I don't think anyone can answer that question dude. It's just a chicken/egg argument. Don't pull that bullshit.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
Religion came before government there is no doubt. But did it religion evolve into government? I really don't think so.
I'm not really going to take a side on this, but what I have noticed is that some recent archaeological research has pointed to religion being personal enough in nature to precede civilization.lowing wrote:
Well then, if "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A GOVERNMENT FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE UNLESS THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES ARE FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE." Then that pretty much answers the question as to religion intertwined in modern America then doesn't it?Jay wrote:
lowing, the United States Government does not have references to common supernatural belief in it. Any references you might point to were added after the establishment of this nation. I will repeat this because you are dense YOU CAN NOT HAVE A GOVERNMENT FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE UNLESS THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES ARE FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE.
Edit for your edit - Religion predates history. Math and science are relatively new. Universal literacy is even newer. Who knows what will happen in the future, but the trend among humans today is that we are moving away from religion and becoming more secular every year.
I do not think there has ever been any discoveries of any societies that do not have references to superstition, mythology, or supernatural beliefs. Nor do I think there has ever been any reference to any govt. that has no reference to any of the same. For me, that pretty much answers the question as to what came first, religion or govt.
Previous assumptions implied that religion was generally the sort of thing that came about after societies started resembling more of what we define as civilizations, but now, it looks like religion (at least in some areas) came before the process of civilization and perhaps might have inspired it.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/18/hist … aking.html
Last edited by Turquoise (2011-04-04 08:17:45)
Didn't they pay taxes to the church only in the middle ages, and didn't the Vatican have a lot of power when it was around hundred years ago. I suppose it still have power but not that much.
I think religion was turned in to a government but was starting to lose the grip when people started to figure out that almost all the things the bible taught was wrong.
I think religion was turned in to a government but was starting to lose the grip when people started to figure out that almost all the things the bible taught was wrong.
I wouldn't say that proves religion came first at all, from the sounds of it, they would have had to have used some pretty advanced building techniques to build something like that. Meaning it came along sometime after civilization began.Turquoise wrote:
I'm not really going to take a side on this, but what I have noticed is that some recent archaeological research has pointed to religion being personal enough in nature to precede civilization.lowing wrote:
Well then, if "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A GOVERNMENT FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE UNLESS THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES ARE FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE." Then that pretty much answers the question as to religion intertwined in modern America then doesn't it?Jay wrote:
lowing, the United States Government does not have references to common supernatural belief in it. Any references you might point to were added after the establishment of this nation. I will repeat this because you are dense YOU CAN NOT HAVE A GOVERNMENT FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE UNLESS THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES ARE FREE OF RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE.
Edit for your edit - Religion predates history. Math and science are relatively new. Universal literacy is even newer. Who knows what will happen in the future, but the trend among humans today is that we are moving away from religion and becoming more secular every year.
I do not think there has ever been any discoveries of any societies that do not have references to superstition, mythology, or supernatural beliefs. Nor do I think there has ever been any reference to any govt. that has no reference to any of the same. For me, that pretty much answers the question as to what came first, religion or govt.
Previous assumptions implied that religion was generally the sort of thing that came about after societies started resembling more of what we define as civilizations, but now, it looks like religion (at least in some areas) came before the process of civilization and perhaps might have inspired it.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/18/hist … aking.html
lol so why isnt mexico a bunch of mooslims? or vietnam? or panama? or cuba? meh. you are terribly wrong tbh.Uzique wrote:
one of the best posts from an american i've read in D&ST on the matter of islamSpearhead wrote:
Islam = third world religion. Christianity = first world.
Thats why one is "violent" and one is not. Throw any religious person into a shithole war torn country, teach them nothing but poverty, oppression, murder, rape, violence, and in Afgahnistan, make them all opium addicts. Oh, and also forget to educate them. Then burn the symbol of one of the only things they have, their religion. Outcome is going to be the same, every time.
I've been saying this for a while now on here and to me it makes perfect sense. You cannot just point to someone's faith and say that is why they are acting certain ways. The Muslims in Saudi Arabia who have oogles of billions of oil dollars living in mansions made of gold hardly seem to care about this Florida guy burning a Koran. See my point?
vietnam has its own religion.
islam isn't everywhere marine...
islam isn't everywhere marine...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
so what? third world he said. right? so basically he is saying poor = violent...and that aint true.Spark wrote:
vietnam has its own religion.
islam isn't everywhere marine...
