Is Obama trying to discredit capitalism

[OPTIONAL777]

Were in the past.

And there were Deists, Jews, and even atheists involved in the founding of our nation.

I would prefer to focus on the values that matter, and that way we can come to agreement, rather than get tied up in the details of Christian Catholic versus Mormon, or versus Lutheran, etc.

It is not a Christian work ethic, it is simply a work ethic. Keep it secular, please.

I don't see real spiritual values at play in America as they relate to personal responsibility, the level of greed, the materialism, the dishonesty, etc.

I see that as the problem, the disease,
and it is going to take every individual to work toward becoming a better person spiritually (this includes humanists and atheists too), because by spiritually I am not denoting a particular religion but an attitude internally, that real and lasting happiness of any kind does not come from the toys we have, nor the false sense of security, etc.

When I focus on the Christians, it is because it is so very disappointing to see them ignore the teachings of Jesus Christ and chase the all mighty dollar, etc.

I know some people think they are saved so they can go ahead and sin all they want...

That is not a recipe for a good society.

You are making a mistake again jem, when you to to the "The problem is you liberals" card.

That is not the solution, that is once again being stuck in the blame game and not spending the time to discover your own flaws and rectify them and be redeemed from them.

It is not good enough that we are not as sinful as another, or that we rationalize our small sins because someone else performs bigger sins.

No, our real recovery will come when we accept our own flaws and take responsibility for them, and stop focusing on what is wrong with the "other."

If we grow up, then we will no longer need to play the blame game...or we can stay as children, get the psychological payoff of feeling like a "victim" and never have to change ourselves...

I am suggesting a way out, the way out is to take full responsibility once again for making America a great country by becoming great people again.

We are no longer a great people, we are a petty people, like spoiled children.

We either grow up, or we fail, simple as that...

Quote from jem:

zzz - you know I have been saying we WERE a great Nation. We WERE a christian nation. We have not been a Christian nation since the supreme court began ripping God out of schools and public life.

You know the problem. You know the solution. Your problem is that liberals like you want our country to display a christian work ethic and sense of value, you wish the citizens would display a sense of working towards a community in the future. But you are trying to do it without the spiritual component. Do you not see the gaping whole in you belief system?


You and all the other liberals out there understand the problem. There was no one on wall street to stop the greed, no one in the SEC, no one on capital hill.

No one to say you can't have a free lunch. No to say Congress must spend with an eye towards the future. Liberal govern too short term.

Liberals have no voice of reason, no one to say hey we have to save today so we can be better off tomorrow.

History has also just proven that Republican politicians can't do it either.

I wonder why?

 

[FortuneTeller]

Quote from TGregg:

Pffft. He doesn't need to discredit capitalism to push through a socialist agenda. Just tell everybody they get <A href="http://wethepeople.org/wpblog/index.php/2009/02/28/childs-fable-free-ice-cream/">free ice cream</a>, and he's set.

I gets a free ice cream? Oh gosh oh molly. I luv dat ice cream!

 

[FortuneTeller]

Okay, an answer to the question: "Is Obama trying to discredit capitalism"?

Of course he is. Obama is a Socialist idiot.

 

[stu]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:



[...]
I see that as the problem, the disease,
and it is going to take every individual to work toward becoming a better person spiritually (this includes humanists and atheists too), because by spiritually I am not denoting a particular religion but an attitude internally, that real and lasting happiness of any kind does not come from the toys we have, nor the false sense of security, etc.

[...]

..which simply begs the question, if not religion, where do you think that spirituality, that internal attitude, comes from?
Is the non-religion, secular approach you describe coming from anything other than humanistic values?

 

[OPTIONAL777]

As a shared value I can call it humanism if that pleases you, even though internally most might call it a foundation of religion.

The result for society is the same, in as much as people act in a beneficial manner toward themselves and others.

Some are driven by a conscience of a religion which teaches man to be a good man, not selfish, not excessive or indulgent in the senses above the needs of others, etc. Greed and excess are shunned in favor of a work ethic to be a productive member of society.

Some are driven by a conscience of a non religion which teaches man to be a good man, not selfish, not excessive or indulgent in the senses above the needs of others, etc. Greed and excess are shunned in favor of a work ethic to be a productive member of society.

The point being that the whole society becomes a good society when each individual takes up the task of becoming a good person, whether the inner motive is a God or non God belief system.

Quote from stu:

..which simply begs the question, if not religion, where do you think that spirituality, that internal attitude, comes from?
Is the non-religion, secular approach you describe coming from anything other than humanistic values?

 

[stu]

Fine I get your overall point I happen to agree with it and think it estimable.
However it begs a question, probably more essentially to those like jem, that you are saying where this spirituality of a shared value doesn't come from and also saying it doesn't seem to matter where it might come from. But you are not saying where you think it does come from.
So ok, the question simply remains a begging one in that regard.

