converstion from Christianity to Atheism

1123581321 · Post by **1123581321** » 2006-01-22 12:12am

As the title sugests, I am now officially an athiest. This is due to Darth Wong and the Republican Party. Thank you, for showing me the truth. If this belongs in Testing, please move it. But thank you for freeing me from the shackles of fundamentalist Christianity.

*Now to make up for 10 years of repressed sexuality*

Zadius · Post by **Zadius** » 2006-01-22 12:52am

Welcome to our team! But seriously it is good to hear.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-01-22 01:21am

Well, good-bye from the sprawling, civil war-torn Christian team. Enjoy your stay as an atheist!

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2006-01-22 01:34am

I was an athiest from birth. I cannot remember any point in my life when I was a Christian or even believed in that faith. I don't even know what demonination I would be.

Pick · Post by **Pick** » 2006-01-22 01:36am

Congradulations! You get a pony

Zor · Post by **Zor** » 2006-01-22 01:39am

Congrats on turning to the winning team!

Zor

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 01:55am

I was a Repbulican, now I'm a independent. Still a conservative, as it were. But since childhood, I've been against religion. Granted, when I started posting here, I'd probably have called my self an agnostic, but athesism is the right word now.

Being on this board, though, I just don't see what republicans have to do with it. Yeah, yeah, right wing nutballs. Got it.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2006-01-22 02:05am

Knife wrote:Being on this board, though, I just don't see what republicans have to do with it. Yeah, yeah, right wing nutballs. Got it.

He probably means the christian fundies that have the party by the short and danglies right now and the vehemently anti-fuckwit mentality of the board that gives fundies of every stripe a hard time.

Von Evil (what a name, eh?) wrote: I don't even know what demonination I would be.

You just take your mothers maiden name and the name of your first pet and then you...no, wait, that's how you get your pornstar name...nevermind.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 02:31am

Keevan_Colton wrote:
Knife wrote:Being on this board, though, I just don't see what republicans have to do with it. Yeah, yeah, right wing nutballs. Got it.
He probably means the christian fundies that have the party by the short and danglies right now and the vehemently anti-fuckwit mentality of the board that gives fundies of every stripe a hard time.

True, I was being somewhat sarcastic about it. I'm an independent for a reason. Social liberal, fiscal conservative.

(edit: fixed quote tags. Damn I like this Senator shit.)

mr friendly guy · Post by **mr friendly guy** » 2006-01-22 03:04am

Well it looks like you have seen the light.

Couldn't resist that one.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 03:06am

mr friendly guy wrote:Well it looks like you have seen the light.

Couldn't resist that one.

Me?

Faram · Post by **Faram** » 2006-01-22 03:36am

Welcome to the rational and logical side.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 03:41am

Faram wrote:Welcome to the rational and logical side.

Neener neener.

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2006-01-22 03:47am

Knife wrote:True, I was being somewhat sarcastic about it. I'm an independent for a reason. Social liberal, fiscal conservative.

Then why don't you describe yourself as a Classical Liberal rather than a conservative who aren't as a rule socially liberal?

(edit: fixed quote tags. Damn I like this Senator shit.)

This is in off-topic you've always had the ability to edit your posts here.

mr friendly guy · Post by **mr friendly guy** » 2006-01-22 03:51am

Knife wrote:
mr friendly guy wrote:Well it looks like you have seen the light.

Couldn't resist that one.
Me?

I meant 1123581321.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 03:52am

Plekhanov wrote:
Knife wrote:True, I was being somewhat sarcastic about it. I'm an independent for a reason. Social liberal, fiscal conservative.
Then why don't you describe yourself as a Classical Liberal rather than a conservative who aren't as a rule socially liberal?

Because the political map in the USA doesn't quite match the UK. I'm stead fast Conservative here because of my fiscal policies, not withstanding the far right republican views these days. I'm independent because of that said 'far right' in the republican party. I'll vote for liberals (read Democrate in the USA) for certain postions, usually not for their fiscal policies.

(edit: fixed quote tags. Damn I like this Senator shit.)
This is in off-topic you've always had the ability to edit your posts here.

*shrug* I tend not to notice shit like that. Being a Senator is really a big surpirse to me. How the hell I made it into the floor level of this establishment is a damn good story I'd like to hear one day.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 03:56am

mr friendly guy wrote:
Knife wrote:
mr friendly guy wrote:Well it looks like you have seen the light.

Couldn't resist that one.
Me?
I meant 1123581321.

Quote tags are your friend.

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2006-01-22 04:19am

Then why don't you describe yourself as a Classical Liberal rather than a conservative who aren't as a rule socially liberal?

I think I might fall under such a category, although I still call myself liberal, as opposed to Knife's terming. "Classical" is implied (and to actually term yourself that would just confuse people, at least the people I know.)

Oh, and congrats 1123581321. Always nice to see those who are not afraid to defy tradition and embrace logic (and donuts, we get donuts.)

Zadius · Post by **Zadius** » 2006-01-22 04:30am

Well, Mr. Fibonacci, you are proof that logic and reason can occasionally break through the wall of ignorance. Congratulations.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 04:37am

Noble Ire wrote:
Then why don't you describe yourself as a Classical Liberal rather than a conservative who aren't as a rule socially liberal?
I think I might fall under such a category, although I still call myself liberal, as opposed to Knife's terming. "Classical" is implied (and to actually term yourself that would just confuse people, at least the people I know.)

