General Debate 31 March 2014

March 31st, 2014 at 8:00 am by Kokila Patel
Tags:

374 Responses to “General Debate 31 March 2014”

  1. iMP (2,387 comments) says:

    Re the Franz Josef stabbing, what is a Dutch and “Japanese and Dutch woman”? [Stuff].

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    State of the parties

    Summary

    National may slip in support a bit but are still looking reasonably in charge. Greens are looking strong. But the rest is up for grabs, which means this year’s election is still very open – with more complicating factors than usual.

    The Colmar Brunton poll showed a large wild card (or cards): Don’t know 13%, Refused 5%

    The media play a major role and can make major stories out of the trivial. It’s a major concern that the balance of our democracy could swing on the whim of journalists. They have become very powerful, and they know it. And they are accountable to no one but their ratings and egos.

    Our elections risk being more superficial lottery than a contest of policies and parties.

    Unfortunately this year’s election may be decided on the least worst option as the positives in our politics are paltry. The parties, press and people are all culpable.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Monique Angel (291 comments) says:

    Good morning.

    Overseas student loan repayments are due.

    Was a good weekend.

    http://www.enlightenedhousewife.com/2014/03/rebellionandwild-animals/

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Chuck Bird (4,897 comments) says:

    PG, A pretty accurate assessment. I think NZF is likely to make the 5% and go with National. There are a lot of National MPs that would like to see the end of the Maori seats. Peters sees them as holding Maori back. I cannot see Labour supporting this but National could and this would be a legacy for Peters.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. MT_Tinman (3,205 comments) says:

    iMP (2,110 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 8:02 am
    Re the Franz Josef stabbing, what is a Dutch and “Japanese and Dutch woman”? [Stuff].

    A natural victim?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    NewstalkZB has really been having a Labour support morning, even had “Tojo” greasing to Maori. This disgraceful media outlet is getting worse than Guyon Espiner on Radio NZ, funded by taxpayers.
    So Labour have appointed a token Maori to try and take Rotorua (Nat, maj 8000), but they have another rainbow . . . that will piss off the feminists.
    The Dotslob is resorting to telling porkies trying to get a bit of support. He is a real slimeball this bastard.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Bovver (173 comments) says:

    One for WO’s cry baby of the week, Wellington women hurts her knee with her own car, days later wants an ambulance to take her to hospital but WFA correctly say this is not life threatening and initially refuse to pick her up. He husband then spends hours ringing around different EMS until an ambulance arrives while she sits in ‘agony’. Why did he not get her into the car and drive her to a medical centre when she first found the pain too much.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Paulus (2,633 comments) says:

    Like the last election the media were in charge – look at how they pushed Winston in the last three weeks – they have all started earlier this time pushing for anybody who is against National. They have waited three years to extract Ambrose “UTU” for actually proposing to take legal action against one of the precious. For the record Ambrose wrote an apology to Key and that was the end of the matter from his standpoint, but not the so called media.
    Labour are toast though so it will be the ragtags they will back.
    They are assuming DotCrim will still be in New Zealand after his extradition hearing.
    – I assume that they are supporting him – it appears so.
    Anybody but Key to lead New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. redqueen (567 comments) says:

    Yet more fantastic polling information from the Herald:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11229168

    So what were the sample sizes? Also, TV3 has NZ First down 0.8%, at 4.9%, whereas One News has 7%, up 4%. So, really, how many people did they bother to ask, what were the sample groupings, etc?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    @ redqueen – perhaps Colmar Brunton’s pollsters focused on rest home residents ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. marcw (251 comments) says:

    Bovver, it would be good Karma if one day you dislocated your knee just to show you when to keep your mouth shut. What a despicable pratt you are. Have a bad day.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    On the heels of the wiretap of the discussion of staging a false flag attack against Syria, Turkey has shot down a Syrian fighter jet.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10717257/Syrian-jet-shot-down-by-Turkey.html
    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1403/S00180/syrian-false-flag-turkeys-pm-is-desperate-m-collins.htm

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Andrew (84 comments) says:

    @Keeping Stock – you actually raise a very important point, right there.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Bovver (173 comments) says:

    Cry me a river marcw, a bit of commonsense on the husbands part would have saved her sitting in agony.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    The one constant across both TV news polls was that both Labour and David Cunliffe were down in popularity. Has the secret trust/anonymous donations saga hurt David Cunliffe more than expected? Are people worried about the direction in which Matt McCarten might drag Labour? Or is everyone simply sick of Labour’s unending negativity?

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz/2014/03/we-cant-help-but-wonder_31.html

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. EAD (1,129 comments) says:

    @ UglyTruth

    Interesting that you bring up Turkey – the Warmongers who’ve failed (so far) to get us to invade Russia really do need to turn their attention to Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

    He has all the qualifications for villainy – his jails are crammed with journalists, his opponents are subjected to evidence-free show-trials and locked up for years, and he ‘kills his “own people”’ when they protest against him.

    There’s more. The country is fantastically corrupt. He foments strife in neighbouring nations. His troops have illegally occupied Northern Cyprus for 40 years and show no sign of going.

    Last week he tried to shut down Twitter in an outburst of laughable megalomania. He even has a moustache.

    So why no sanctions, no squeaky, righteous denunciations by John Kerry? Er, Turkey is a member of Nato and a fully paid-up member of the Globalist club. So it can do what Russia can’t.

    http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/03/28/pushing-toward-final-war-paul-craig-roberts/

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. MT_Tinman (3,205 comments) says:

    Bovver (132 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 8:46 am
    Cry me a river marcw, a bit of commonsense on the husbands part would have saved her sitting in agony.

    No, it wouldn’t.

    Having had a daughter with a damaged knee that occasionally dislocated I can assure you moving her into a car would have been impossible.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. kowtow (8,524 comments) says:

    imp

    Re the Franz josef stabbing,I see a man had doused himself in petrol during a standoff with police……

    The Dirty Harry modus operandi would have been appropriate.

    Go ahead matey,no loss. Whosh,end of problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. flipper (4,084 comments) says:

    A better way of looking…..

    TV3 Reid Research Poll: / TV One
    National 45.9, up 1.4 / 47 per cent, down four points

    Labour 31.2, down 2.3 / 31 per cent, down three points

    Greens 11.2 per cent, down 1.2 / 11, up three point

    NZ First 4.9 per cent, down 0.8 / 7 per cent, up four points

    Conservatives 1.9 per cent, down 0.2 / 2 per cent, up one point

    Maori Party 1.5 per cent, up 0.3 / `1 per cent, no change.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    @ EAD

    According to Sibel Edmonds, Turkey is one of four nations that have a favoured diplomatic relationship with the U.S. IIRC they don’t conduct espionage against Turkish diplomatic communications. Also the Gulen movement is strong in Turkey, with allegations that Gulen’s money comes from narcotics trafficking via the CIA.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    EAD , let’s turn the other side of the coin and examine the actions of Turkey”s neighbour Syria pre civil war according to both Genocide watch and Amnesty International .Including , of course , the usual dose of Internet filtering and censorship.
    Going back beyond to Basher al Assad’s notorious father makes Turkey’s present PM look like an Angel.
    As for Cyprus the conflict there between Greece and Turkey is a historic one that does not stand your simplistic analysis , or lack thereof.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    The findings of Genocide Watch re Syria over the years,

    http://www.genocidewatch.org/syria.html

    I don’t think Putin and maybe yourself will lose sleep over this,!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. EAD (1,129 comments) says:

    Ever wondered what the end game of the progressives is when they decide what we should/shouldn’t drink, smoke and eat in case?

