Fox News reporter confirms Ted Cruz flew to Cancun while Texas citizens suffer

[RememberMurray]

BB was saying you didn't start that thread, therefore you're a shill or some such. Don't get me wrong, it's a silly thing to say.

BB is a troll.

 

[RememberMurray]

Dallas Cowboys Owner Slammed Over ‘Hitting The Jackpot’ With Gas Prices As Texans Suffer
The Comstock Resources shareholder is joining in the payoff as natural gas prices hit “super-premium prices.”

Critics are scorching the billionaire owner of the Dallas Cowboys for “hitting the jackpot” with his natural gas prices amid a record-breaking winter storm that left Texans shivering — and dying — without heat and electricity.
Cowboys owner Jerry Jones is the majority shareholder of the publicly traded Comstock Resources Inc., a shale driller operating in Texas and Louisiana. Investors whooped it up in a conference call over the rocketing fuel prices spurred by soaring demand in the frigid South.
“This week is like hitting the jackpot with some of these incredible prices,” Comstock President and Chief Financial Officer Roland Burns said on the call Wednesday, Bloomberg reported. “Frankly, we were able to sell at super-premium prices for a material amount of production.”

Jones was happy to enjoy a $325 million taxpayer subsidy for the AT&T Stadium that hosts his team, noted Rosenberg. “Now you see how Jones is treating Texans in their time of need. We can call this a betrayal.”

“It is impossible to arrange a fair transaction when one party is in it for love and the other is in it for money,” Rosenberg added. “If all the clothing suddenly disappeared from the state, Jones would start selling Cowboys sweatshirts for $1,000 each.”
Robert Reich, who was President Bill Clinton’s labor secretary, noted that “billionaires profiting off of human suffering is a feature, not a bug, of our rigged system.”

Loading…

www.huffpost.com

 

[MplsGopher]

We are here, not by accident, but by purpose.

That it may be true that our universe exists purposefully, does not necessarily mean that humans "have a purpose" any more than any other asteroid floating around does.

The concept of "having a purpose", much like the concept of God itself, is something that humans came up with. Doesn't mean they're wrong, mind you.

 

[MplsGopher]

BB is a troll.

Maybe. Maybe he's just bored, or tired of putting effort into these discussions, but yet hasn't found the will to leave GH entirely.

I have to remind myself sometimes, that some of the people who still post here daily have been here for over ten years. Not an ounce of shame in that, of course. Just saying, I imagine at some point it all just starts to look like the same thing over and over and over.

Now Trump was something new ...

 

[RememberMurray]

Even when I post in the Cuomo thread, I’m told I haven’t!

Exactly. Don't play the game with him. He's got his little schtick; let him play with it.

 

[MennoSota]

I'll try one more time, knowing you won't/can't answer: What is the meaning of your life, specifically?

Good question.
To love God with all my heart and to love my neighbor as myself. This fulfills all the commandments.
As a theist this is the meaning of existence according to my faith tradition.

You, on the other hand, can have no meaning in life as an atheist. Your tradition states that you are no more than a carbon-based collection of elements that have no purpose and no meaning.

The question we both ask is: Which option is most reasonable. My answer is theism. Your answer is atheism. What you believe is entirely up to you. I have no concern. My only concern in this exercise is to show that theism is both reasonable and theists started and support science. Science is hardly just a field for atheists.
Can we agree?

 

[howeda7]

Even when I post in the Cuomo thread, I’m told I haven’t!

Apparently we have to post "hold Cuomo accountable" for 18 pages to appease the Trumpster Fellas. They're upset no one will defend him so they can own libs.

 

[howeda7]

Does the genuine anger of his constituents, even if purely emotional and not practical, mean nothing?

Look, if they wouldn't hold Nancy accountable for her ice cream, they're not allowed to whine about having no electricity, heat or water for a week.

 

[Wally]

To love God with all my heart and to love my neighbor as myself. This fulfills all the commandments.
As a theist this is the meaning of existence according to my faith tradition.

I see no meaning there.

to love my neighbor as myself.

I see this as the most fullfilling way to live but I don't need god to tell me that. There is value in most religions as a blueprint to live a fullfilling and happy life. The biggest problem I have is eith the idea pushed by many evangelical faiths in the US that as long as I accept Jesus as my saviour I go to heaven, nothing else matters. Its like a get out of jail free card to excuse all indescretions.

 

[RememberMurray]

Good question.
To love God with all my heart and to love my neighbor as myself. This fulfills all the commandments.
As a theist this is the meaning of existence according to my faith tradition.

You, on the other hand, can have no meaning in life as an atheist. Your tradition states that you are no more than a carbon-based collection of elements that have no purpose and no meaning.

The question we both ask is: Which option is most reasonable. My answer is theism. Your answer is atheism. What you believe is entirely up to you. I have no concern. My only concern in this exercise is to show that theism is both reasonable and theists started and support science. Science is hardly just a field for atheists.
Can we agree?

