Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 03, 2016, 04:41:01 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 162
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Two Counties Gave HRC her ENTIRE PV Plurality on: December 01, 2016, 08:39:25 am
Get rid of York and Lancaster County, PA, Livingston County, MI and Waukesha County, WI  and Clinton wins the EV. This is why we should have the PV- to protect the rest of America from four counties out of over 3000.
2  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Pope Francis extends Catholic priests' power to forgive abortion on: November 24, 2016, 08:29:44 am
The most quasi-universalist talk I've heard is from people like Robert Barron who hold the "reasonable hope that everyone will be saved" position, but I'm not aware of many, if any, who go further than that.

That's what I'm referring to (and approximately the position I hold).

Quote
Personally, I think univeralism is a plausible outcome, but one I find rather unlikely as it overrides free will (although you can make a purgatorial universalist argument that doesn't necessarily do so, although it has other problems), and it seems to go against a number of teachings from Jesus himself.

There are elements within Eastern Orthodoxy, especially in Russian-language theology, that tend in the purgatorial-universalist direction, if memory serves.

I recently read a paper by the Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart which putt the case against Hell in very strong terms (available here). I personally found it very convincing, but Hart is one of those people who's worth reading even when you disagree with.
3  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: Senate Confirmation Hearing: Gass3268 for Supreme Court Justice on: November 23, 2016, 11:47:09 am
I think Gass would make a great justice and I urge the senate to confirm him.

Having said that, I would like to, as an eminent elder statesman of this game, like to release the following statement on Truman nominating a highly qualified, broadly respected atlasian for the supreme court while serving in the last days of a term he wasn't even elected for: lmao

This is clearly an attempt on Oakvale's part to ensure that Griffin does not appoint his successor on the court. I can't say I'm surprised, though.

As a matter of principle, I will oppose this nomination should it come to a vote before Friday, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
4  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Why can moderate republicans win in red states but not the other way around? on: November 22, 2016, 02:24:30 pm
i think the thread is spot-on.

ofc dems can win in republican states but it's much harder and needs much more luck/ressources/ name recog/gaffes than the other way around.

just look at the map...which states are out of reach for down-ticket republicans? (hint: not maryland/illinois/mass.....)

There is no reason at all to say that Democrats need more luck/resources or worse opponents to win in Solid Republican states than the converse. A quick look at the races you mention proves the point. Why did Republicans scrape a victory in Illinois? Because they were running against the incredibly unpopular Pat Quinn in a republican landslide year. Why did Charlie Baker win in 2014? Because he was a good candidate running against Martha Coakley, the world's worst candidate, in a republican landslide year. Why did Phil Scott win in Vermont? Because he was a well known moderate figure in the state, running to suceed the unpopular Shumlin. Why did the unknown John Bel Edwards win in Louisiana last year? Because he was a good candidate running against David Vitter. Why did Jim Justice win this year? Because he was a good, very rich candidate. There is no difference at all.

Wyoming and Tennessee had very popular democratic governors just 6 years ago. South Carolina had a very very close gubernatorial race in 2010. Obviously, all things being equal, Republicans are more likely to win in these states than Democrats. The same is obviously true in reverse for Vermont and Massachusetts and Maryland. But for all of these states there are circumstances, when there is the perfect storm of a good candidate, a poor opponent, the national tide and so on where the minority party can win. And these perfect storms seem to happen about as often on both sides.
5  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Why can moderate republicans win in red states but not the other way around? on: November 22, 2016, 08:54:53 am
What a ridiculously silly thread.

Just 2 weeks ago Jim Justice won the governor's race in the state with the second largest vote for Trump. If you look at the state house races for West Virginia and Kentucky Democrats won races in seats where Hillary got 10 or 20%. All three rural Minnesota dems were re elected despite Hillary losing their districts in a landslide (Clinton didn't even win a county in Petersons). Steve Bullock won re election in a state which Trump won by 20 points.

The whole premise is just flat out wrong.

6  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Are the vast majority of people good at heart? on: November 19, 2016, 09:02:51 am
Quote
"Approximately at midnight, sleep finally took pity on Pontius Pilate.....He walked in the company of his dog, and beside him walked Yeshua. They were arguing about something very complex and important, and neither of them could refute the other. They did not agree with each other in anything and that made their argument especially interesting and endless. It went without saying that today's execution proved to be a sheer misunderstanding: here Yeshua, who had thought up such an incredibly absurd thing as all men are good, was walking beside him, therefore he was alive. And, of course, it would be terrible to even think that one could execute such a man"
7  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Norbert Hofer (FPÖ) to host US-Russia summit in Vienna if elected President on: November 13, 2016, 04:12:22 pm
the transition of power in the Russian revolution, being by force, was illegitimate. There is no comparison to, say, our revolution.