    The UK is well down the road of Huxley’s Brave new world( http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-30/2014-brave-new-dystopian-1984-world ) where the government has ordered restaurants to cut their portion sizes while charging the same price – i.e. it should make customers poorer. Amongst it gems of advice it has given to restaurants are the following:

    – Italian restaurants should cut an inch off the width of a pizza, saying: ‘You will save money by using less dough and toppings.’ It adds: ‘Thinner bases – bigger profits!

    – Indian takeaways should scrap free poppadums and use smaller containers as ‘smaller portion sizes will still be satisfying and will save you money!’

    – Sandwich shops can reduce the size of fillings. ‘Use grated cheese instead of sliced’ and if customers ask for a spread, ‘spread it thinly’.

    – ‘Customers won’t notice if you add a tiny bit less and you will save money!’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2592494/Nanny-states-plan-cut-inch-pizzas-shrink-curries-ban-free-poppadums-encourage-healthy-eating-restaurants-charge-same.html

    This from a so called “right wing” Government! Government is not your friend no matter what colour rosette the pig is wearing.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. rg (214 comments) says:

    Enjoyed watching ACT’s Jamie Whyte on global warming on Q & A, he called the futile mitigation attempts like John Key’s ETS irresponsible moral exhibitionism.

    I agree with him, taking money off the poor to give to multinational forestry corporations in some futile attempt to pretend he is doing something is irresponsible. I would add immoral.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. gravedodger (1,566 comments) says:

    @ bovver
    Ignorance is no excuse but in your case it explains your total stupidity.

    Go back and read what Tinman and markw commented.

    Moving someone with that woman was enduring could make even your eyes water Bovver you tough bastard you.
    Likewise a dislocated artificial hip.

    Calling for Pain relief as a precurser to even trying to make her more comfortable is just so basic.

    Increasingly best practise has communication centers staffed with telephonists without even a first aid cert in the case of ambo and it will come to the NZ fire service, leading to increasing instances of such crass stupidity.

    I echo what Tinman and marcw said. I have seen a fractured tib fib with angular distortion described as no pain and a dislocated finger at 10/10. Pain tolerance is so subjective and variable and since you do not know what you are talking about, Just stfu and be regarded as an idiot rather than make further stupid statements and remove any doubt.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Lucia Maria (2,473 comments) says:

    EAD,

    No one wants to invade Russia, we just want Russia to stop invading other countries. I’m picking Eastern Ukraine will be the next to go, and not because “we made them do it”.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    irresponsible moral exhibitionism.

    Did mr Whyte mention his party prior total denial of the science of global warming and past judgment on that?

    The vacuum created by the right-wing denial of climate change is empowering the opponents to right wing political views.

    Wonder why the moonbats in the green party are polling more as time proceeds.

    It because of you….. the stupid wingnuts on the right.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Griffith
    I think Whyte backed off (a little) from Act’s previous outright denial:
    ‘Mr Whyte accepted that there was global warming but said there was some debate about what was causing it.’

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. dirty harry (504 comments) says:

    Why do we have to keep regurgitating this shit….cant we leave it now and move on..

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9885369/The-call-Daddy-I-won-t-make-it

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. flipper (4,084 comments) says:

    The Whale nails the poofter take over of cunners and Labour…….
    **** “ … .
    The past week has been interesting to say the least as Labour announced a few selections.
    Ever since Damien O’Connor expressed his own frustration about the “gaggle of gays” Labour has been at pains to state how inclusive they are, while at the same time implementing exclusive rules like their Man Ban.
    However with the march of their candidate announcements plus some recent replacements one really does now have to ask what it takes to get selected for Labour if you are a straight bloke .
    Labour selected Tony Milne for Christchurch Central, he is a reasonable sort of a candidate, young, well meaning, earnest even, …and never had a real job. He is also gay.
    Then Tamati Coffey was selected in Rotorua and Kelly Smith in Whangarei.
    Yesterday they announced the selection of Richard Hills as their Northcote candidate
    , pretty much extinguishing any chance of Darien Fenton remaining relevant inside Labour.
    You can add all of them to existing MPs and candidates Grant Robertson, Louisa Wall, Maryan Street and Meka Whatiri. On top of that their General Secretary is Tim Barnett.
    So Labour has 34 current MPs of which 4 are LGBT…that is 11% of caucus.
    Now there are at least 4 more LGBT candidates of which only Tony Milne is likely to win his seat, the other dependent on the list for successfully entering parliament…but realistically only Tamati Coffey, but adding in another two LGBT MPs to the existing caucus.
    Let’s face it, Labour isn’t like to improve on their current position so is likely that the rainbow caucus will number 6 out of 34 MPs or a massive 6% increase to 17% of caucus.
    With the man ban in place it makes it very hard to see a straight bloke gaining selection anytime soon, and certainly not being placed on the list in a winnable position.
    Without putting too fine a point on it Labour appears to be coming the party of poofs, cementing the belief that they are captured by single interest groups and factions. ”

    OUCH !

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Yes, because 6 gay MPs out of 34 would be almost a majority…

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. stigie (1,224 comments) says:

    They are really just a shambles !!~

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    I’m picking Eastern Ukraine will be the next to go, and not because “we made them do it”.

    Discussing the fate of Ukraine’s eight million ethnic Russians with Shufrych, Tymoshenko was also heard as saying that they should be “nuked”.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-pm-wipe-out-russians-2014-3?IR=T

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. dirty harry (504 comments) says:

    Im not surprised. That homosexual Tim Barnett is in the background pulling the strings within liarbor…heh they will get what they deserve this coming election..fuck all.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    So the way things are tracking, 1 in 6 labour MP’s will be gay?

    They need to promote that! That way the waitakere man will be on board and that number may drop.. cause they will get way more seats.

    Are 1 in 6 also ex-unionists? or higher?

    1 in 6 were teachers?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. stigie (1,224 comments) says:

    It just gets worse for poor ole Damien O’Connor, the man for ordinary people !!

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Left Right and Centre (2,986 comments) says:

    alcohol loophole:

    I wonder if an underage person could get away with buying 16% alcohol content rice cooking wine from the supermarket ?

    Cheap hooch too if you just want to get buzzed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    I have not personally explored mr Whytes pronouncements beyond noting who the pay masters for act are and their agenda.

    Act will not get my vote again in till it clearly distances itself from the likes of http://nzclimatescience.net/ involved in anti science propaganda and honestly acknowledges the findings of mainstream science as its position on AGW.

