy courses, and Socrates references it in Gorgias.That doesn't support your statement "most of the elite had a wife and a homosexual relationship"
-
Yeah, right - your nieces graduation party has been put into a high quality feature-film. Yeah, suuuure.WOW!!!!! That's AMAZING!!! Why, my niece's YouTube vid of her graduation party hijinks has only about 45,000 more views than that!!!
Well, actually - the reason why I don't see the need to bother sourcing beyond the work is because (1) you would have to buy those sources and you almost definitively will not - therefore, waste of time and (2) your sole purpose for chatting here is not 'I want to learn something' but 'I want to cling to what I've got and run with it' (to put it in as sarcastic way as is possible).
-
I HAVE read the Gnostic writings. Several times. For one thing, they are NOT the "earliest" gospels. Second, they were not considered orthodox, and most Christians today would reject some of their main concepts: The Creator of earth and man was an evil God. Jesus and Christ were two separate beings (Jesus mortal, Christ God). Christ entered into Jesus' body at his baptism and left on the cross.
The first person considered a Gnostic was Simon Magus. Peter condemned him as an apostate who tried to purchase the priesthood power to give the Holy Ghost. Paul and John also wrote against anti-Christs, who claimed Jesus did not resurrect nor actually come in the flesh - both Gnostic ideas.
So, your example just doesn't fly. Try another one, and we'll see how aerodynamic it really is.
Actually, yes the earliest available gospel is a gnostic gospel - so, you may want to question that because a lot of scholars are really starting to. It does in-fact appear to be, many scholars say (and many more are coming out to say) that the Gnostics were the first and were suppressed by the Literalists who outgrew them in size due to their nature and as the story goes the winners get to write history.
A good place to start might be here, and I can give you a considerable list of scholarly works if you'd like. Here is but one of the scholars I'm talking about discussing this subject:
Ofcourse they would, because it humanises Christianity and brings it back down to Earth. However, this is a whole separate topic and if you want to discuss this then we'd better have a new thread.most Christians today would reject some of their main concept
I said "one of.." the most corrupt. All others are basically the same because they use the same institutions, and they are what make them corrupt.Aesa has claimed the USA to be the most corrupt nation on earth.
And by the way, the amount of money a person donates to something doesn't make them a good nation. There are plenty of people who donate to good causes yet on the other hand aren't 'good' in action.
-
Yes, but if a group has more percentage in an area they will have an influence rather than just being a fringe.
-
Okay, I understand - but I disagree strongly.You stated that Ancient Greece had much greater instances of same-sex romantic activities. If that were the case, it would suggest one of three reasons.
Merely it has to do with the environmental conditions being sufficient. Gay people are more commonly found and exist in larger numbers in cities and metropolitan areas, this would make sense when we take into account that Greece was based on city-states.
-
No that's not what I'm saying at all.
I can't imagine how you can come to that conclusion, so unless you want to elaborate I don't even know where to begin with regards as to what's wrong with that.
-
I would say that they're one and the same, really.Is orientation a choice influenced by environmental factors or did ancient Greece simply not experience a same-sex renaissance like what you're suggesting?
Orientation is a choice based upon what you are exposed to by your culture. You can only make choices based on what you 'know', or come to know.
-
No, that's not what I'm saying.
It's just that some members on here seem to espouse that a move away from 'traditional marriage'/nuclear family being one man one woman with kids - is damaging to the fabric of society. I wanted to hear what others have to say on it.
Essentially I am not giving any opinion on this at all - I just want to see what others have to say.
-
Create something, with your own ingenuity.
They're always the best presents.
I love when someone, say, makes chocolate fudge on their own and makes a lovely package to give it to me.
It's those things that make gift giving/receiving so worthwhile (and affordable).
-
Most definitely all of the elites were. It was a different form of homosexuality, in other words, not the 'imagery of a heterosexual relationship' we have today.
I brought this topic up because I've been re-studying my philosophy notes in time for re-emerging of classes next week.
"Homosexual relationships seem to have been prevalent in ancient Greece. It is possible Achilles and Patroclus of Homer's Iliad were icons of male homosexuality. Aristotle stated that the Cretans encouraged homosexuality as a population controller on the island community in his Politics." Homosexuality in Ancient Greece - ReligionFacts
-
Many of you seem to espouse the notion that Marriage keeps society together. Do you think this explains the collapse of Ancient Greece (the fact that most of the elite had a wife and a homosexual relationship - and the rest of the population was largely bisexual)?
This will be a discussion of personal opinions, I'm not interested in debating or going on with points here.
-
I know, it was just appropriate to confound it.Funny... In your PM, what you actually said was:
Well, that's kind of what's happening anyway. Just that it's ultimately going to destroy Monetaryism, you can't sustain a mode of scarce exchange with systems that create abundance.And if you wanted to talk about the philosophy behind Mormonism, you could do so without being well versed in it. The only way you could give your current argument substance is to turn this movement into a sort of new religion- something you seem to be doing (capitalizing Science and Technology?).