Jesus Christ, Sanchez.
Only legitimate transfers of power should be recognized. The American Revolution was one. The Glorious Revolution was another. The secession of the CSA can even be legally justified (though, of course, not nearly as much as the subsequent reconquest and repatriation by the Union). These were totally different animals compared to the Russian Revolution or the rise of the Nazi Party in Germany, where existing albeit flawed state structures were overthrown either by force or just general intimidation.

Sorry, but you're not applying any sort of coherent standard here.
I think it's a pretty coherent standard. "Legitimate transfer of power" simply means a revolution sanchez happens to agree with.
8  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK Parliamentary by-elections, 2015-2020 on: November 06, 2016, 12:32:15 pm
Tories should run Mr Moat for throwback's sake

If that happened Paul Gascoigne would unexpectedly file as an independent candidate at the last moment.
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What went down in NC just now? on: November 04, 2016, 03:23:47 pm
Did anyone see the Obama rally descend into chaos? I against a heckler (an elderly veteran backing Trump according to Obama himself from the podium) was beaten? I dunno. Nobody is reporting it for some reason, but it alarmed me when I watched it happen.

Obama reminded me of Ceausescu during his last speech trying to calm the mob before he was forced to flee the building via helicopter. It took him a hot minute to get that place under control.

This is a remarkably stupid comment, even for a white supremacist.
10  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: You should have listened on: November 04, 2016, 02:29:08 pm
We've got some delusion of grandeur here. People have been aware and vocal on the need of game reform long before you became President. Suggesting that your actions, or rather lack of action, was a deciding factor here is... interesting.

Restart had been accomplished under Griffin, who unlike you never abdicated his responsibilities as President. It's naive to think "bah, reset, everything's solved now" way was of any use.

Well yes. That's true, and I've never claimed otherwise. Pretty much every game reform had the support of a majority (hence all of them passing the senate) of atlasians and probably a supermajority of active ones. What did happen, on every single one of them though, was that there were reactionaries who blocked the changes, not always the same, (although, as noted, some like zuwo were the same) but always enough, combined with the terrible system, to block any change.


Well, I've been receiving more positive notes than negative on my overall tenure as GM and a lot of people were getting involved thanks to various developments, so you certainly can't claim Atlasians views it as bland or useless.

OK, forget terrorist stuff for a moment. What about diplomatic problems with other countries? You've ignored it entirely. Whether you like the idea of GM or not, the law provides for the game engine and President can't just ignore it. You're free to push for the abolition of the game engine, but until then it's just immature to be like "oh, this is part of the rules I don't like, let's ignore it."

Last, but not least, I firmly believe that one of the reasons South American experiment had failed is because you have no game engine whatsoever. All you managed was to repeat all of Atlasia's mistakes.

I'm not at all surprised that people claim to view the GM office positively. In fact I've already said that, repeatedly, up thread.  But of course people claim to do so. As I said, it's one of the best sticks for beating your opponent over the head with. No one really decides their votes on it though, it's just a rhetorical device. And as soon as they reach the position of actually engaging with the office in a meaningful way, most people come around to the view that the office is unworkable. Most GMs do, which is why there is such a high turnover. The problem is no one ever believes that something is so because the GM says so. Hence Adam's aliens storyline, or the terrorist attacks, or whatever. In all those cases the public simply don't believe him. Hell, who really believes that atlasia has run surpluses for the last 12 years? The GM, if he is to believed has to say things everyone already knows, and if he doesn't, no one believes him.

And the thing is atlasia is primarily an elections game and only secondarily a government one. If the president wants to ignore the GM he can. Maybe not de jure but certainly de facto. If the public disagree they'll not re elect him or his party. But, funnily enough, that doesn't happen.


Prior to the massive number of deregistrations, consolidation was still viewed with hostility, and many thought a convention would fail to achieve anything. Even among those who signed it, many were still opposed to consolidation, which was of course the primary expected proposal at a convention. Perhaps that is what is causing our different interpretation of events with regards to support on the right. The massive loss of players finally encouraged those who had long opposed consolidation to realize it was only answer at that point.