    AGW is Human caused and if allowed to continue unchecked is heading us towards global civilisation collapses in a matter of decades.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Left Right and Centre (2,986 comments) says:

    Now that Monique Angel is a patriot American who has never heard of NZ – shouldn’t she change the word ‘housewife’ to ‘stayathomemom’ in the www address ? I wonder if she’s trying to gain 40-50kg of fat to blend in and assimilate with the local women ?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    King Canute comes to mind: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/28/white-house-looks-to-regulate-cow-flatulence-as-part-of-climate-agenda/#ixzz2xHqYITaT

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    AGW is Human caused and if allowed to continue unchecked is heading us towards global civilisation collapses in a matter of decades

    Read: The sky is falling, so tax us more to protect supreme Gaia. While at it, please pass another two joints.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    right…so I found out from greenwave.com that the reason for the ditched jumbo is because tech execs were on board who were working on massive cloaking technology. definitely not what the NSA want.

    Also, I have just learned from one source police are confiscating USB’s during searches. Makes sense when the Reserve Bank doesn’t want Bitcoin or alternative currencies that can’t be rigged like fiat paper can.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Labour is definitely a party of misfits, perverts, deviants and losers. The founders of this once proud party comprising of hardworking families, most of them returned servicemen/women, and God fearing people would be disgusted seeing the weirdos and pacifists that have hijacked it in the past two decades . . . a damn shame.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    Hitchhiker attack and supermarket body may be linked

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/9886237/Hitchhiker-attack-and-supermarket-body-may-be-linked

    Another case which destroys the myth that hitchhikers are dangerous. The reality is it’s usually drivers raping woman.

    The middle class just use the myth as an excuse to remain ignorant

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I think you will find, igm, that pacifists were a strong component when the Labour Party was formed in 1916.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    wiki – did you see the new stealth bomber spotted over texas? happened a couple of days ago..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    Hitchhikers left stabbed, with broken bones

    Two hitchhikers were found stabbed and with broken bones after taking a lift near Whataroa today.

    West Coast police are looking for a man who was driving a blue SUV, possibly a Nissan Terrano or similar, after he picked up two German women this afternoon
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/9885062/Hitchhikers-left-stabbed-with-broken-bones

    The reason you Kiwiblog Nazi’s aren’t pasting this is because it hasn’t been revealed Maori aren’t the problem. Otherwise you woulda beat me to the gun !

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Read…. greed

    greed pure a simple

    fuck the world I want

    No civilization and your I want.

    greed

    Becomes a primitive struggle for food and shelter

    Not whether you run 91 or 98 petrol in your ego inflating european car

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    “wiki – did you see the new stealth bomber spotted over texas? happened a couple of days ago..”

    Sawry Dime no. Check up on it.

    As I shared earlier, media ignored the passengers on the downed flight. Was full of Hi tech experts working on huge cloaking technology.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    wiki – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2591860/UFO-secret-fighter-jet-The-mysterious-triple-triangle-craft-pictured-flying-Texasre.html

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    Dime will hire her: http://news.msn.co.nz/worldnews/8822486/german-neo-nazi-party-fires-porn-star

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. wreck1080 (3,924 comments) says:

    Dan Vicary died in a wingsuiting accident.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/9886298/Kiwi-killed-in-wingsuiting-crash

    I checked his facebook page out of interest.

    March 21st…
    “Every interview, every time we speak to the media about our sport, we as wingsuit pilots try to get across that we are not doing a “stunt” or a “crazy” thing – Finally we’re getting somewhere!!

    I guess 1 step forward, 2 steps backward.

    I think anyone doing extreme sports like this are nuts. Sad nonetheless.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    “right…so I found out from greenwave.com that the reason for the ditched jumbo is because tech execs were on board who were working on massive cloaking technology. definitely not what the NSA want.”

    It was a 777 not a Jumbo.

    I read the conspiracy theory.

    China a may have stolen the plane etc

    The cloaking device was from “freescale semiconductor”. according to the theory 4 out of 5 of the owners were onboard.. and the 5th owner is in the Illuminati.. then I check yahoo finance.. Freescale was spun off from motorola, it is publicly listed. they are more than 5 owners etc etc etc

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    Manolo – bahaha that’s outstanding.

    did you know a porn stars earning power goes down (excuse the pun) after doing scenes with black guys… guess they are never the same :P

    as for her.. hard looking thing she is!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Fletch (6,410 comments) says:

    According to the Independent, one of Putin’s former advisors is saying that Finland is next.

    After annexing Crimea and with troops massed on the border of Ukraine, Vladimir Putin will not stop trying to expand Russia until he has “conquered” Belarus, the Baltic states and Finland, one of his closest former advisers has said.

    According to Andrej Illarionov, the President’s chief economic adviser from 2000 to 2005, Mr Putin seeks to create “historical justice” with a return to the days of the last Tsar, Nicholas II, and the Soviet Union under Stalin.

    Speaking to the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, Mr Illarionov warned that Russia will argue that the granting of independence to Finland in 1917 was an act of “treason against national interests”.

    “Putin’s view is that he protects what belongs to him and his predecessors,” Mr Illarionov said.

    “Parts of Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States and Finland are states where Putin claims to have ownership.

    He added: “The West’s leaders seem, from what they say, entirely to have forgotten that there are some leaders in the world who want to conquer other countries.”

    Mr Illarionov has helped draft a host of Russia’s economic policies in recent years, and served as Mr Putin’s personal representative at a number of G8 conferences. He is now a senior fellow at the Cato institute’s Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity in Washington.

    More – http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vladimir-putin-wants-to-regain-finland-for-russia-adviser-says-9224273.html

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. kowtow (8,524 comments) says:

    Why does flipper keep so nastily talking about labour “poofters” and Whaleoils’ constant attacks thereupon.

    Whaleoil,and others, were big campaigners for Labour led “progressive” “poofterism” in respect of so called marriage equality,with National collusion…..

    ….the vicious language that you Notionals use in your attack on Labour is ,in this context, arrant hypocrisy.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. kowtow (8,524 comments) says:

    wikidiki,

    Re Franz Josef outrage.

    First post of the day,with some follow up.

    Now run along with your reverse racism.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Flips post @ March 31st, 2014 at 9:44 am was to a standard of nuttery really seen on kb.

    The excessive Bold highlighting said warning whackjob posting.

    Then the homophobic ranting contents confirmed the prognosis.

    Still its flipper so par for the course.

    Flips has assured us prior he has a position of responsibility in the Party.

    I Pity national for having such a whackjob any were near its governance processes

    Party number two I can not vote for.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Fletch (6,410 comments) says:

    Apparently it was Earth Hour last weekend (Saturday just gone).
    I didn’t hear much about it in the media. Hopefully it’s been more-or-less abandoned here.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Britain’s current account deficit is in the country’s headlines.

    This is an interesting contrast to NZ, where the PR spinners focus national attention on pure trade figures, while NZ has not had a current account surplus for 40 years!