— I don't love any god, since I've never seen any evidence that any one of the many gods that have been created throughout human history exists; nor have I seen any evidence that supports the notion of one of these gods specifically over the other gods. I see nothing 'meaningful' in the worshiping of invisible friends of any stripe. So, no real 'meaning' proved there.

— Other than that, the only other 'meaning' for your life that you yourself seem to be able to articulate is your claim that you "love my neighbor as myself." But loving our fellow humans is in no way the exclusive territory of people who have an invisible friend. I certainly don't need an invisible friend handing down a 'commandment' in order to treat my fellow humans respectfully and/or lovingly.

Therefore your claims that atheists can have no meaning in their lives is false.

— As for the rest, it's a straw man, since I never claimed that science is limited as a field to atheists only.

 

[MennoSota]

I see no meaning there.



I see this as the most fullfilling way to live but I don't need god to tell me that. There is value in most religions as a blueprint to live a fullfilling and happy life. The biggest problem I have is eith the idea pushed by many evangelical faiths in the US that as long as I accept Jesus as my saviour I go to heaven, nothing else matters. Its like a get out of jail free card to excuse all indescretions.

I didn't expect you to. In your agnosticism there is no meaning. Just live in your contradictions.

 

[RememberMurray]

I didn't expect you to. In your agnosticism there is no meaning. Just live in your contradictions.

You were unable to articulate any meaning whatsoever that stems from what you seem to be claiming is your "theism".

Since you've been blathering on and on and on about "meaning", that's a pretty big fail.

 

[MennoSota]

— I don't love any god, since I've never seen any evidence that any one of the many gods that have been created throughout human history exists; nor have I seen any evidence that supports the notion of one of these gods specifically over the other gods. I see nothing 'meaningful' in the worshiping of invisible friends of any stripe. So, no real 'meaning' proved there.

— Other than that, the only other 'meaning' for your life that you yourself seem to be able to articulate is your claim that you "love my neighbor as myself." But loving our fellow humans is in no way the exclusive territory of people who have an invisible friend. I certainly don't need an invisible friend handing down a 'commandment' in order to treat my fellow humans respectfully and/or lovingly.

Therefore your claims that atheists can have no meaning in their lives is false.

— As for the rest, it's a straw man, since I never claimed that science is limited as a field to atheists only.

I have never said that atheists don't act like theists. In fact, they do. My point is that your actions are meaningless in your worldview. No doubt you may try to lie to yourself and trick your mind, but if you honestly follow your reasoning to its end point, everything is meaningless. Nihilism is your base. Nietzsche was very honest in his conclusion. I admire his honesty. Not all atheists are as honest.

 

[RememberMurray]

I see this as the most fullfilling way to live but I don't need god to tell me that. There is value in most religions as a blueprint to live a fullfilling and happy life. The biggest problem I have is eith the idea pushed by many evangelical faiths in the US that as long as I accept Jesus as my saviour I go to heaven, nothing else matters. Its like a get out of jail free card to excuse all indescretions.

I've noticed that Menno has claimed only theism as his belief, and carefully avoided any mention of a specific religion. He certainly never references Jesus.

Yet somehow his 'theism' guides him and gives him 'meaning'... yet he can't quite articulate how that really works.

 

[MennoSota]

You were unable to articulate any meaning whatsoever that stems from what you seem to be claiming is your "theism".

Since you've been blathering on and on and on about "meaning", that's a pretty big fail.

You realize that your opinion is entirely meaningless in your worldview, yet you persist. This is a fascinating dichotomy you display.

 

[RememberMurray]

I have never said that atheists don't act like theists. In fact, they do. My point is that your actions are meaningless in your worldview. No doubt you may try to lie to yourself and trick your mind, but if you honestly follow your reasoning to its end point, everything is meaningless. Nihilism is your base. Nietzsche was very honest in his conclusion. I admire his honesty. Not all atheists are as honest.

Your claim that your unspecified religion gives your life "meaning" that mine lacks is so weak you can't even articulate it.

— Your love for and worship of your invisible friend is meaningless.

— Your love for your neighbor has nothing to do with having an invisible friend, and is therefore available to atheists as well.

 

[MennoSota]

I've noticed that Menno has claimed only theism as his belief, and carefully avoided any mention of a specific religion. He certainly never references Jesus.

Yet somehow his 'theism' guides him and gives him 'meaning'... yet he can't quite articulate how that really works.

There is no reason to do so.
I have shown that theism is a reasonable position when doing science. I have shown that it gives meaning. I have also shown that atheism is meaningless.
What form of theism one holds is an argument of theology, not science. Science only provides a reason to be a theist, not what theology a person should hold.

Will you admit this:
Theism gives a person the ability to see meaning in life while atheism denies the existence of meaning.