I would also point out that I purposely delayed signing by a week because I was worried that the minute I signed the petition, it would be attacked as "Yankee's little scheme to preserve the status quo" by the dissolution, which was already being tossed around. Avoiding signing it gave the con-con some distance until those critics began to depart.

Your second paragraph is convenient, maybe it's true. I don't know so I can't deal with it.

And the first one isn't really a matter of disagreement. I obviously wouldn't have made the speech if there hadn't been a spate of deregistrations and inactivity. They were the inevitable outcome of that incarnation of the game running it's course, but if it had happened in the term after me I would have kept on going, obviously. The president obviously doesn't have the power to announce there is a crisis and have everyone believe him. The crisis was very very real. But I certainly think it's the case, and the negative reviews from the usual suspects of my tenure confirm, that if I had tried to polish the turd, if I had unleashed a flurry of executive orders and pmed everyone in the game and dragged together a cabinet, at least in name only, then the game would have held together for a bit long, staggering on. And I think that is a real contradiction. You can't say that on the one hand I didn't lead enough, and on the other that of course the crisis was real and overwhelming and nothing I did changed its course, and the ConCon would have happened anyway. If I had been more active on a conventional level in my last few months I think the ConCon would not have happened. And I think that would be a tragedy for the game.
11  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: You should have listened on: November 03, 2016, 07:58:33 am
Bore, nobody pretended that "everything was OK". The difference was between those who wanted to throw everything away without even trying to lift their fingers, like you, and those who acted.

Not true. At all, actually. In my many terms in the senate I backed pretty much every major reform going, only for every single one, including objectively sensible and minor ones like giving the SOFE the power to hold votes on amendments instead of unreliable governors, to be blocked by mindless reactionaries. In my first term as president I spent pretty much all of my political capital on a big piece of electoral reform, only to have it torpedoed by the labor machine. I signed the petition for a ConCon weeks before my speech, with the only result being radio silence. I did everything within the structures of the game possible to push for change, with nothing happening. Given that threatening to throw everything away was the only thing that provoked the reactionaries into accepting radical change then I'm not going to apologise for doing so.

Quote
As of the GM stuff, you seem to believe it's pretty much unimportant and we should stick to electoral simulations only. Valid point, but you can't possibly expect Atlasia to be a real governmental simulation without such mechanism. If such a bland approachment suits you, well, it's your right.

Perhaps. Although, as I noted, I'm far from alone in that view. I think a GM can be useful, although such a role should be limited. The thing is there's no fun, and actually it's the height of blandness, in dealing with something like a terrorist attack (write a speech saying you condemn the attackers and will support the victims, say we won't be afraid because the terrorists would have won, forget about it in a week), and there's no fun in dealing with an objectively implausible situation like Bushie leading a rebellion against the government.
12  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: You should have listened on: November 03, 2016, 07:47:45 am
Notice I said, "move the discussion on the right", not change my vote personally.


There was still reluctance after I signed, bore and the mass loss of players from Sawx, to Adam to Snowguy from bans and deregistrations, help push them to try the Con-con.

The petition was signed before sawx's banning but after my speech by you, jomcar, cinyc, poirot and adam. That's 4 (at the time) very active right wingers and the labor power broker. After the 22nd july but before the 1st of august it was signed by, timturner, marokai, flo, dereich, tony v, texasgurl, clarkkent, newcanadaland, badger, anoton kreitzer, peeperkorn, sanchez and gass.

Of those 4 can be counted as right wingers, with dereich being the only one who was active in the game at the time. The rest were the result of the labor machine swinging behind getting people to sign the petition and were mainly, to put it charitably, zombies. I'm sorry, yankee, but the facts simply do not bear your theory here out.
13  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: You should have listened on: November 02, 2016, 07:28:46 pm

You didn't move the terms of the debate on the right, bore. Sawx's ban did more to move the debate among us than you did.


My speech was on the 18th, you signed it on the 18th, Sawx was banned on the 22nd. Nice try.

Fmr. President James Buchanan
OldPublicFunctionary     
YaBB God

★★★★★
Posts: 6168

Re: BREAKING: Lee's Army Surrenders at Appomattox
on: April 9, 1865, 11:23:47 pm

My last months as president coincided with a secession crisis, with state after state announcing her departure from the union, the congress hopelessly divided, and the army a mere husk. It was only through my strong leadership, neither resigning and abandoning the union nor endorsing the approach of black Republicans who wished merely to play coy and ignore the impending rupture of our family of states, that brought about a successful war strategy which, while perhaps going on for too long, did bring about the reunion that was necessary.