I'm not attacking him. Just don't pretend like he wasn't 'perverted by the ways of man' (at least from your perspective that there is such a thing).Yep, that guy. Crazy, isn't it?
I don't want to activate your hilarity unit, but just hypothetically, what happens if/when your Church decides to support us?my agenda is to put forth the doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Taking into consideration that this movement has no relation to politics, it wouldn't be impossible.
Unfortunately if we do that (bold) we end up with this sort of argumentative problem. There really is no philosophy we support, just near-empirical science. Anything else is personal.I thought we were discussing the philosophies the movement supports, not the movement itself.
I am dodging your points because they are of a materialistic nature. Answering them just creates another counter-argument that is relevant to nothing, et al,
It's unproductive from both ends
-
No but it'll give you a starting point. You cant expect to discuss this movement logically if you have a very limited idea of what it's about.So watching a movie is going to open my eyes to the whole gambit of human emotions, and make me an expert on the history of economics, religion, politics, and human nature?
Completely wrong. The reason why this argument has gone off on so many pointless tangents is because you're coming from a perspective of essentially discussing the movement through knowing very little about it (and the idea that I've come to the conclusions I have is just ludicrous - I think the majority of people want to see, for example, world unification - they're just very scared of where that's going right now because it's so abusive)Aesa, you live in a box built by the Zeitgest Movement. Anything outside the box is completely 'bad' or 'fallacious' to you.
Ofcourse it did, but it's not the root or the base of my reasons for joining it - I align with anything that wants to unconditionally advance Science and Technology. I would align with any direction that would want to provide for humanity's needs in abundance without the need for unnecessary servitude. Even if it was religious, so long as it didn't think it would be the 'religion' that would do it.the decision that you won't interact with me until I meet your personal demands and watch the movie- undoubtedly the thing that convinced you so strongly to join the Zeitgeist Movement. It also gets you out of actually providing solid evidence for anything you say- something I keep asking for and never get.
The problem is that from the outset you have a complete agenda... and as I said to you via private message:
If I were to behave as you have in regards to the Book of Mormon and quote scriptures against it and call it evil because it 'adds to the Bible' and all that other BS you'd call me closed minded and pursuing an agenda based on lack of understanding.
This is exactly what you're doing. It's not that I am totally refusing to discuss with you until you've watched those films and chose to educate yourself, but rather it's just that you can't expect to discuss the incredibly relevant and well sourced information in those films which are also relevant to our discussion if you haven't watched them.
It goes along the same lines of if someone asked me "[X] about Nephi?" and I just reply "He's an evil, gay, fat man." See how illogical and uninformed that'd be?
Coming from your perspective there - the same guy who carried around pagan charms, the same guy who had a lot of young wives, the same guy who started up a bank and did a runner when it collapsed? Woah.if they possess a logical mind (I use 'logical mind' like Joseph Smith did- that is, a mind that has been uncorrupted by the false doctrines of man)
Agenda highlighted: That, however, is impossible to live in and sustain until Christ, the perfect King, will come and reign again (or until right beforehand).
No where near everyone who commits crimes is caught.why didn't everyone turn to crime?
-
The answer is it can't in our present system.Explain how it can work in this country?????
But the further issue is that it's where we're moving anyway.
As technology advances the need for humans in the workforce will be continually diminished. From McDonalds automation to robots that can care completely for plants as well as harvest them, to name just a few.
Also outsourcing is a huge problem for us westerners because of industry's priority of profit jobs are constantly being outsourced (another excellent example that this culture creates a competitive industry that doesn't care for you and me).
This is an excellent example of how much more altruistic humanity can be. Volunteer work is huge.in pockets of our country we watch out for each other and needs are met sometimes without being asked... People care and help each other
The reality is, we have to change. We can't rely on our leaders to do it because they serve vested interests. You might say "It sounds so impossible." But we have to try, education is the real solution here.
It's time we see each other for what we all are - human. Everything else is an extrapolation, and we -all- have the same basic needs.
-
It's only impossible so long as we decide it is. This idea that it is impossible is based in lack of understanding (and I don't mean that as an attack), and it's the same lie the royals tried on your founding fathers.
"It'll never work."
This can never occur in a scarcity-driven, monetary-based economy.Modern society has access to highly advanced technology and can make available food, clothing, housing and medical care; update our educational system; and develop a limitless supply of renewable, non-contaminating energy. By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society
Special Witnesses of Christ
in Learn about The Church of Jesus Christ Of Latter-day Saints
Posted
I don't understand how it's special. Prophets and Apostles are just as much human beings as you or me, to my mind.
Anyone care to explain what makes them special?