Oh, and congrats 1123581321. Always nice to see those who are not afraid to defy tradition and embrace logic (and donuts, we get donuts.)

For the record, my terming is via USA standards. Liberal is usually termed here as socially liberal, fiscally liberal. While conservatism is usually labeled as socialy conservative and fiscally conservative.

There is not much of a middle ground. Moderates being of both and mixed positions.

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2006-01-22 05:07am

Knife wrote:
Noble Ire wrote:
Then why don't you describe yourself as a Classical Liberal rather than a conservative who aren't as a rule socially liberal?
I think I might fall under such a category, although I still call myself liberal, as opposed to Knife's terming. "Classical" is implied (and to actually term yourself that would just confuse people, at least the people I know.)

Oh, and congrats 1123581321. Always nice to see those who are not afraid to defy tradition and embrace logic (and donuts, we get donuts.)
For the record, my terming is via USA standards. Liberal is usually termed here as socially liberal, fiscally liberal. While conservatism is usually labeled as socialy conservative and fiscally conservative.

There is not much of a middle ground. Moderates being of both and mixed positions.

So you realise that even within the traditional US usage of the word you aren’t a conservative?

Furthermore increasingly in the US those who describe themselves as ‘conservative’ want to radically change the role that the state plays in society and are prepared to spent huge amounts of tax payers money to pursuer their ‘conservative’ social agenda. Thus politically you have little in common with many of today’s ‘conservatives’ beyond some foreign policy points and a dislike of welfare liberalism, in other words you are a classical liberal.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-01-22 05:13am

Plekhanov wrote:
Knife wrote:
Noble Ire wrote: I think I might fall under such a category, although I still call myself liberal, as opposed to Knife's terming. "Classical" is implied (and to actually term yourself that would just confuse people, at least the people I know.)

Oh, and congrats 1123581321. Always nice to see those who are not afraid to defy tradition and embrace logic (and donuts, we get donuts.)
For the record, my terming is via USA standards. Liberal is usually termed here as socially liberal, fiscally liberal. While conservatism is usually labeled as socialy conservative and fiscally conservative.

There is not much of a middle ground. Moderates being of both and mixed positions.
So you realise that even within the traditional US usage of the word you aren’t a conservative?

Furthermore increasingly in the US those who describe themselves as ‘conservative’ want to radically change the role that the state plays in society and are prepared to spent huge amounts of tax payers money to pursuer their ‘conservative’ social agenda. Thus politically you have little in common with many of today’s ‘conservatives’ beyond some foreign policy points and a dislike of welfare liberalism, in other words you are a classical liberal.

No, not really. You might be right if I termed my self a Republican. They're hyjacked by the loony right-wing fundie bastards. Being Conservative isn't necessarily a Pat Roberson fuck-wit.

Fundie-republican is a recent development in US politics. It was the Republicans that helped pass the Civil Rights Act, as it were. The far right wack-o's are a more modern interpertation.

All that being if you prescribe conservative=republican/liberal=democrate via the two party system of the US. Each is really a generalization. Multilateral parties, big tent partys, ect.....

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-01-22 05:23am

I think it best to always specify "fiscal conservative". The word "conservative" by itself with no qualifiers implies both fiscal and social conservatism, which is the platform of the Bible-thumping right wingnut brigade.

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2006-01-22 06:19am

Knife wrote:
Plekhanov wrote:So you realise that even within the traditional US usage of the word you aren’t a conservative?

Furthermore increasingly in the US those who describe themselves as ‘conservative’ want to radically change the role that the state plays in society and are prepared to spent huge amounts of tax payers money to pursuer their ‘conservative’ social agenda. Thus politically you have little in common with many of today’s ‘conservatives’ beyond some foreign policy points and a dislike of welfare liberalism, in other words you are a classical liberal.
No, not really. You might be right if I termed my self a Republican. They're hyjacked by the loony right-wing fundie bastards.

“Right-wing fundie bastards” who call themselves conservatives.

Being Conservative isn't necessarily a Pat Roberson fuck-wit.

However Pat Robertson and his millions of followers do describe themselves as ‘conservatives’ so if you use the term you are associating yourself with them. And like Pat Robertson and unlike you it does involve being socially conservative.

Fundie-republican is a recent development in US politics. It was the Republicans that helped pass the Civil Rights Act, as it were.

Yes and then came the southern strategy and “our schools are for education – not integration” I’m aware of this stuff, not sure what relevance it has to the definition of conservative though.

The far right wack-o's are a more modern interpertation.

And these “far right wack-o's” what do you think they describe themselves as? ‘far right wack-o’s’ or ‘conservatives’?

All that being if you prescribe conservative=republican/liberal=democrate via the two party system of the US. Each is really a generalization. Multilateral parties, big tent partys, ect.....

And this means that it’s accurate to describe you as a conservative when you declare yourself to be socially liberal a position in direct opposition to mainstream conservatism why exactly?

1123581321 · Post by **1123581321** » 2006-01-22 08:30am

The Republican Party thing is because of the fundies. Back in the day of high school when it was EVILution and sex is bad, I was all into their shit. Then I grew up and had to go out into the real world and after discovering that sex is actually good it was all downhill from there. Of course, according to the parents I've been on the path to hell for a while now. It's just finally official.