Comments by "J Nagarya" (@jnagarya519) on "How Could People Think God Sent This Moron? (with David French) | The Bulwark Podcast" video.

The deal was that "religions" wouldn't be taxed in exchange for their staying out of politics. Instead they took up LY(NG.
40
@lewisthelog3749 He nonetheless had political impact -- and the official politics responded by killing him because of his call to responsibility, which was viewed by the monied class as a call to "socialism".
10
@reginaldgarner4321 The point I'm making is that there is a difference between fact and belief. And it's a fact that a belief can be false. The question I'm asking is: Is it morally responsible to cling to a false belief. If a thing can't be proven to exist, is it reasonable to insist it does and that there IS "proof"? And how credible is that "proof"? It is lazy to never critically evaluate -- which requires active THINKING -- beliefs as to whether they are true or false, or based on evidence other than emotion and "preference".
9
@reginaldgarner4321 It can't be proven there's a "God". And no myopic "Christian" has ever been able to correctly predict what their hypothethetical would or will do. You're arrogance is the opposite of the humility prescribed by Christ.
7
@reginaldgarner4321 YOUR problem is that you can't PROVE there is a "God". And what do you rely on? The unproven and unprovable word of illiterate sheep herders. There is a DIFFERENCE between BELIEF and KNOWLEDGE.
7
@patriciagriffin1505 Then you have an imaginary "relationship" with a speculation that can't be proven to exist.
5
@91GT347 "God" talked to me not five minutes ago, and "He" said that I am the only human, in the entire infinite history of the universe, that "He" has ever talked to. Well, yeah: I can't prove that -- but you can't prove "He" didn't. That is agnosticism, not "atheism" -- which is your only option as an oversimplifying person who thinks in either/or extremes. Get it through your unprovable and unproven subjectivism: humans are flawed and finite; therefore, humans cannot conceive of a perfect infinity. You know what you believe; but you don't know that your belief is true.
4
@peterbetts858 1. It can't be proven there's a "God". 2. That being the fact, you cannot know what a "God" that can't be proven to exist would or could "say". And how about learning to communicate like a mature adult?
3
The only observable Christians I've seen who actually walk the talk are Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter. Period. Full stop.
2
Let's apply logic to your comment: "it doesn't matter what they believe . If they believe in God that's there own business not yours". It's okay to believe a thing exists that can't be proven to exist, and reason and logic be damned? How many of those who PROFESS to believe in "God" are using that as excuse to vote for TRUMP? "it's people like you that make this world the way it is today." It's "people like me" who prefer logic, reason, FACTS, to mindless blind belief, and personal attacks in defense of that which is, frankly, stupidity. Is your belief in "God" your excuse for that bigotry? Christianity is actually quite simple: compassion and inclusion. And to _quote you_: "it doesn't matter what [I] believe. [T]hat's [my] business not yours". "Did you ever hear the saying mind your own business and keep your opinions to yourself." Did you ever stop to think that you should first apply that principle to _yourself_?
2
@PaulZink-k8d And you need to drop the cute teenage "spelling" and respect readers with adult spelling.
2
Because they DON'T think -- they BELIEVE.
1
Apparently most people don't recognize the difference between "thought" and "belief". The thinking person critically evaluates belief because belief can be false. It's how, fundamentally, we distinguish between error and truth, lie and truth.
1
Or it has a shortage of locusts.
1
@believein1 There are also locusts disguised as Republicans. And it can't be proven there's a "God". Moreover, Christ said to keep your "religion" to yourself -- it is to be a PRIVATE relationship between you and your speculation called "God". And the First amendment separation of "religion" and gov't was based on a deal: the gov't won't tax your "religion" if you keep it out of gov't and politics. Instead the "religions" LIE in order to IGNORE AND SUBVERT that agreement.
1
Are they brainwashed, or dishonestly cloaking their ambitions for worldly power? The Catholic church has massive hoarded wealth -- but when it wants ready cash it passes the collection plate.
1
@TrustGod-p7w He may be "innocent" by having brainwashed himself; but either way, innocent or knowingly, he is a scammer seeking WORLDLY power.
1
@robynliteracy7057 Pastors are selling themselves to MAGA.
1
@vincentsmith9562 Churches are tax exempt. The original deal was that they would be tax exempt so long as they stayed out of politics. Instead they've amassed untaxed wealth and use that to force their fantasies onto others, some of that through gov't. Some include lying against the fact of separation of "religion" and gov't.