    Britain’s current account deficit is the highest since World War 2, and the Telegraph says it is raises concerns that economic recovery is being fed by “a premature return to bad habits of house price inflation and credit-driven spending rather than a revival of manufacturing and productive investment”.

    The newspaper quotes one Simon Ward from Henderson Global Investors as saying Britain is structurally unbalanced, relying heavily on imports to meet demand as confidence returns

    When NZ’s pure trade balance figures were released last week, at least one Kiwiblog poster seemed to suggest current account deficits don’t matter as they are balanced by inflow of foreign investment (when of course, it is overwhelmingly balanced by lending to us by foreign lenders).

    Here’s an account of current account balances’ relevance from the web site Trading Economics:

    Usually, countries recording a strong current account surplus have an economy heavily dependent on exports revenues, with high savings ratings but weak domestic demand. On the other hand, countries recording a current account deficit have strong imports, a low saving rates and high personal consumption rates as a percentage of disposable incomes.

    Here’s how Britain’s current account deficit is reported overseas:

    The Telegraph:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10427783/Britain-to-have-worst-2014-trade-deficit-in-industrial-world-on-EU-forecasts.html

    China’s news agency:
    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/indepth/2014-03/29/c_133222172.htm

    And from the Left, the Guardian:

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2014/mar/30/britain-economy-deficit-crisis-recession-pound

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Nostalgia-NZ (5,221 comments) says:

    LK will be delighted that Pora has been granted parole, next step the decimation of the case against him at the PC.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. kowtow (8,524 comments) says:

    The Conservative Party in Britain really has lost the plot.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/10732982/Parents-who-starve-children-of-love-face-jail.html

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Elaycee (4,393 comments) says:

    griffith (450 comments) says: The excessive Bold highlighting said warning whackjob posting.

    @griffith: It took you 450 comments, but on this occasion you’re bang on! :D

    The overuse of bold font / CAPS is the signature of a moron unable to get their point across using English.

    That’s why we’ve all been given a scroll wheel. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. flipper (4,084 comments) says:

    Geez….
    Psycho, griff, yoza, rossie69 or whatever it calls itself today…. the truth really hurts you doesn’t it?

    En passant, so called “homophobia” is an invention (aka fiction, because there is no such condition) of/by the poofters and their fellow travellers, of which y’all are clearly one and the same.

    And as for…. . “has assured us prior he has a position of responsibility in the Party. ….

    Source please, because like everything else you write, it is another of your serial lies.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. HB (323 comments) says:

    Left Right and Centre:
    I had to show ID at Pak n Save when I bought some brewing stuff (no alcohol content at all)!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    Strange Parallels of 2 BC and 2014

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_GFarb4Zyo

    Awesome knowledge

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Rowan (2,410 comments) says:

    Last week the high court denies Teina Pora bail and this week the parole board have released him on bail, all seems rather weird!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. flipper (4,084 comments) says:

    Rowan (1,678 comments) says:

    March 31st, 2014 at 11:59 am
    ****

    Hi There….
    but you mean ” …. and this week the parole board have released him on “bail”, …” , do you not?

    In fact, his parole conditions are very likely to be more onerous that bail, except that Comm Corr will be involved, and he will not be reporting to Police.

    But already there is pejorative reporting in the NZ Herald saying Pora “will [now] face the Privy Council”. The fools that masquerade as reporters in 2014 are as numerous as a few that inhabit these hallowed precincts… to coin a phrase. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    Wiriiwhis,

    The Four Blood Moons : It’s s called Lunacy for a Reason,

    http://m.blogs.christianpost.com/guest-views/four-blood-moons-its-called-lunacy-for-a-reason-20673/

    Sorry ,the second coming 2014 is now on hold – yet again.!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Wow, wikiriwhis business spouting nonsense. How unusual.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Flippy

    Griff Or Griffith

    Is not at all interested in going back over years of your twaddle to highlite your prior claims of relevance to national party internal process and those you infer you hobnob with.

    Persons on this forum and in politics who are aware of your real identity are naturally judging you.

    I suggest you will be found wanting both as to your level of cognitive thought and your intelligence.

    As to Griff and lies

    Do you mean this sort of stuff?
    AAAS http://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-kicks-initiative-recognize-climate-change-risks
    Climate scientists agree: climate change is happening here and now.
    We are at risk of pushing our climate system toward abrupt, unpredictable, and potentially irreversible changes with highly damaging impacts.
    The sooner we act, the lower the risk and cost. And there is much we can do.

    Science wingnut and those who work honestly within its processes and present its conclusions can not lie.

    Repeating the conclusions of scientific bodies is not lying.

    Denial of the conclusions of scientific bodies is whacko nut job territory.

    Flips mind is trapped within the fantasy of wingnutology in his head……..

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Rowan (2,410 comments) says:

    Flipper
    I meant to say released on parole but the still seems rather weird, it was a bit of a grey area for the court without much precedence so they convienently decide to deny him bail, for the parole board top release him anyway, strange?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Lucia Maria (2,473 comments) says:

    Ugly,

    Discussing the fate of Ukraine’s eight million ethnic Russians with Shufrych, Tymoshenko was also heard as saying that they should be “nuked”.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-pm-wipe-out-russians-2014-3?IR=T

    It doesn’t make any sense that Tymoshenko would seriously want to nuke the 8 million Russian in Ukraine, given that nukes are indiscriminate. She also asserts that she never said that part (from your link):

    “The conversation took place but (the part) about 8 million Russians in Ukraine is a montage,” Tymoshenko said on Twitter.

    “In fact I said: ‘Russians in Ukraine are Ukrainians. Cheers to FSB,” she said, referring to the Russian security service which she clearly believes were behind the bugging of the phone call.

    “Apologies for the expletives,” she added.

    I think getting all excited about what someone is alleged to have said in response to me thinking that eastern Ukraine is next is buying into the potential FSB propaganda machine that is clearly working on overdrive.

    1) It’s unlikely she said it, because it’s nonsensical
    2) If she did say it and meant it for real, following through without hurting a whole lot of non-Russian Ukrainians is impossible

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    Rowan , thinking of things weird it was last week sometime that you, I believe, attempted to dispute the Police Report finding of at least 60 errors of assumption and fact on the Binnie report.
    Which ones exactly.?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. thedavincimode (6,803 comments) says:

    for the court without much precedence so they convienently decide to deny him bail

    I think you’ll find that the court held that there was no statutory basis upon which it could release him on bail pending his appeal. The fact that you have no doubt read the same news item as me, yet still make that comment, is yet another indicator that you are disadvantaged in holding your views on the DB business by virtue of being somewhat fucked in the head. Perhaps you and Nursey could attend remedial comprehension classes together.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    Re: The Four Blood Moons : It’s s called Lunacy for a Reason,

    Hagee writes that every time a tetrad occurs on Jewish feast days something traumatic and ‘world-changing’ happens to Israel. He gives three examples. First, in 1492 Spain expelled the Jews and Christopher Columbus discovered America, giving the Jews a place to go. Second, in 1948 Israel became a nation again. And third, in 1967 Israel won the Six Day War and captured Jerusalem.

