church

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by Anonymouse And how different is that? You must still be taxed for the State, no choice in the matter. And your property rights are violated.

The choice you have is to look at the system critically, as Socrates would, and not vote.

That's your great, defiant choice? Not to vote? You big rebel pimp, you.

[whitelotus]

Originally posted by felizitation Ok, again, we derivated from the main topic.
I have many things to say on the choices, but this is not the place. What the subject was dealing about is the place of the church in our society.

Now, lotus, go further. You said the church has always funded itself. This is obviously true. But actually, at least during the past centuries, the church used to have a social leading role, as being a divine representative on earth, as being a ciment of society, as being a symbol of mankind rules, etc
Now, except made for the "divine representative", all these roles are assumed, at least on the "paper", by states. So, what is remaining to church ? all the divine stuff ?

As having a social importance, it would have been normal to give to this institution (I recognise that there were some deviations and this is not what i want to talk about) the means to function correctly (ie. money).
Now the role being very restricted, it seems normal that the economical binds between the society and the church are weakened. And the deserted church have to survive on its own.

You are talking about "corruption". Yes, it's certainly corrupted since it tries to survive and people does not see the importance.

My point is the following: religion, and implicitely churchs, have their social role. More widely, we may talk about "sectarism". If this is not known religion, people often stick together with some divine entity upon the group, and belief to sthg more than human always exists.
In a certain extent, we would say that churchs (or mosques or synagogues) have still their social role, even if most of the work is today assumed by states.
So, like schools, it seems to be important to the society (of course, some people would not agree, but take it as an hypothesis). Hence, it should receive some money from the state itself, as any other institution.

The question is the following: in what extent, in the actual society, church should exists, and underlying this: What is the social role of church ? If its social role is recognised, should the state financially support the church ? If this kind of support exists, do you think the way the religion is praised would change ?

well for example, the church basically ran england, screw the king, the church pulled the strings. What happened ? people rebelled against it, protestons... People moved the f*ck out and went to other places around the world, america being a main one.

[felizitation]

Originally posted by whitelotus well for example, the church basically ran england, screw the king, the church pulled the strings. What happened ? people rebelled against it, protestons... People moved the f*ck out and went to other places around the world, america being a main one.

I'm not basing myself on "historical facts" but more on the notion of churchs. Any book of history would say me that "church is bad" or something like that. I would say religion is an idea which realization is quite impossible.
So, what are YOUR opinions concerning church and concerning the questions of my preceding post?

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by loseyourname That's your great, defiant choice? Not to vote? You big rebel pimp, you.

Well the other alternative is to rise in arms, but since I am against killing people, I will not go that far to violate my ethics.

[whitelotus]

Originally posted by felizitation I'm not basing myself on "historical facts" but more on the notion of churchs. Any book of history would say me that "church is bad" or something like that. I would say religion is an idea which realization is quite impossible.
So, what are YOUR opinions concerning church and concerning the questions of my preceding post?

to tell you the truth, i never really read your post, i just skimmed it haha so i have no comments

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by Anonymouse Well the other alternative is to rise in arms, but since I am against killing people, I will not go that far to violate my ethics.

It's probably pointless to continue demeaning you, because I would like to see changes as much as you do. But given the strength of homeland security in the United States, there aren't going to be any revolutions, violent or otherwise. So I find it most effective to work with the system you're given. Withdrawing from it and resorting to internet pedagogy that is mostly ignored isn't likely to get you far.

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by loseyourname It's probably pointless to continue demeaning you, because I would like to see changes as much as you do. But given the strength of homeland security in the United States, there aren't going to be any revolutions, violent or otherwise. So I find it most effective to work with the system you're given. Withdrawing from it and resorting to internet pedagogy that is mostly ignored isn't likely to get you far.

The Mises Institute doesn't see it the way you do. They are people devoted to liberty and economic principles surrounding individualism. While accusing others of being closed minded for wanting to marry within their culture, the same open minded goomba is now exercising the very logic he is against, "going with what you know". And the same person who liked to quote Socrates in how it is essential to question everything with regard to the discussion on God or free will, to sound semi intelligent, is now doing the exact opposite.

The fact that you cannot engage in any form of critical thinking and how dependent you are on the system, is the exact reason why I expect the response that you gave. That other people may be victim because of Imperialism, abroad, and at home, and some may have their individual rights violated, is of no concern, as long as you have your football, and your ability to churn up love stories.

Thus when you proved yourself incapable, or unable to discuss this, it is expected that you would accuse me of "pedogogy" or earlier of "idealism" which is the exact thing I am against, which shows to me, you don't pay attention, nor bring your beliefs to question.

I think your behavior is just a big lard of contradictions that if used to cook bacon, wouldn't produce the desired results.

[felizitation]

Originally posted by whitelotus to tell you the truth, i never really read your post, i just skimmed it haha so i have no comments

I put you in my mind's jail, and you'll never get out.

[whitelotus]

*bangs on the bars like a maniac*

i hope i dont get raped by bubbuh in there :<

[felizitation]

Originally posted by whitelotus *bangs on the bars like a maniac*

i hope i dont get raped by bubbuh in there :<

No, I'm just doing everything you were too ashamed to ask. Gna gna gna !!! (*smiling like a big maniac*)