Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why are certain forms of Christianity so scared of nation working
> together cooperatively (i.e. a single world government)?
> --
> ~Mike

Speaking as one who is a non-Christian, but by no means an anti-Christian, I
have some doubts about whether or not the phrase "a single world government"
has, generally speaking, the same meaning as "nation(s) working together
cooperatively."

At a glance, it just seems to be "common sense" that the global nature of the
problems currently confronting humankind calls for an equally global system for
addressing them. If there does exist a plausible means organizing the world's
resources on a global scale for the betterment of the human race (or better
yet, all life) as a whole, we would clearly be fools not to avail ourselves of
it.

Whether or not such a thing IS plausible, however, is quite a serious question.
The "putting all your eggs in one basket" analogy may be a tad cliche, but I
believe it to be applicable.  It doesn't require one of the world's greatest
scholars in the field of history to notice that when we humans centralize
authority to avail ourselves of some of the obvious practical advantages of
doing so, things can (and often do) go horribly wrong.

Sure enough,there are(sadly)plenty of folks who tend to oppose anything and
everything they associate with "globalization" simply because they don't much
care for them thar ferriners. It's a tremendous oversimplification, however, to
imply that anyone with reservations about the possible consequences of
centralizing authority over human activity on a global scale is of that limited
frame of mind.*

Hopefully, we will be clever enough to find ways to develop global systems for
social, political and economic interaction that enable and facilitate
cooperative action without falling into the trap of creating a "world overseer"
in the process.  If not, perhaps the arthropods will have better luck in a few
billion years.

Best Regards,
Mike C.

* I wish to make clear that this statement addresses the discussion that tends
to take place on this topic generally.  I am most definitely NOT saying that
any particular person on this forum has implied such a thing.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   I think the main reason is the same as why economic monopolies are bad.

That was always my guess.

Plus, of course, it's unstable. Imagine a single world government taken over 
by a military coup. What would you think happens next?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> 
>>
>> ... after which, God used muscle power to bring down the tower, 
>> because otherwise they might have reached his throne.
> 
> But, He also scattered their languages so they could no longer work 
> together and communicate.
> 
>> When you actually follow through, most of the stories make no sense. 
>> "God intervened to make them fail, because if he hadn't, they would 
>> have failed."
>>
> 
> Sometimes, just reading the stories makes me wonder ... maybe God is the 
> evil one ... I mean, he basically sent the Jews on a wild goose 
> chase...  :)
> 
Yes, well, in "one" much earlier religion, Yehweh was one of three sons 
of the "true" creator, a war monger, and got his toys taken away, along 
with the other two sons, for all being too stupid to correctly run the 
kingdoms they where given by daddy. lol

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:

> Yes, well, in "one" much earlier religion, Yehweh was one of three sons 
> of the "true" creator, a war monger, and got his toys taken away, along 
> with the other two sons, for all being too stupid to correctly run the 
> kingdoms they where given by daddy. lol

That's an interesting view...

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
> 
>> Yes, well, in "one" much earlier religion, Yehweh was one of three 
>> sons of the "true" creator, a war monger, and got his toys taken away, 
>> along with the other two sons, for all being too stupid to correctly 
>> run the kingdoms they where given by daddy. lol
> 
> That's an interesting view...
> 
I found it, ironically, on a Jewish site, talking about the nature of 
the OT god, and whether or not the NT one is the "same" as that OT one. 
Their answer seemed to be "no".

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Not directly related but:

  Is it true that there are "closet atheists" in many parts of the US?
In other words, atheists who pretend to be believers because else they
would be discriminated against in the community they live in.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Probably, but how real are their fears. There are certainly a lot of 
"practicing atheists"
(i.e people who live as if they believed nothing) who don't see to be 
especially "discriminated
against". I have a friend who is definitely an atheist and makes no 
secret of it. He claims to
be discriminated against, but I've seen no sign of it. The best concrete 
evidence he has been
able to give me is that people invite him to church or try to "convert" 
him. He believes in, or claims
to believe in, all sorts of "Christian" conspiracies from the White 
House under Bush to the
management where he works, though he seems to have been above average in 
receiving the
credit, honor, and promotion due him for his excellent work.

It quite possible that if he lived in a small less educated community, 
his fears might be more realized,
but I think not -- or if he had an offensive personality.

David



Warp wrote:
>   Not directly related but:
> 
>   Is it true that there are "closet atheists" in many parts of the US?
> In other words, atheists who pretend to be believers because else they
> would be discriminated against in the community they live in.
>

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Is it true that there are "closet atheists" in many parts of the US?

Yes. Lots of places, especially in the south (known as the "bible belt") 
there will be tremendous discrimination against atheists, to the point of 
being harassed out of town. (I don't know about "many parts," mind. Just the 
very religious parts.)

And of course many young adults who are atheist but don't want to cause a 
problem with their family.

Of course, most places aren't like that, but when the evangelicals wind up 
being 75% of the population, you wind up having nobody in authority who will 
stand up for you, which is really the problem. I.e., when the school board, 
most of the police force, all the judges, and all the teachers think atheism 
is a sign of the devil, it's hard for a kid to complain they shouldn't be 
praying in grade school.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   Is it true that there are "closet atheists" in many parts of the US?

> Yes. Lots of places, especially in the south (known as the "bible belt") 
> there will be tremendous discrimination against atheists, to the point of 
> being harassed out of town. (I don't know about "many parts," mind. Just the 
> very religious parts.)

> And of course many young adults who are atheist but don't want to cause a 
> problem with their family.

> Of course, most places aren't like that, but when the evangelicals wind up 
> being 75% of the population, you wind up having nobody in authority who will 
> stand up for you, which is really the problem. I.e., when the school board, 
> most of the police force, all the judges, and all the teachers think atheism 
> is a sign of the devil, it's hard for a kid to complain they shouldn't be 
> praying in grade school.

  And nothing is being done about this clear constitutional violation?

  That kind of situation feels somehow foreign to me. Here people are more
or less by default considered atheists, and someone telling they are actually
a christian believer is more an exception than the rule. (Usually people don't
discriminate christians in any way, but they often get questioned a lot. "Why
do you believe that?" etc.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   And nothing is being done about this clear constitutional violation?

That's the problem. When everyone involved in enforcing the laws disagree 
with the laws, it's hard to change things. You have to take the complaints 
so high that you're outside your own little town, so you get someone 
interested in making a change to the situation, and for most people it's 
easier to not say anything than to fight such all the way up to the supreme 
court.

Kind of like when southerners were harassing blacks. When all the cops and 
judges are white former slave-owners, you get a lot of nasty stuff going on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party
That's the source of a lot of America's more oppressive gun laws, I 
understand. The "ban on weapons" they protested was passed because blacks 
were openly carrying shotguns on their motorcycles because the police were 
arresting them and beating the crap out of them.

I don't think it's *quite* that bad with atheists, but it's also I think the 
case that there are far more evangelical Christians willing to do persistent 
low-level harassment (like graffiti on your house and beating up your kids 
at school, rather than burning your house down) than there were 
average-citizen people willing to try to beat up a gang of black folks on 
motorcycles. :-)

I think atheists can probably get along 99% even in the worst areas if they 
just STFU and let the majority have their way, instead of complaining about 
prayer in school and "In God We Trust" on government buildings and such.

>   That kind of situation feels somehow foreign to me.

Me too. It's only in certain very provincial areas. The same kinds of areas 
where you hear jokes about people holding up the Bible and saying "If 
English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me."

> discriminate christians in any way, but they often get questioned a lot. "Why
> do you believe that?" etc.)

A can understand that, if most people around you while you were growing up 
are atheist.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message