    O.K.

    In a moment I will absolutely destroy Hagee’s conclusion about “traumatic things” happening to the Jews and the nation of Israel every time a lunar tetrad occurs on Hebrew holy days.

    Quite a subtle strawman is being set up here, which could be avoided by retstating the “conclusion” as the proposition that tetrads which fall out on Hebrew holidays indicate significant events for the people of the Mosaic covenant.

    For now, just think about this: Israel wasn’t even a nation the first six times a lunar tetrad occurred.

    Yeah, so what? The Zionist state of Israel and the house of Israel are very different things.

    There are a number of fallacies in Burleson’s critique, here are a few of them:

    In saying that the sun going dark and the moon turning to blood is not literal astronomy, Burleson ignores the idea that the text is a poetic reference to astronomical events.

    Burleson assumes that Joel 2:31 refers to Christian dogma when Joel is not a Christian text.

    Burleson assumes that the scattering of the Jews is relevant to the significance of the tetrads.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I guess wikiriwhis business found at least one credulous fool here…

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    http://www.angelfire.com/or/sociologyshop/lazlong.html
    Robert Heinlein.

    A touchstone to determine the actual worth of an “intellectual”–find out how he feels about astrology.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Elaycee (4,393 comments) says:

    Ahoy there Milkmilo:

    I hope you’re at lunch / on leave and not buggering around (oops – bad turn of phrase) wasting time on the Department’s dime. I’d hate to see my tax dollars going to waste. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Rowan (2,410 comments) says:

    DVM
    I think prehaps you should look in the mirror if you wish to see someone seriously fucked in the head, your inability to understand basic logical reasoning and to accept the fact that the police do in fact sometimes make f…ups is not my problem.

    Stephie
    Not quite sure what your getting at here, I believe the last time you were trying to discuss this I pointed out to you that none of the 60 so called “errors” stood up to any scrutiny and were mostly errors on behalf of the boys in blue if you looked at them objectively, difficult for you I know.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Nookin (3,361 comments) says:

    Rowan
    You suggest that the High Court “conveniently” declined bail. Here is what the judge said

    “[38] Given that background, the omission of any statutory provision permitting bail to be granted to a person in Mr Pora’s position cannot realistically have occurred through oversight. Rather, I consider that Parliament elected to retain the status quo in relation to appellants whose appeals were awaiting hearing before the Privy Council. It decided that such persons should not have the ability to seek or be granted bail”

    The parole board deal with a different Act and different criteria. Nothing weird about the fact that they came to different outcomes, at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Thanks for your concern, Elaycee. I’m doing my best to deliver value for money today for the long suffering taxpayers.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    Re: nuke the russians

    1) It’s unlikely she said it, because it’s nonsensical

    It’s entirely consistent with the rest of her tirade.

    She also asserts that she never said that part

    She’s lying. “Cheers to the FSB” absolutely does not fit into the rest of it.
    She’s not stupid, she knows that public knowledge of it would be a major political liability. Just look at Erdoğan’s response to the Turkish false flag wiretap.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Elaycee (4,393 comments) says:

    Love to hear it, Milkmilo. But please keep an eye on the clock! :D

    Whilst I can totally understand how your mind could wander from the tasks at hand to that of trying to sort Wikiwhizz, you may have to give him up as a lost cause. Sheesh – I see the discussion has now moved onto ‘four blood moons!’

    Yikes! 8O

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    “In saying that the sun going dark and the moon turning to blood is not literal astronomy, Burleson ignores the idea that the text is a poetic reference to astronomical events.”

    But if you look at what he says more closely this is the point he makes , namely there not to be taken literally as Hagee and Perry seem to suggest.

    “Burleson assumes that Joel 2:31 refers to Christian dogma when Joel is not a Christian text. ”

    I don’t think so. Sure the Book of Joel is Old testament but like e.g the Book of Daniel highly influential in Rapture and End of TImes theories and thinking.

    ” Burleson assumes that the scattering of the Jews is relevant to the significance of the tetrads.”

    Am not sure if he makes that case but the Diaspora again is an important element in End of times theology.

    Again I think we can be confident that 2014 will not witness the end of times or whatever.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Ugly
    Why would she talk about ‘nuking’ the Russians when Ukraine has no nuclear weapons?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Nostalgia-NZ (5,221 comments) says:

    ‘Rather, I consider that Parliament elected to retain the status quo in relation to appellants whose appeals were awaiting hearing before the Privy Council. It decided that such persons should not have the ability to seek or be granted bail…’

    Or that Parliament didn’t consider it because it is so rare.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    Why would she talk about ‘nuking’ the Russians when Ukraine has no nuclear weapons?

    Didn’t you listen to it? She was trying gauge how much support she could get, she floated the idea but it didn’t take.
    There’s no point in her trying to procure them if she doesn’t have allies when push comes to shove.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    You think Ukraine is trying to procure nuclear weapons?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    I guess wikiriwhis business found at least one credulous fool here…

    How’s that atheism working out for ya, mikey boy?
    Won any arguments lately?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    Rowan, yes you may of said the 60 points raised by the police did not stand critical scrutiny but you failed to provide evidence and facts to back up your assertion.
    That is the point.!
    Nothing difficult for me but it would be nice if you took the time which I really doubt .!
    But one example, Binnie claimed that Dr Brinded stated that David diid not have a predisposition to murder . He did say that ,rather he did not have a mental illness .
    and,

    Footprints in blood – foot lengths found in favour or David Bain
    Binnie has determined this evidence in a particular way that is favourable to David Bain, ignoring the fact that Bain said at his trial that he walked through the area where the footprinls were found with bloodied socks. The defence at his first trial conceded this evidence

    etc,etc

    .

    B

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I win lots of arguments, Ugly. Not everyone is as evasive as you. Convinced anyone on this blog of the merits of any of your kooky theories lately?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    I win lots of arguments, Ugly.

    Really? When was the last time you got lucky?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I’m certainly not discussing my sex life with you.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    I’m certainly not discussing my sex life with you.

    And you call me evasive. I was obviously talking about your proficiency in debate.

    You think Ukraine is trying to procure nuclear weapons?

    Do you know why that is a stupid question?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Oh do please enlighten me.
    BTW I’d be interested if you could show me one instance on Kiwiblog of a comment to the effect of “wow, after our argument I now agree with you”.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    I think the line between sanity & madness just got a little thinner Mike. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Rowan (2,410 comments) says:

    Stephie
    I don’t have the list in front of me or no it off by heart but you have been given various examples many times over, one of which springs to mind is the one where the police incorrectly stated that the manual did not contain a directive to cut out the skin from around a bullet wound, which it clearly did, etc etc, It is the police trying to justify their position by twisting the ‘facts’ to suit, it is of a similiar quality to the 1997 PCA investigation, you remember the “copybook” investigation or the 2003 COA one.
    Yes Michael Guest did make some dumb concessions and errors in the original trial, such as the footprints, i’ll give you that one but he is a corrupt, dishonest ex lawyer, hardly an inspiring role model.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    Oh do please enlighten me.