Completely inaccurate, obviously, but I have to admit this is quite funny. Most obviously, the crisis as it started was nothing to do with me but to do with a game wide dissatisfaction with atlasia as it existed. And yes, my approach was the correct one by any objective standard. I fulfilled all that was required of me. I never failed to sign or veto any of the few bills the senate sent me, I made appointments and I even engaged with the senate more than most senators did. In other words I allowed the game to stumble on, but I did not try and give the illusion that all was well and try and paper over the severe structural flaws by proposing new laws which would have been wiped out in a few months or spend hours trying to find a SoEA or SoIA who would just resign in frustration a wee later.

Unlike you I took full responsibility for the fiasco.

What is interesting that I've devised that ultimately failed scenario as a way to actually get the likes of you to react. Unsurprisingly to no avail.

So yes, I did mishandle this, but at least I did something.

Is that interesting? I don't really think so.

I'm not going to pretend and never have that I enjoyed engaging with GM storylines much, like most people in the game at best I used them as sticks to beat my opponent with because they didn't respond to them. But of course this was highly hypocritical. That's politics. But I guess I'm sorry that I didn't take storylines such as atlasia being in the throes of a rebellion led by Bushie and Lebron as seriously as they deserved.
At least Kalwejt acted, and as GM he always worked to make the game more interesting and more interactive. His legacy as an officeholder (and particularly as GM) is far more accomplished than this revisionist active and strong presidency which apparently existed during 2015, even if we can find countless statements of respected Atlasians of different sides who openly defined the period the other way around.

Your call for radical reform was admittedly more reasonable than that of those who wished for the game to suddenly cease its existence, but you are on record stating that a Con Con was impossible at one moment and that we might as well leave everything to burn down. To make matters worse, that was right at the moment in which we had an actual revolution and the Attorney General appointed by the Administration committing treason. What we needed was firm, assertive leadership from the White House, and I'm pretty sure that wasn't what we had (which was voiced again and again from people from virtually all sides).

And if we want to debate only of facts, we can note that the opinion polls and public debate consistently showcased disappointment on the administration, that respected cabinet ministers resigned in protest of this, that even people deeply supportive of Labor like Windjammer did call for your resignation and that very little got actually done or said by the White House in those two terms.

I'm somewhat bemused by this idea that if only I had appointed some people (and, let us be clear, no one wanted those jobs) to some unworkable jobs, or written a statement condemning violence, then everything would have been ok and we would have returned to a land of milk and honey.

Using the term strong presidency which I did not, is misleading. I said strong leadership, which is not the same thing. I showed strong leadership by not exercising a strong presidency during the crisis, by not issuing paper decrees and stirring speeches when that was the politically popular thing to do.

Personally my feeling is that the animosity towards my presidency, and I don't doubt that it exists from, as you have pointed out, the establishment of the time, across the spectrum, is based on the fact that I didn't pretend that everything was ok at the time. And by acknowledging this truth I was directly implicating that very same establishment for killing the game, which of course they can not handle. Now I don't think it's intentional, clearly not. Yankee for instance is clearly committed to the game. But the establishment was angered by the implication that by blocking nearly every reform of consequence (of course individually many of them did support one reform but not others, but collectively nothing could happen), had stifled the game to death. No one wants to be accused of killing a thing they love. And the natural reaction is to pretend that everything was fine in the lead up to the crisis, until big nasty bore and the evil IRC tried to kill it. But it simply isn't true.
14  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: You should have listened on: November 01, 2016, 05:16:05 pm
There is no way that attacking a candidate in the voting booth is not campaigning by any traditional definition. You can spin it, you can dive into any kind of historical examples that you want. But it is what it is and the law states that it is grounds for invalidation.

I would point out that Rpryor knocked off several of my voters too, two of which are being sued over as well. Why? Because the law either rightly or wrongly interpreted motivated those actions.

I don't think I should have to point this out to a Supreme Court Justice, but if laws were as obvious as you think they are, you'd be out of a job.

The terms of the debate were not shifted because of your statements. They were shifted by the mass exodus of players that occurred over the course of that July, leading to myself and others like PiT embracing consolidation as the only viable path forward.

Your statement was regarding as neigh on embrace of dissolution, which the embrace of the Con-Con by various conservative elements was aimed at stopping.

It's pretty clear that the signatures to the ConCon started happening again at almost straight after my speech. And yes maybe that was because I moved the terms of debate, forcing the right out of its hidebound Smiley moderate reform Smiley dogma. I make no apologies for that. Although if you'd read the statement and my other ones it would be pretty clear that I regarded dissolution and a successful ConCon as largely the same thing.