 

[RememberMurray]

You realize that your opinion is entirely meaningless in your worldview, yet you persist. This is a fascinating dichotomy you display.

I think you have watched far too many old Star Trek episodes.

 

[RememberMurray]

There is no reason to do so.
I have shown that theism is a reasonable position when doing science. I have shown that it gives meaning. I have also shown that atheism is meaningless.
What form of theism one holds is an argument of theology, not science. Science only provides a reason to be a theist, not what theology a person should hold.

Will you admit this:
Theism gives a person the ability to see meaning in life while atheism denies the existence of meaning.

No. You haven't "shown" any of the things you claim to have "shown".

So far you have clearly articulated one cogent thought: you believe you have an invisible friend.

 

[MennoSota]

Your claim that your unspecified religion gives your life "meaning" that mine lacks is so weak you can't even articulate it.

— Your love for and worship of your invisible friend is meaningless.

— Your love for your neighbor has nothing to do with having an invisible friend, and is therefore available to atheists as well.

I have articulated that atheism is, at its core, meaninglessness. This is fact, based upon your own assumptions.
You may attempt to construct meaning where there is none in order to keep yourself from utter despair, but as long as you maintain atheism as your base position, you are telling yourself a lie. Ultimately, you are a nihilist. You can be no other.

 

[MennoSota]

No. You haven't "shown" any of the things you claim to have "shown".

So far you have clearly articulated one cogent thought: you believe you have an invisible friend.

Is the creator anybody's friend? You are making theological assumptions. This is fascinating.

 

[RememberMurray]

I have articulated that atheism is, at its core, meaninglessness. This is fact, based upon your own assumptions.
You may attempt to construct meaning where there is none in order to keep yourself from utter despair, but as long as you maintain atheism as your base position, you are telling yourself a lie. Ultimately, you are a nihilist. You can be no other.

I haven't attempted to 'construct' anything.

I've pointed out — correctly — that you have two arguments, regarding 'meaning': you believe you have an invisible friend who somehow gives your life meaning. You also claim that, since I do not have an invisible friend, my life can have no meaning at all.

That's as far you've been able to take this, beyond repeating it over and over.

 

[RememberMurray]

Is the creator anybody's friend? You are making theological assumptions. This is fascinating.

There is no proof of any supernatural creator.

 

[Nax5]

to love my neighbor as myself.

I think you're falling short on that one. (As are many people these days).

 

[RememberMurray]

Have you anything new to add, Menno — beyond repeating your claims that you have an invisible friend who gives your life meaning, and that my life can have no meaning because I don't believe in your invisible friend?

If not, we've been hijacking this thread too long, and I'm going to get back to the topic at hand.

Speaking of which, it would be nice if you would finally answer the question as to which of Georgia's senators is an atheist.

 

[Spoofin]

Even when I post in the Cuomo thread, I’m told I haven’t!

That’s what is nice about GH - others are here to tell you what you “really” did/think/believe. Takes all the pressure off.

 

[Spoofin]

Apparently we have to post "hold Cuomo accountable" for 18 pages to appease the Trumpster Fellas. They're upset no one will defend him so they can own libs.

Holy sh!t are you a hypocrite.
I am at a loss for words....

 

[MennoSota]

I haven't attempted to 'construct' anything.

I've pointed out — correctly — that you have two arguments, regarding 'meaning': you believe you have an invisible friend who somehow gives your life meaning. You also claim that, since I do not have an invisible friend, my life can have no meaning at all.

That's as far you've been able to take this, beyond repeating it over and over.

You have lied, which is often a trait of atheists. You project an invisible friend on me while you refuse to acknowledge the meaninglessness of your assertions.

 

[saintpaulguy]

That’s what is nice about GH - others are here to tell you what you “really” did/think/believe. Takes all the pressure off.

If I could read minds or predict the future, I’d be in Vegas. Well, for the two weeks before I die in a Rod Serling morality play.

 

[MennoSota]

There is no proof of any supernatural creator.

I didn't claim there was. My claim is that it is reasonable to have a theistic worldview. It is unreasonable to have an atheistic worldview.
Science provides that reasonable conclusion.
You cannot prove there is no Creator. I cannot prove there is. Both of us rely upon reason to come to our conclusion. I provided mathematical data to show that there are three basic conclusions.
1) Randomness (highly unlikely)
2) Intelligent design (the numbers suggest this)
3) Multiple unnumbered universes of which we got lucky to exist in the only one that can sustain life. (Untestable and highly unlikely)

You choose the first one. I choose the second. Both theists and atheists may choose the third, but for different reasons. In the third option a theist would see design while an atheist would see random chance. Ultimately one has meaning, the other is meaningless.
You have chosen, as have I. This exercise is simply for others who might be undecided.
I am done with this conversation. You may have the final word.