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

As a shared value I can call it humanism if that pleases you, even though internally most might call it a foundation of religion.

The result for society is the same, in as much as people act in a beneficial manner toward themselves and others.

Some are driven by a conscience of a religion which teaches man to be a good man, not selfish, not excessive or indulgent in the senses above the needs of others, etc. Greed and excess are shunned in favor of a work ethic to be a productive member of society.

Some are driven by a conscience of a non religion which teaches man to be a good man, not selfish, not excessive or indulgent in the senses above the needs of others, etc. Greed and excess are shunned in favor of a work ethic to be a productive member of society.

The point being that the whole society becomes a good society when each individual takes up the task of becoming a good person, whether the inner motive is a God or non God belief system.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

I would hate to answer for jem, as I don't agree with his point of view on this subject.

In terms of the function of a society, I don't think it matters why people act as good human beings, civilized human beings, enlightened human beings.

If they act that way out of guilt, or fear, or love, or a moral philosophy, or because they have the light of God in their heart...the net result is the same for the society.

Civilized citizens with compassion for their fellow man results in a civilized society with compassion for mankind.

Quote from stu:

Fine I get your overall point I happen to agree with it and think it estimable.
However it begs a question, probably more essentially to those like jem, that you are saying where this spirituality of a shared value doesn't come from and also saying it doesn't seem to matter where it might come from. But you are not saying where you think it does come from.
So ok, the question simply remains a begging one in that regard.

 

[stu]

Good human beings, civilized human beings, enlightened human beings, a society arrived at with or without religion with or without God. A net result which transcends religion or non religion, transcends God or non God. You describe values coming from something independent of it all.
The Secular?

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

I would hate to answer for jem, as I don't agree with his point of view on this subject.

In terms of the function of a society, I don't think it matters why people act as good human beings, civilized human beings, enlightened human beings.

If they act that way out of guilt, or fear, or love, or a moral philosophy, or because they have the light of God in their heart...the net result is the same for the society.

Civilized citizens with compassion for their fellow man results in a civilized society with compassion for mankind.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

I believe human beings make choices.

They choose to be good and civilized human beings.

History has show atheists being uncivilized, and history has shown theists as acting equally uncivilized, so it cannot be shown that either theism or atheism is necessarily the cause of uncivilized behavior.

stu, I am not going to get into an atheist vs. theist debate with you, or what transcends anything else. From a theist perspective, nothing transcends God. There is no common ground between us to debate those kinds of issues.

Let's rather go to where we can find agreement.

All we can know is a man's actions, we can never know what is in a man's heart, what is the inner motivation and true inner intent and belief. We have laws that are based on actions primarily and not belief systems, and punishment based on motives of the actions with some exceptions to the general rules...i.e. laws against murder, but different degrees of murder and punishment accordingly based on motivation for the killing. The consequence of a killing someone is the death of another, but if we deem the motive was self defense, there is no punishment for the same consequence (death) of the death of someone by a person who plans and executes the murder. The actions might be exactly the same.

A witness might see a man take out a gun and shoot someone. The shooter may have been shooting in self defense, it might have been an act of temporary insanity, it might have been an act of jealous rage, or it might have been a stone cold calculated killing.

But the act is the same in every case, a man shoots and kills another.

What matters with respect to society is that a man acts civilized, whether that civility is a result of his belief in God or non God has no bearing on the condition of the society from a purely practical perspective.

No, I am not describing values that govern our behavior coming independently from belief in God or non God, I am just stating that it doesn't matter from a societal perspective if the results are the same.

I am a theist, and you are an atheist, and as long as you act in a civilized manner contributing to society, not forcing your personal beliefs on me...why would I care what your personal beliefs are? I would think you would have the same point of view toward theists and their personal beliefs.

Live and let live.

Quote from stu:

Good human beings, civilized human beings, enlightened human beings, a society arrived at with or without religion with or without God. A net result which transcends religion or non religion, transcends God or non God. You describe values coming from something independent of it all.
The Secular?

 

[Cesko]

Quote from NeoRio1:

First of all you don't need a book that favors Obama to figure out what Obama is doing unless you are a radical with no principles past the point of destroying the opposition.

Secondly you can't convince radicals on either side to quit being radical.

My point is that your post was irrelevant. Also I think your opinions are irrelevant as well considering that the debate before your stupid book thing was a debate about the improvement of the country which you consider non-sense.

Anything else to further prove your stupidity?

First idea to post about book came from the link from the third post by bond_trad3r, so it is relevant dumb ass.

First of all you don't need a book that favors Obama to figure out what Obama is doing...........
Are you fucking nuts? Book favoring Obama???? Talk about stupidity. You prove it's stupid to mention book when people can't even read.

And yes title of the thread is stupid. "Discredit capitalism", generally speaking, "public servants" have been doing it forever. Who they are gonna blame? Themselves? Or even better, constituency?