1
@edwardbaker1331 A belief that is false exists; but that it exists does not make it true. And this isn't about "animosity," simpleton: it is about REASON. Let's see if your are not so profoundly shallow that you can grasp reason: Not five minutes ago "God" talked to me. And "He" said that he has never, in the entire endless history of infinity, talked to any other human. Well, yeah -- I can't prove that, but you can't disprove it. That's why reason requires EVIDENCE. And why Christ instructed that one practice one's "religion" IN PRIVATE -- because the public showing off of one's "piety" is egotism based on being judgmental of others as inferior because you run for necessary doubt and can't stand others believing differently than you. I love the way the FOUNDERS put you bullying cranks in your place: ___ From the North Carolina constitution adopted on December 18, 1776: "XXXI. That no clergyman, or preacher of the gospel, of any denomination, shall be capable of being a member of either the Senate, House of Commons, or Council of State, while he continues in the exercise of the pastoral function. . . . . "XXXIV. That there shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State, in preference to any other; neither shall any person, on any pretence whatsoever, be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith or judgment, nor be obliged to pay, for the purchase of any glebe, or the building of any house of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes right, or has voluntarily and personally engaged to perform; but all persons shall be at liberty to exercise their own mode of worship:--_Provided_, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to exempt preachers of treasonous or seditious discourses, from legal trial and punishment." ___ From the constitution of Georgia adopted on February 5, 1777: "Art. LVI. All persons whatever shall have the free exercise of their religion; provided it be not repugnant to the peace and safety of the State; and shall not, unless by consent, support any teacher or teachers except those of their own profession." "Art. LXII. No clergyman of any denomination shall be allowed a seat in the legislature." ___ From New York constitution adopted on April 20. 1777: XXXIX. And whereas the ministers of the gospel are, by their profession, dedicated to the service of God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their function; therefore, no minister of the gospel, or priest of any denomination whatsoever, shall, at any time hereafter, under any pretence or description whatever, be eligible to, or capable of holding, any civil or military office or place within this State.
1
@marciamariethompson6463 Exactly my point.
1
@mkkrupp2462 Do you actually understand "freedom" -- and the fact that every right is inextricably entwined with RESPONSIBILITY? Or are you all about abstract fantasies without substance?
1
@Francisco50771 From the North Carolina constitution adopted on December 18, 1776: . . . . "XXXIV. That there shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State, in preference to any other; neither shall any person, on any pretence whatsoever, be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith or judgment, nor be obliged to pay, for the purchase of any glebe, or the building of any house of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes right, or has voluntarily and personally engaged to perform; but all persons shall be at liberty to exercise their own mode of worship:--_Provided_, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to exempt preachers of treasonous or seditious discourses, from legal trial and punishment." ___ And that is because the Founders realized that it can't be proven that there IS a "God".
1
@anjaoldnettle2841 The majority of "Christian" churches -- many were anti-Semitic based upon their stolen JEWISH-written "Bible" -- in Nazi Germany caved to and went along with Hitler. "Biblical" gibberish won't change those facts.
1
@tonimartine370 It can't be proven there's a "God" -- therefore it can't be proven that illiterate sheep herders were talked to by anyone let alone a "God". Reason requires more EVIDENCE than mere word from finite and imperfect humans who are prone to error and lying. This is how the Founders put your subjectivist rejection of fact and reason in its place: ___ From the North Carolina constitution adopted on December 18, 1776: "XXXI. That no clergyman, or preacher of the gospel, of any denomination, shall be capable of being a member of either the Senate, House of Commons, or Council of State, while he continues in the exercise of the pastoral function. . . . . "XXXIV. That there shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State, in preference to any other; neither shall any person, on any pretence whatsoever, be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith or judgment, nor be obliged to pay, for the purchase of any glebe, or the building of any house of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes right, or has voluntarily and personally engaged to perform; but all persons shall be at liberty to exercise their own mode of worship:--_Provided_, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to exempt preachers of treasonous or seditious discourses, from legal trial and punishment." ___ From the constitution of Georgia adopted on February 5, 1777: "Art. LVI. All persons whatever shall have the free exercise of their religion; provided it be not repugnant to the peace and safety of the State; and shall not, unless by consent, support any teacher or teachers except those of their own profession." "Art. LXII. No clergyman of any denomination shall be allowed a seat in the legislature." ___ From New York constitution adopted on April 20. 1777: XXXIX. And whereas the ministers of the gospel are, by their profession, dedicated to the service of God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their function; therefore, no minister of the gospel, or priest of any denomination whatsoever, shall, at any time hereafter, under any pretence or description whatever, be eligible to, or capable of holding, any civil or military office or place within this State. ___ Those, and equivalent provisions in the other states constitutions, eventuated in the First Amendment separation of "religion" and gov't. The US Constitution, by its own express terms, is the SUPREME Law of the Land. There is NO "higher law".