    1. Tymoshenko does not represent the Ukraine.
    2. She just got busted for warmongering.

    BTW I’d be interested if you could show me one instance on Kiwiblog of a comment to the effect of “wow, after our argument I now agree with you”.

    Yeah, that would divert from the actual issue, wouldn’t it?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    I would be fascinated to see occasions were any one on kb has admitted total capitulation on an important point.

    I think you will find it exceptional to find directly admitted even the most imperceptible of error.

    With Griff being as guilty as anyone.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    I think the line between sanity & madness just got a little thinner Mike.

    Atheists united, eh nasska?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Yes, that’s my point Griffith – was it too subtle for Ugly? One doesn’t go to Kiwiblog to have one’s mind changed – it’s a forum for venting, not persuasion.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    One doesn’t go to Kiwiblog to have one’s mind changed

    Speak for yourself. Some of us are still capable of learning.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    What have you read here that changed your mind, Ugly?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. thedavincimode (6,803 comments) says:

    your inability to understand basic logical reasoning and to accept the fact that the police do in fact sometimes make f…ups is not my problem

    Rowan, you do it again. Are you seriously suggesting that when a judge says he has no legislative power to grant bail, he does not mean exactly that? Is this your idea of logic and reason?

    As for the police not making fuckup, feel free to point to anything I have ever said to that effect. But anyway, to make my position perfectly clear, the police have made fuckups and by all accounts engaged in very questionable behaviour. That does not however, mean that Nursey’s godson isn’t a mass-murderer.

    No Rowan, you’re simply doing the little weasel dance that you and Nursey engage in whenever you make a completely stupid remark that cannot be sustained. You duck and dive and then attempt to cloak your own crushing logic fail in a mist of atomised bullshit particles. And nobody ever buys it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    “As things stand, the banks are the permanent government of the country, whichever party is in power.”

    – Lord Skidelsky, House of Lords, UK Parliament, 31 March 2011)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. thedavincimode (6,803 comments) says:

    I would be fascinated to see occasions were any one on kb has admitted total capitulation on an important point.

    I’m ya huckleberry grief. And I’ve done it within the last two weeks and on at least one other, possibly two occasions to my recollection.

    I can only attribute the fact that you haven’t noticed to the fact that I’m so rarely wrong. It’s just a gift I guess. :oops:

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    What have you read here that changed your mind, Ugly?

    From today’s Dotcom thread: nobody has any unambiguous evidence that he is guilty of a wrong.

    When do you believe that you last won an argument on Kiwiblog?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    On March 20, 2014, European Union officials reached an historic agreement to create a single agency to handle failing banks. Media attention has focused on the agreement involving the single resolution mechanism (SRM), a uniform system for closing failed banks. But the real story for taxpayers and depositors is the heightened threat to their pocketbooks of a deal that now authorizes both bailouts and “bail-ins” – the confiscation of depositor funds. The deal involves multiple concessions to different countries and may be illegal under the rules of the EU Parliament; but it is being rushed through to lock taxpayer and depositor liability into place before the dire state of Eurozone banks is exposed.
    The bail-in provisions were agreed to last summer. According to Bruno Waterfield, writing in the UK Telegraph in June 2013

    Under the deal, after 2018 bank shareholders will be first in line for assuming the losses of a failed bank before bondholders and certain large depositors. Insured deposits under £85,000 (€100,000) are exempt and, with specific exemptions, uninsured deposits of individuals and small companies are given preferred status in the bail-in pecking order for taking losses . . . Under the deal all unsecured bondholders must be hit for losses before a bank can be eligible to receive capital injections directly from the ESM, with no retrospective use of the fund before 2018.

    As noted in my earlier articles, the ESM (European Stability Mechanism) imposes an open-ended debt on EU member governments, putting taxpayers on the hook for whatever the Eurocrats (EU officials) demand. And it’s not just the EU that has bail-in plans for their troubled too-big-to-fail banks. It is also the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other G20 nations. Recall that a depositor is an unsecured creditor of a bank. When you deposit money in a bank, the bank “owns” the money and you have an IOU or promise to pay.

    Under the new EU banking union, before the taxpayer-financed single resolution fund can be deployed, shareholders and depositors will be “bailed in” for a significant portion of the losses. The bankers thus win both ways: they can tap up the taxpayers’ money and the depositors’ money.

    http://ellenbrown.com/2014/03/29/banking-union-time-bomb-eurocrats-authorize-bailouts-and-bail-ins/

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Rowan (2,410 comments) says:

    DVM
    Oh the irony! substantiated comments by yourstruly?
    I am talking about the DB case not Pora. You as usual, in any of your kb comments on the subject state “facts” with no reasoning or explanations at all yet we are doing the “little weasel dance…..”

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalia_Poklonskaya

    If all the new Crimean officials look like her, I say let Putin invade everywhere! I for one welcome our cute new overladies!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Shrug

    I have different views on the usefulness of KB and Griff often encourage others venting as an opportunity to examine with logic the discrepancys responsible for their induced cognitive dissonance.

    There are some who show indications of Psychopathy. It is fruitless to try to use rational debate with them.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. thedavincimode (6,803 comments) says:

    Rowan

    Feel free to actually address the substantive issues. 1) Your allegation that the judge rejected bail for reasons other than those he advanced. 2) Your further allegation that I cannot ever accept the prospect of a police fuckup.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    And yet you try, griffith – although you mix in a fair amount of abuse as well.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Ed Snack (1,883 comments) says:

    Wiki, those sound like completely sensible rules for banks. If you have money on deposit with a bank, and that bank goes tits-up ten it’s your money at risk. There is a standard (EU enforced I believe) deposit guarantee whereby deposits under 100K Euro are capital guaranteed, but amounts over that are not.

    As most banks in fact are insolvent and not actually bankrupt (that is, they have enough assets but not enough cash and can’t borrow it) depositors can get most if not all of their funds back. Shareholders though, they’re last in line and bond-holders not that far in front depending on what if any security they hold. The reason governments get involved in insolvent banks is that usually the money can be recovered, and in many cases the governments can actually make money from doing so. Taxpayers are at risk where the bank has invested very badly, typically in real estate developments that go sour, or in sovereign bonds that are repudiated. Banking regulation should (and typically do) at least attempt to moderate the degree to which banks can invest in such instruments, at least as a % of assets.

    The banks that failed in Cyprus though are an example, they actually were bankrupt or very close to it because they had (for mainly political reasons) invested heavily in Greek sovereign bonds, so when Greece and the EU agreed to a deal whereby the bondholders took a huge (75% or so) haircut, then those banks lost a huge chunk of their assets.

    You seemt o think that the “bankers” win, but if they have any money invested in “their” bank, they’re first in line for losses. They may bleed the bank for profit and/or bonuses before it goes down, but won’t get any of that if it does. I’m just not sure what your complaint is ?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Ed Snack (1,883 comments) says:

    Oh, and isn’t it the “shaky isles” out in the East this afternoon. A whole lot of banging and shaking goin’ on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    Fear-mongering to thrill even the addled Griff: http://news.msn.co.nz/worldnews/8822591/climate-change-boosts-conflict

    Seas will rise by 26-82cm by 2100: IPCC

    Soaring carbon emissions will amplify the risk of conflict, hunger, floods and migration this century, the UN’s expert panel says in a landmark report on the impact of climate change.

    Left unchecked, greenhouse gas emissions may cost trillions of dollars in damage to property and ecosystems and in bills for shoring up climate defences, it said.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    Rowan , again you typically failed to address the substantive points the Police raised in their critique of the Binnie report. You go off on a tangent about Detective manuals.
    Then you again typically try to do a snide hatched job on Guest. At least He has been upfront and forthcoming about his shortcomings and has not sought to conceal or hide them.
    His letters to Judith Collins both September and December 2012 had the effect of putting the skittles irrevocably under and discrediting Bain’s compensation claim,the numerous errors in Binnie’s report not withstanding.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. stephieboy (3,169 comments) says:

    Tom jackson,

    You appear to be oblivious towards Putin’s own skullduggery. and murders ?

    http://larussophobe.wordpress.com/putinmurders/

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    ” I’m just not sure what your complaint is ?”

    If you read the article you’ll find the EU is making illegal moves. Usually what the EU deos because it’s run by unelected bureaucrats mostly from Goldman Sachs. A name we had naver heard of until J Key came to NZ

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Sounds like a global conspiracy , wikiriwhis.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. Fletch (6,410 comments) says:

    Unbelievable…

    The brand-new CEO of Mozilla (which produces the Firefox browser) is being pressured by his employees to resign because he donated in the past to a campaign supported traditional marriage, or “anti-LGBT” as the liberals put it. He also likely is the creator of Javascript.

    Staff at tech company Mozilla are calling for CEO Brendan Eich to resign a week after he took the job, after it emerged that he gave donations to an anti-LGBT campaign.

    Eich contributed $1,000 (£601.11) in support of California’ Proposition 8 in 2008, an initiative which opposed same-sex marriage.

    His controversial donation was discovered on a public database, with Mozilla named as his employer, in 2012, the Telegraph reported.

    Eich was made CEO of Mozilla, which is behind the Firefox web browser, in late March after his predecessor Gary Kovacs announced his resignation in April last year.

    He was previously the organisation’s chief technology officer, and has been associated with Mozilla in its various guises since the 1990s.

    According to Mozilla, Eich invented JavaScript, the Internet’s most widely used programming language.

    Since his appointment, his colleagues, who regard his anti-LBGT stance as against the company’s ethos, have taken to Twitter to post the message: “I’m an employee of @mozilla and cannot reconcile having @BrendanEich as CEO.”

    More – http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mozilla-ceo-brendan-eich-urged-to-step-down-over-donation-to-antigay-marriage-campaign-9222453.html

    Now that is intolerance, right there.
    But you’re not allowed to disagree with the liberatti. If you don’t share the same view as them, that’s grounds for dismissal.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Manolo (12,531 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 3:20 pm

    Thank you for your ongoing, one lined, often ironically funny advertising of the coming problems facing humanity.
    The pentagon has the same warnings
    http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2007/climate_security_threat_africa.pdf
    AGW enhanced drought in the cradle of civilization is already apparent.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/22/opinion/friedman-wikileaks-drought-and-syria.html?_r=0

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Gee griffith, when are you going to stop bombarding them with facts?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. Rowan (2,410 comments) says:

    Stephie
    These substantive points in the police list of “errors” being?
    I gave you one specific example, it was a direct response to an alleged “error” in the police report, I don’t have a copy of each the the 60 different ones infront of me but I have read them and they are generally of about the same quality. Guest is a incompetent fraud, his inadequate defence was half the reason for the original conviction.
    As usual you provide a lot of smoke and mirrors with no substantiation, surprise, surprise!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    When the majority stop doing such amazingly amusing mental flips and gymnastics to sustain their world view.

    The fun will be gone then.

    Poking at the fringe loons doesn’t have quite the same level of amusement.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Nah, Kiwiblog wouldn’t be the same without the fringe loons. I treasure them, and Kiwiblog provides a harmless outlet for their crazy theories.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. singularian (22 comments) says:

    Is it just me or is it ironic that two of the biggest kool aid drinkers on KB are discussing dealing with loons?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    lol @ auckland action against poverty group.

    apparently national has been waging a “war on the poor” for the last 6 years.

    if they want to see a real war on the poor, elect Dime to office :D

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    singularian
    I presume you are referring to support for the widespread scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming. Not a concept widely endorsed by loons; but a very scary reality.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    fringe loonys?

    Some earn respect.

    some are irrelevant

    Some are dangerous in their out ward appearance of sanity.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. singularian (22 comments) says:

    Mr mike – do you really think Science is practiced by consensus? Reality is here and now – which bits are you finding scary?

    Griff – your repeated projection is funny in a retarded cousin kind of way.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    Why I admire Putin, by Farage: Ukip leader praises Russian President as superb ‘operator’ who has outwitted the West•Ukip leader Nigel Farage has praised Russian President Putin
    •He said he didn’t approve of his politics, but personally admired him
    •He said his handling of the Syrian civil war had been ‘brilliant’
    •Russia was criticised for propping up tyrannical leader Bashar Al-Assad
    •Last year Al-Assad used poison gas against his own civilians

    Nigel Farage today names Vladimir Putin as a political hero, saying his handling of the brutal civil war in Syria has been ‘brilliant’.
    In an extraordinary intervention, Mr Farage praised the thuggish Russian President as a superb ‘operator’ who had succeeded in outwitting the West.
    The comments will reopen the row about the UK Independence Party leader’s outspoken views on foreign policy.
    Asked which current world leader he most admired, Mr Farage told GQ magazine: ‘As an operator, but not as a human being, I would say Putin.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2593006/Why-I-admire-Putin-Farage-Ukip-leader-praises-Russian-President-superb-operator-outwitted-West.html

    Farage on the EU

    Asked who he would like to win the election, assuming Ukip does not, he replied: ‘I don’t care… If I was back in the London Metal Exchange I’d not give a toss, because 100 per cent of the legislation affecting me is made in Brussels.’

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    When the consensus is represented by solid, peer-reviewed studies and the minority relies on unqualified fringe opinions, I guess I’ll go with the consensus.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    The scientific consensus is built on knowledge.

    Scientists all start agreeing on specific points and researching the implications from there.

    AGW theory is decades past the points of: is it happening? Are we responsable?

    All the debate now is about: how bad?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. wikiriwhis business (4,019 comments) says:

    “if they want to see a real war on the poor, elect Dime to office ”

    I’d fight you to the bitterest Dime

    Then have a coffee wif u aftwards. Black and no sugar for me

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. singularian (22 comments) says:

    Like I said – kool aid drinkers.

    Which reality are you scared of Mike – ie – What is happening right now that you find scary?

    Griff – AGW theory – Lolz – theory Griff – look it up

    “a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.”