The problem is that bore simply threw the towel when any sign of activity from the top would be of great importance. He didn't cross the line like Nix, but the fact remains he gave up.

Even before the crisis bore was pretty much a lackluster President. When I was the GM I a had very hard time to get him to react to anything (Lumine was very cooperative).

Interesting that you've neglected to mention that your time as GM came to an ignominious end as you were forced by the overwhelming weight of public opinion to resign as GM because you nuked atlasia.
15  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: You should have listened on: November 01, 2016, 08:13:50 am
So much revisionism, so little time:


Snip.

Well there are two things to deal with here. Firstly I have no interest in how the people rank my tenure. People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. People are often wrong. It is the facts which concern me.

And, moving onto the facts, though certain people try to deny them, are clear. Before my call for radical reform on July 18th 2015, the Constitutional Convention petition thread had been nigh on abandoned. After, the terms of debate completely shifted, and we got our ConCon. The facts simply speak for themselves.

Snip

I have always been nothing more and nothing less than my own man. When people like Nix, who I deeply respect, resigned, I could have gone with them, but didn't.  Similarly an ally like Adam can confirm that trying to whip me always fail. I have no more elections to run for, so I am not trying to impress people with my maverick status. It's just that ranting about various other people has little connection to the issue at hand.

And, maybe this is only clear to those who have been outside the atlasian bubble for a while, but there are no words for your running mate disqualifying perfectly valid votes to win you the election other than corruption and treachery.


Are you serious?

In the final phase of your term, you were deeply inactive, with just the Senate being active in the government. Also your approval ratings were something like 10%


This is blatantly untrue, and the fact that it has become accepted history is deeply disturbing. The senate was to all intents and purposes, a zombie institution in the last three months of my term, from the beginning of August to the beginning November, there were 14 acts voted on by the senate. Most of those attracting a smattering of comment. In the month of october the senate expelled 2 of its members and passed 3 laws, attracting a total of 164 posts between all 3.
16  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / You should have listened on: October 31, 2016, 08:46:40 pm
Roughly a year ago today, my active atlasia career ended after consecutively serving in the northeast assembly, in the senate and then as president. It was a long and illustrious career, and, at the end of it all I was happy to retire as an elder statesman with no regrets.

My second term as president coincided with a crisis of inactivity, with offices vital to the running of the state becoming impossible to fill, the senate being barely active and the regions mere husks. It was only through my strong leadership, neither resigning and abandoning the game or endorsing the approach of conservatives who wished merely to tinker around with the deck chairs, that brought about a concon, which, while perhaps going on for too long, did bring about the restructuring and rebooting that was necessary.

Now it has come to my attention that a cabal of individuals, perhaps jealous of this proud legacy, have spent the last year constantly undermining and attacking me as a weak and failed president, who single handedly drove atlasia onto the rocks. It goes without saying that the most longwinded of these individuals is the esteemed Supreme Court Judge Yankee.

Ironically it turns out that the very people who have spent the last year talking about the importance of doing things by the book, who have defamed my legacy and the legacy of all those who pushed for game reform in those dark days, are, unsurprisingly, complete hypocrites, shamelessly ignoring the very same rules simply to win an election.

Well something much important is at stake here than who controls the presidency for the next few months. At stake is the very future of atlasia as a democracy. While I believe that yankee should have been rejected for his mendacious slander about the past I have referred to above, reasonable people can disagree. It is now clear, however, that reasonable people can no longer disagree, and that yankee must be rejected due to his contempt for the democratic system.

Speaking as your former president, my conscience would not be clean if I did not try to warn you that all people of good will must condemn this brazen attempt at a coup.
17  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: October 2016 Presidential Runoff on: October 29, 2016, 03:34:22 pm
1. Blair/Kingpoleon
18  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: October 2016 Federal Election on: October 23, 2016, 07:53:34 pm
PRESIDENT
[2] Xahar/Bacon King
[1] Blair/Kingpoleon

HOUSE
[3] Peebs
[1] EarlAW
[2] Fitzgerald
[4] NeverAgain
[5] Siren
[6] Southern Gothic
19  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: Northern Voting Booth: October 2016 Elections on: October 23, 2016, 04:21:16 pm
Senate
[1] LLR
[2] Harry S. Truman
[3] WI: Maxwell

Governor
1. Mike Wells

Assembly
1. darthebear
2. Harry S. Truman
3. Blair
4. LLR
5. Mike Wells
6. Dkrol
7. Kingpoleon
8. Kent
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: As a Democrat, I feel this election is rigged. on: October 20, 2016, 05:10:36 pm
I'm not a Trump supporter, in fact I've supported every Democrat that's run for president since 1988, but I do think there is a little bit of merit to Trump's accusations of this election being rigged.