1
@SherryHill-k5y You've actually STUDIED "all past societies"? Including their level of education, illiteracy, and critical thinking? Because ignorance is the basic tradition, your assertion is meaningless. It is also meaningless and also ignorant is this fact: Most societies believed in MULTIPLE "Gods" -- not a single "supreme being"; see as examples Greek mythology and Indian Hinduism. It is only with the pre-Christian era that all those "Gods" were consolidated into a single "God"(though Catholicism posits a "father, son, AND "holy ghost") -- and the "God" of the "Old Testament" is a mass-murder-ordering TYRANT who blames and punishes the IMPERFECT humans "He" created, instead of taking responsibility for making them IMPERFECT and therefore bound to screw up. You're also wrong to believe that "believing" a thing makes the thing believed true -- or makes it actually exist. Can you imagine flying without having an airplane? -- yes. Can you IN REALITY fly without an airplane? NO! Can you "BELIEVE" the FALSE FANTASY that you can fly without an airplane? Certainly -- but that belief, being a false fantasy, would be FALSE. That's why THINKING is an ACTIVE process, whereas "belief" is a resting point. CRITICAL THINKING evaluates the BELIEF to determine whether it is true OR FALSE. Or, neutrally, not proven. What the claims about a "supreme being" are about is FEAR OF DEATH. NO ONE knows what occurs when one dies. But the alternative to the fear is "hope" -- and generated fantasies about it. So "religion" provides made-up "answers" to questions that have no answer. Believing a thing DOES NOT automagically also make it true. How can an imperfect, finite human comprehend infinitude and perfection? S/he cannot; one can "believe" that infinity and perfection exist, but the finite, imperfect human cannot KNOW they do.
1
@marciamariethompson6463 None of that proves there's a "God" that, according to finite imperfect human speculation, is beyond the conception of finite imperfect humans. You're a subjectivist who rejects facts and reason -- including the fact that illiterates in a "Bible" that claimed the "whole world" was flooded -- before it was proven the world is round, and before there was any knowledge of any "world" outside the Middle East desert -- and who claimed they heard voices, and that the "voices" were "God," provided a shred of proof for any of that. This is how the Founders put you subjectivists in your place: ___ From the North Carolina constitution adopted on December 18, 1776: "XXXI. That no clergyman, or preacher of the gospel, of any denomination, shall be capable of being a member of either the Senate, House of Commons, or Council of State, while he continues in the exercise of the pastoral function. . . . . "XXXIV. That there shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State, in preference to any other; neither shall any person, on any pretence whatsoever, be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith or judgment, nor be obliged to pay, for the purchase of any glebe, or the building of any house of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes right, or has voluntarily and personally engaged to perform; but all persons shall be at liberty to exercise their own mode of worship:--_Provided_, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to exempt preachers of treasonous or seditious discourses, from legal trial and punishment." ___ From the constitution of Georgia adopted on February 5, 1777: "Art. LVI. All persons whatever shall have the free exercise of their religion; provided it be not repugnant to the peace and safety of the State; and shall not, unless by consent, support any teacher or teachers except those of their own profession." "Art. LXII. No clergyman of any denomination shall be allowed a seat in the legislature." ___ From New York constitution adopted on April 20. 1777: XXXIX. And whereas the ministers of the gospel are, by their profession, dedicated to the service of God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their function; therefore, no minister of the gospel, or priest of any denomination whatsoever, shall, at any time hereafter, under any pretence or description whatever, be eligible to, or capable of holding, any civil or military office or place within this State. ___ Those state constitution provisions, and their equivalents in other state constitutions, eventuated in the First Amendment separation of "religion" and gov't. Gov't is by definition RULE OF LAW. Your rejection of the rule of law is ANTI-AMERICAN. Last but not least: Christ instructed his adherents to practice their "religion IN PRIVATE -- not to bullyingly push your lawless crap into others faces in arrogant pretense that you're holier-than-though. Christianity is compassion and decency. Learn at least to respect others by learning to be decent in both word and action. Else you'll continue to get put back in your place by the rule of law.
1
@marciamariethompson6463 It has never been proven -- which is why there are 90,000 different versions of "Christian" "religions," and every one of them claims to be the "one True Religion". And why they "proofs" and their "reasonings" based thereon don't work so they resort to bullying and force in effort to impose their lunacy on everyone else. Bak off: the issue is not "abortion"; the issue is problem pregnancies that can only be resolved by the medical procedure of abortion. Get an education outside the swamp of illiterate lawlessness in which you wallow.
1
@wesleydavis2766 Taxing "religion" would give them the authority to invade gov't.
1