Last edited by 11 Bravo (2011-04-05 02:53:29)
Malaysia is full of mooslims and theyre doing ok imo.11 Bravo wrote:
lol so why isnt mexico a bunch of mooslims? or vietnam? or panama? or cuba? meh. you are terribly wrong tbh.Uzique wrote:
one of the best posts from an american i've read in D&ST on the matter of islamSpearhead wrote:
Islam = third world religion. Christianity = first world.
Thats why one is "violent" and one is not. Throw any religious person into a shithole war torn country, teach them nothing but poverty, oppression, murder, rape, violence, and in Afgahnistan, make them all opium addicts. Oh, and also forget to educate them. Then burn the symbol of one of the only things they have, their religion. Outcome is going to be the same, every time.
I've been saying this for a while now on here and to me it makes perfect sense. You cannot just point to someone's faith and say that is why they are acting certain ways. The Muslims in Saudi Arabia who have oogles of billions of oil dollars living in mansions made of gold hardly seem to care about this Florida guy burning a Koran. See my point?
it certainly helps...11 Bravo wrote:
so what? third world he said. right? so basically he is saying poor = violent...and that aint true.Spark wrote:
vietnam has its own religion.
islam isn't everywhere marine...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
bullshit. america, england, mexican cartels, bin laden, .... all rich,,all very violent.Spark wrote:
it certainly helps...11 Bravo wrote:
so what? third world he said. right? so basically he is saying poor = violent...and that aint true.Spark wrote:
vietnam has its own religion.
islam isn't everywhere marine...
i think youd be pretty piss if you couldnt drink or get pussy and live in a desert lol.11 Bravo wrote:
bullshit. america, england, mexican cartels, bin laden, .... all rich,,all very violent.Spark wrote:
it certainly helps...11 Bravo wrote:
so what? third world he said. right? so basically he is saying poor = violent...and that aint true.
bin laden was all over the world drinking and stuff.....Cybargs wrote:
i think youd be pretty piss if you couldnt drink or get pussy and live in a desert lol.11 Bravo wrote:
bullshit. america, england, mexican cartels, bin laden, .... all rich,,all very violent.Spark wrote:
it certainly helps...
not referring to him, but to most of the people in the ME.11 Bravo wrote:
bin laden was all over the world drinking and stuff.....Cybargs wrote:
i think youd be pretty piss if you couldnt drink or get pussy and live in a desert lol.11 Bravo wrote:
bullshit. america, england, mexican cartels, bin laden, .... all rich,,all very violent.
laden's just a spoiled bitch that hates america, he even got exiled by his own country and was known as the black sheep of the family.
just saying the money excuse is just that...and excuse.
poverty has more to do with crime and violence than culture or religion. but this is not to say all crime is caused by the poor, there are some rich fuckers that are criminals. good example is that in vancouvar a lot of the gangs are middle class asian and hajji kids.11 Bravo wrote:
just saying the money excuse is just that...and excuse.
the fuck are you on about? are you really being that stupid? you're trying to use one generalization to explain unrest, conflict and violence all over the entire WORLD? well it pays to look at the history and actual specifics of each area. vietnam, mexico, panama and cuba historically have nothing to do with islam, at all, so how can you use their example to dismiss the middle-east? that's retarded tbh. every area and its peoples are a product of their own individual history; it's hard, even, to really compare places as similar as the united states and britain (even though they are a lot-- but this is because of the clear link, your examples have none whatsoever). the problems of central and latin america have nothing in common with the middle-east. money? you can't apply such a gross generalization to the entire globe. inequality and money problems affect different places and different cultures in many different ways, often according to the type of government, religion and culture.11 Bravo wrote:
lol so why isnt mexico a bunch of mooslims? or vietnam? or panama? or cuba? meh. you are terribly wrong tbh.Uzique wrote:
one of the best posts from an american i've read in D&ST on the matter of islamSpearhead wrote:
Islam = third world religion. Christianity = first world.
Thats why one is "violent" and one is not. Throw any religious person into a shithole war torn country, teach them nothing but poverty, oppression, murder, rape, violence, and in Afgahnistan, make them all opium addicts. Oh, and also forget to educate them. Then burn the symbol of one of the only things they have, their religion. Outcome is going to be the same, every time.
I've been saying this for a while now on here and to me it makes perfect sense. You cannot just point to someone's faith and say that is why they are acting certain ways. The Muslims in Saudi Arabia who have oogles of billions of oil dollars living in mansions made of gold hardly seem to care about this Florida guy burning a Koran. See my point?
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
That generalization perchance?Uzique wrote:
the fuck are you on about? are you really being that stupid? you're trying to use one generalization to explain unrest, conflict and violence all over the entire WORLD? well it pays to look at the history and actual specifics of each area. vietnam, mexico, panama and cuba historically have nothing to do with islam, at all, so how can you use their example to dismiss the middle-east? that's retarded tbh. every area and its peoples are a product of their own individual history; it's hard, even, to really compare places as similar as the united states and britain (even though they are a lot-- but this is because of the clear link, your examples have none whatsoever). the problems of central and latin america have nothing in common with the middle-east. money? you can't apply such a gross generalization to the entire globe. inequality and money problems affect different places and different cultures in many different ways, often according to the type of government, religion and culture.11 Bravo wrote:
lol so why isnt mexico a bunch of mooslims? or vietnam? or panama? or cuba? meh. you are terribly wrong tbh.Uzique wrote:
one of the best posts from an american i've read in D&ST on the matter of islam
Hilariously it appears you are agreeing with 11 B, and in doing so kind of contradicting yourself.
Edit: I was referring to Spearhead's statement that Christianity is a first world religion whereas Islam is a third world religion.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2011-04-05 03:21:57)
no, what i am arguing for is the way that money has affected the current situation in the middle-east... but i am saying it is incomparable to anywhere else. just because 'economics' is the (claimed) root-cause, doesn't mean you can just apply the same generalisation to the entire world. as i said... it's highly specific to the situation and history of the area.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
they got shit tons of money in the ME. what is your point?Uzique wrote:
no, what i am arguing for is the way that money has affected the current situation in the middle-east... but i am saying it is incomparable to anywhere else. just because 'economics' is the (claimed) root-cause, doesn't mean you can just apply the same generalisation to the entire world. as i said... it's highly specific to the situation and history of the area.
are you seriously that obtuse? yes... historically... all that great wealth... so shared with the people... so much advancement and education...
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
islam's current extremism is a cultural manifestation of economic inequality in the regionnukchebi0 wrote:
Exactly. That is what 11 B was trying to suggest, that you can't associate religious reliefs with economic development. Considering the original post by Spearhead said that is the case, and you lauded said post as "one of the best posts you've seen from an American on the topic of islam", that seems kind of contradictory.Uzique wrote:
no, what i am arguing for is the way that money has affected the current situation in the middle-east... but i am saying it is incomparable to anywhere else. just because 'economics' is the (claimed) root-cause, doesn't mean you can just apply the same generalisation to the entire world. as i said... it's highly specific to the situation and history of the area.
well, partly anyway... geopolitics and antinomy with the west is another
Last edited by Uzique (2011-04-05 03:26:10)
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Exactly. That is what 11 B was trying to suggest, that you can't associate religious reliefs with economic development. Considering the original post by Spearhead said that is the case, and you lauded said post as "one of the best posts from an american i've read in D&ST on the matter of islam", that seems kind of contradictory.Uzique wrote:
no, what i am arguing for is the way that money has affected the current situation in the middle-east... but i am saying it is incomparable to anywhere else. just because 'economics' is the (claimed) root-cause, doesn't mean you can just apply the same generalisation to the entire world. as i said... it's highly specific to the situation and history of the area.
Edit: lel at the post order
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2011-04-05 03:26:31)
and why dont they share it?Uzique wrote:
are you seriously that obtuse? yes... historically... all that great wealth... so shared with the people... so much advancement and education...
or maybe i should post a pic of dubai like some people do
i claimed it was one of the best posts because it does more than to just consider the last 10 years of history
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/