Now, I don't think the electoral commission is actively trying to sabotage the Republican party or any other candidates, but let me try to explain how I think the election is rigged.

Lets talk about the primaries first.I feel that the Democrat party's electoral process was stacked to make sure Clinton got the nomination instead of Sanders. I think in a straight first past the post electoral system without SuperPACs Sanders would have had a much better chance of clinching the nomination.

When it comes to the general election, I feel the majority of media sources have decided that they want Clinton to win and will bend over backwards to make Trump look ridiculous even when he says something that does make sense (which admittedly is rare, but it does happen). Some weeks ago Donald Trump Jr. made the statement about how the media "would be warming up the gas chamber" if the GOP would have carried out some of the tactics the Democrats had carried out. The outrage on CNN and other Democrat leaning channels almost made me think like they have vindicated Trump Jr's statement.

Every debate is covered as a maniac bullying a poor defenseless woman. Now, Trump's actions are unacceptable, and I don't think he's done a good job at all in the debates, but a few of his answers do carry merit. However those are ignored in favor of covering how many times Trump interrupted the moderator, or how much he sniffed. They also tend to gloss over some of the, frankly, stupid answers Clinton gives during the debates.

So, in conclusion, I don't think there's a political conspiracy involving the parties directly but there might be some merit in looking into how the media has portrayed Trump as a ridiculous option and an un-electable candidate since the day he announced his nomination.

Once again, I would like to point out, I am a Democrat.

lol
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: James O'Keefe: "We have smoking gun evidence and it is incredibly damning." on: October 19, 2016, 05:36:31 pm
I'm amazed anyone, even deranged trumpists, is falling for this. Just saying your evidence is incredibly damning doesn't make it so.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump vows to unite America under "one God" on: October 18, 2016, 09:47:30 am
This thread is kind of odd, especially compared to all the other trump stories and all the other terrible things republicans have said about atheists.

You don't really get more american and less like a worrying break with the past than using a formulation that appears in the Pledge of Allegiance and the most common form of the Gettysburg Address. What's the big deal?

Because it is a break with the past. As Thomas Jefferson wrote,
Quote
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.

American obsession with The One True God is a comparatively recent thing - it was added to the pledge in 1954.

I feel like you didn't really read what I said. For one thing the Gettysburg address which is where the "under God" line comes from (and yes while I know Lincoln probably didn't say under God at the actual speech, he wrote it in the most widely publicised version, which is the important thing) was a century before the Cold War, so not comparatively recent. For another even if we accept that the obsession with the One True God is a comparatively recent thing historically, it is still 60 years ago, meaning a candidate affirming it now is hardly a break with the past. It's like saying because Vermont has a very long history of voting for Republicans, and it's Democratic swing is comparatively recent, when Clinton wins it in a few weeks it will be a break with the past.

The Jefferson quote is rather silly as well, because the issue here is theism versus atheism not Christianity versus any other religion, and the Founders, while obviously wishing for a secular state and not being especially christian, came down firmly on the theism side with the whole "Endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights".

Look, you don't have to like that the pledge of allegiance says under God, or that the coins say "in God we trust", I certainly don't. But it's silly to pretend that it is the same issue as Christianity versus every other religion (obviously there are some similarities because Christianity is by far the largest theism, but it's not the same), and it's silly to pretend that Trump using phrases that go back in american history at least 150 years is anywhere near the top of a list of bad things he's done.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump vows to unite America under "one God" on: October 18, 2016, 06:59:16 am
This thread is kind of odd, especially compared to all the other trump stories and all the other terrible things republicans have said about atheists.

You don't really get more american and less like a worrying break with the past than using a formulation that appears in the Pledge of Allegiance and the most common form of the Gettysburg Address. What's the big deal?
24  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: Atlas' favorite countries: Final European round on: October 17, 2016, 08:07:35 pm
Italy would be the best country in the world even if the only thing it had done was invent pizza.
25  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Do you believe the election is rigged for Hillary Clinton? on: October 17, 2016, 08:00:33 pm
Do you believe that the Pope is not a catholic?
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 162


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines