Atheist Nexus Logo

Politics, Economics, and Religion

Information

Politics, Economics, and Religion

Religion has so many connections to political and economic beliefs, there needs to be a place to identify linkages, problems, goals, options, action plans and evaluation criteria.  

Members: 103
Latest Activity: on Saturday

What is the purpose of life?

An eternal question, what is the purpose of life?, occupied philosophers’ thoughts throughout history. Stone pictographs reveal even primitive peoples reflected on this query. Each one has the capacity to define his or her personal thinking about politics, economics and religion.

Discussion Forum

An Atheist / Antitheist Manifesto, by Brian Dalton

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Loren Miller on Saturday. 8 Replies

The original title of the following video was: "The Way of the Mister: Atheist Fundamentalist," but having watched it twice, I can't escape the feeling that my moniker fits as well and perhaps a bit better.  In 20 minutes and change, Brian Dalton…Continue

Tags: fundamentalist, manifesto, antitheist, atheist, MrDeity

Hillary Clinton has Connections to The Family Fellowship

Started by sk8eycat. Last reply by sk8eycat May 18. 6 Replies

WOULD YOU BUY A USED BUYBULL FROM THIS WOMAN?From Mother Jones...2007…Continue

The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats (Nick Hanauer - Politico.com)

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Loren Miller May 10. 2 Replies

Memo: From Nick Hanauer To: My Fellow ZillionairesYou probably don’t know me, but like you I am one of those .01%ers, a proud and unapologetic capitalist. I have founded, co-founded and funded more than 30 companies across a range of industries—from…Continue

Tags: pitchforks, 1%, capitalism, plutocrat, Jeff Bezos

HOW A PIONEER OF BRANDING INVENTED CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM

Started by Bertold Brautigan. Last reply by tom sarbeck May 9. 10 Replies

Religion Dispatch…Continue

Tags: marketing, Fundamentalism

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Politics, Economics, and Religion to add comments!

Comment by Joan Denoo on September 19, 2012 at 1:00am

Robert, You make sound and rational statements if your concern is only for the unborn child/with potential to grow to be a man or woman. That is one point I am trying to convey.
1. Why should each and every pregnant woman be expected to sacrifice herself for the life of her unborn child without consideration of the price she pays. I would not/could not abort a child, whether at the moment of conception or at the moment of birth, but what I decide is my right and that responsibility resides in me. I cannot make that decision for another woman. I don't know her mental state, or her physical state, for that matter. To expect a woman to make a decision because someone else has a belief makes no sense to me. Each person is entitled to her/his beliefs, not all beliefs are equal, and no one is required to respect the beliefs of others. Beliefs are standpoint specific; one person believes one thing and another a different one. It is not like gravity, a natural law of nature. (Thanks Sk8eycat for Shaw's quote.) 

In primitive cultures, whether a woman carries pregnancy to term is often decided by the needs of the tribe. If there is enough food for another life, the pregnancy goes to term; if there is not enough food, the pregnancy is ended, without consulting the mother. 

In China, with incredible overcrowding, a woman is allowed only one child. If the 1st child is a female, it often is killed, making possible for another child who could be a male. If a woman has two children or more, she loses her rights to access to benefits provided by the state. I talked to many Chinese women in China who had been caught up in that terrible dilemma, and you know what, women that I talked to agreed with the law. Well, if that is what they want, so be it. However, desperate times require desperate thinking. It depends on where you stand on an issue and one standpoint is not right for a person from a different standpoint. 

As to my over-generalizing about christians, you are absolutely correct. I over-generalize. I do so when a fundamentalist christian makes some ridiculous statement, such as the Earth is 6,000 years old, and a rational person does not stand up and say, "Wait a minute, that is not true!" Not all christians are uneducated, but all christians seem to think the old bromide, my religion, right or wrong; or my country, right or wrong; or my family, right or wrong. Such devotion to religion or patriotism or family loyalty is bigoted. By that, I mean,   "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."

Confession time, I am a bigot. I make no apologies for being obstinate and intolerant of beliefs that interfere with evidence. When a person wants to bring creationism or intelligent design into a science classroom, I object, and loudly. If there are those who believe in a god or allah or yahweh or whatever the name, and know that evidence does not support that claim, yet remains silent, I find that more intolerable than a person who loudly claims creationism. Silence implies agreement. 

Have you ever heard a christian confront another christian who believes in spirits and devils and angels and heaven and hell? Silence tells me all I need to know about a person. 

I respect your willingness to debate, Robert, and enjoy the challenge,.

Comment by Steph S. on September 18, 2012 at 10:30pm

Just reading all the posts here.

Hope everyone is doing well today.

Comment by sk8eycat on September 18, 2012 at 8:47pm

Change the subject for a while, okay?

Comment by Loren Miller on September 18, 2012 at 8:35pm

"Life begins at conception."

Sure, right ... even if that life is that of an anencephalic embryo ... or a fused twin ... or a chimera or some other description?  How detectable is that to some country doctor without advanced equipment, say in a rural area, without easy access to the kind of facilities some but not all US citizens enjoy?

The process of creating human life is a gauntlet, a 40-week stretch of too many kinds of challenges, dangers and biological minefields.  It's estimated that 40-50% of all fertilized eggs get flushed out with the next menses, and that something like 5-7 percent of pregnancies don't survive the first trimester, not to mention other potential affectations of genetic and other sources.  Yet mankind has survived to this point, and indeed, is beginning to spread beyond this planet's ability to sustain its quickly increasing numbers.

There is no single metric I am aware of which would say, past this point, the gestating being is fully HUMAN, not even at 40 weeks, without the sophistication of modern medicine.  That sophistication is available to many, but hardly all.  Someone ... I DARE you ... try to legislate the dynamics of a pregnancy so that all those who can survive will, and even then, what of the choice of the mother?

I have said this before and will repeat: it is women who bear this responsibility.  They deserve the right to be trusted with the contents of their own bodies FIRST.  The men who may have participated in that process may deserve input, but it remains the woman's body FIRST.

As was said some time back: Trust Women.

Comment by sk8eycat on September 18, 2012 at 7:52pm

The people I have a problem with are the ones who want it written into our laws that "life begins at conception."  How can they tell?  It takes up to 8 days after an ovum is fertilized for it to reach the uterus and implant itself there.  All that while the cells are dividing.  And it's estimated that more than 50 percent of all fertilized eggs fail to attach at all.

So are they human at that stage, or what?

Comment by Loren Miller on September 18, 2012 at 5:16pm

Robert, from the outset, I said that you were entitled to your views and practice them as you see fit, just as I have mine.  I don't presume to tell someone else that they have to run their life according to my rulebook.  I don't have that right.  Neither do you.

Comment by Robert Brown on September 18, 2012 at 5:01pm

One other thing for Loren and even booklover

I thought I should include the definition of a bigot here.  I do have strong opinions, but it seems that my views are more flexible than are yours.

Bing Dictionary
intolerant person: somebody with strong opinions, especially on politics, religion, or ethnicity, who refuses to accept different views
 
Merriam-Webster
a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
Comment by sk8eycat on September 18, 2012 at 4:54pm

Loren, this quote came to mind while I was reading posts in here.

Pardon him, Theodotus, he is a barbarian, and thinks that the
customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature.
-- George Bernard Shaw
Comment by Robert Brown on September 18, 2012 at 4:30pm

Been a busy day it looks like.  I actually love true debate like this.  That is why I was so upset with the discussion stopping use of the term bigot and got me originally posting.

Where to begin, I guess first, in my earlier response I stated I believe a baby becomes its own being or individual after its own heart starts beating.  This can be detected around 9 to 10 weeks at the earliest so I think abortion is ok until then, and am even flexible enough to stretch it until actual viability which may be around weeks 20 to 24.  This would give plenty of time in most cases for a woman that was raped or in some other circumstance to end an unwanted pregnancy.

I am not 100 percent anti-abortion and I am not saying it is only for cases of rape or incest.  Any reason until it can be viable on its own is fine for me. 

Joan, your response about what I said regarding Liberals calling conservatives Bigots I didn't quite get.  I think you are equating all religious people being conservative or all conservatives being religious.

All of the burn in hell comments that religious people make to a liberal atheist, they also make to conservative atheists, my point was religious people in my experience are more willing to hearing athieist ideas than liberals are willing to hear conservative ideas.  Time and time again in life I have had liberals literally turn away from me and ignore what I am saying when they hear I am a conservative, or use a comment like you are a bigot to shut down the conversation and disregard ideas on that basis.  A religious person may say I will burn in hell, but I can still say why and then ask them to prove it.  The conversation isn't ended by a burn in hell statement.

I also get more upset when Liberals won't discuss subjects because they are supposed to be open-minded, where as religious people aren't thinking right to begin with.

I know the religious right and left aren't on any of our sides until they get unbrainwashed.

To booklover, I just think it is sad that anyone will say it is ok for a mom to kill her unborn child at 7 months, 8 months, or even the day before the due date.  It may be her choice, but what happened to our humanity to be so cavalier about the awsomness of a woman bringing a new life into the world.  And even with my dislike of death a day before due date, I know there are always circumstances that can't be controlled like auto accidents and cancer's that may make saving the mom necessary.  I am not talking about the exceptions, but the rule. 

And Joan, good for you on adopting a child. I agree that every child should be wanted and in your case an unwanted, unaborted child became wanted and had not only a better life, but a life in itself because of it.

I say give a child a chance to grow up and be a good or bad adult and judge them by their actions in life.  Don't assume because they will have a tough or unwanted childhood that they will be bad or worthless.

  

Comment by sk8eycat on September 18, 2012 at 4:22pm

"Sure you can overturn Roe, even with what should be stare decisis status.  You won't stop abortions, not so long as there is a demand for them."

Thank you, Loren!

I knew by the time I was 13 that I was not fit to raise sane children, and that I never wanted to try.  So, in the summer of 1959 I was 19 years old, pregnant, and 2000 miles from home.  The guy who said he loved me suddenly revealed that he was already engaged and couldn't/wouldn't marry me.  All I could think of was finding a building in Sioux City that was tall enough to jump off of and die. 

Somehow my employer found out, and through connections found an MD who was willing to do a D&C in his office after hours.  Without anaesthesia.  It was expensive (for me... $300...a lot of money in 1959), scary, and painful, but I have never regretted it.  Not even for a minute.

And I would do it again, if I had to.  But I won't, now. 

Hooray for menopause!

 
 
 

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service