    How many decades ago do you think all this was decided?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. publicwatchdog (2,626 comments) says:

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/commerce-commission-investigates-currency-trading-amid-global-probe-manipulation-bd-154008#comment-650236

    (My comment – yet to be published )

    How can the public have confidence that NZ politicians at the highest levels are not involved in foreign exchange trading – either directly – or indirectly passing on tips to friends / family or business associates?

    Who is checking?

    How is this being checked?

    Anyone else think that these are fair questions?

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption/anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Nato standard blonde and two for me dime.

    Unless its real java.

    Then its 2shot long black with one.

    Into the night.

    If there is insufficient pot its scotch and coke till it runs out and/or I fall over and become cast.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Subject to experimentation

    That is the issue

    The experimental subject is somewhat valuable being the earth.

    The experiment being its ongoing suitability for our civilizations and all

    Try linking to a source single cell.

    Else its just flatulence.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. singularian (22 comments) says:

    Coke Griff? – you do know what them little bubbles are, right?

    Shame on you. Hypocrite

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. stigie (1,224 comments) says:

    Are you still in your house Penny ?

    Meant in a considered sort of way !!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. publicwatchdog (2,626 comments) says:

    FYI Kiwibloggers – seen this?

    URGENT! Ernst & Young are playing a PIVOTAL role in ‘The inaugural New Zealand Infrastructure Summit’ (starts TOMORROW!) – at which Mayor Len Brown is a keynote speaker!

    (This is the SAME Ernst and Young – who wrote the (in my considered opinion) BOGUS ‘report’, which helped to save Auckland Mayor Len Brown from possible criminal prosecution.)

    FOLLOW THE DOLLAR????

    Is this why NZ Prime Minister John Key has not a bad word to say about Auckland Mayor Len Brown?

    FOLLOW THE DOLLAR????

    FYI

    http://www.informa.com.au/conferences/infrastructure-ppp-project-finance/new-zealand-infrastructure-summit

    http://www.informa.com.au/conferences/infrastructure-ppp-project-finance/new-zealand-infrastructure-summit/P14K12WEBPDF.pdf

    The inaugural New Zealand Infrastructure Summit
    Examining the developments in large infrastructure delivery throughout New Zealand

    1 – 2 April 2014 | Heritage Hotel Auckland

    9.00 Opening remarks from the Chair

    Grant Hodges, Partner, Transactions Infrastructure Advisory Leader, Ernst and Young

    OPENING KEYNOTE ADDRESSES from Auckland and Canterbury – The Major Project Hubs

    9.05 Developments in Auckland Infrastructure

    Mayor Len Brown, Auckland Council

    9.40 Developments in Canterbury Rebuild

    Peter Townsend, Chief Executive, Canterbury Employers Chamber of Commerce

    10.25 Morning tea and networking opportunity
    ………………..
    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Anti-corruption/ anti-privatisation Public Watchdog

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Over 20,000 Americans died so Nixon could win the Presidency.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21768668

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Follow the dollar.

    Large infrastructure delivery AND super sizing councils.

    The latter enables larger contracts for corporates delivering outsourced services to council. Contracts of a size to interest international corporates. Local contractors already in place and well connected with contacts in Wellington will seek to win these contracts and then build up a nationwide presence so they can interest a foreign bidder for (reach international price and profit from this).

    And these corporates will be protected from councils and government from taking service delivery back in house by TPP rules – meaning privatisation will become a one way process.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    The climate of the planet changes. Civilisations either adapt to this change or they do not.

    The capacity and will to manage the impact of climate change is a security issue.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26810559

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    3/4 of New Zealanders believe that the gap between rich and poor had grown under National.

    A third felt better off, a third about the same, and a third worse off.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11229270

    If the top third are better off and the bottom third are worse off, then the gap has grown.

    Of those in the middle, if enough believe that this growing gap between rich and poor is good for the economy then National wins. But if enough feel that the growing gap is unfair or bad for their society then National will lose.

    In large part this balance between “good for the economy and “good for the society/people” is what elections in New Zealand turn on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. ex-golfer (165 comments) says:

    A war on the poor huh?
    I stopped to chat with a “begger” on Lambton Quay this afternoon.
    I asked her how me putting money in her hat would help and empower her.
    She said she could buy food with the money.
    I asked what she does with her welfare payment – she said it goes on other living bills.
    I asked her if she knew who paid for the welfare she gets “for free” every week.
    She said the “gummint” pays it.
    So I asked her where the “gummint” got the money from.
    She said it printed it.
    So when I explained what happens to the taxes that working people pay she seemed genuinely surprised.
    Then I said that is why I will not give you money – because I already do every week and the choices she makes has created the situation she is in. Putting money in her hat simply encourages her not to help herself.
    So much for the war on the poor.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. thedavincimode (6,803 comments) says:

    So I asked her where the “gummint” got the money from.
    She said it printed it.

    So she was a melon then.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ex-golfer, the little detail that after paying for power and rent there was not enough money left over for food.

    The normal reaction would be to say how come? Is it a budgeting issue or lack of access to food banks for some reason? Is her circumstance exceptional or normal for a person on her income in a higher cost area like Wellington?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “I have different views on the usefulness of KB and Griff often encourage others venting as an opportunity to examine with logic the discrepancys responsible for their induced cognitive dissonance. There are some who show indications of Psychopathy. It is fruitless to try to use rational debate with them.”

    Talking about yourself in the third person is usually a good sign of mental illness.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    3/4 of New Zealanders believe that the gap between rich and poor had grown under National.

    Given we’ve had the GFC and very low inflation most of that time, I wonder where they get that impression from? Perhaps they think it’s because of the Akld house prices? Where else would you derive a hallucination like that?

    Seriously it’s a shame polls seem never bother to ask the why question. Or if they do they never publish the results. But that’s where real insight lies.

    But regardless, it’s not the size of the gap and never has been, it’s the mobility rate between what is considered ‘wealthy’ and what’s considered ‘poor.’ Which is subjective. Because what’s the bet the owner of the worst home in say, Panmure, has a greater net worth than the owner of the best home in say, Whangarei. But walk into their homes and you’d never pick it.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    The “gap between rich and poor is growing” is largely I suspect more a form of urban myth than a reality, within NZ at least. It has been repeated so often that it just gets accepted, but I have never seen a study that really proved it.

    That said too much of a gap between the richest and poorest is not a good thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Griff is not real.

    Griff/ griffith is only an on line presence .

    A creature found only within the matrix of the interweb having no corporal reality.

    :lol:

    Who are those who find sukinshippu distasteful ? rhetorical question.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Griff is not real. Griff/ griffith is only an on line presence .”

    Ah, I understand. Fair enough.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    The character behind Griff/griffith isn’t a bad sort of coot who carries considerable knowledge about the world & the ways of its inhabitants.

    Alas he stumbles when it comes to discussing the weather. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    It takes a wise man to critically examine his own ignorance.

    A fool lives solely within the certainty of his faith.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “It takes a wise man to critically examine his own ignorance.”

    And his own prejudices.

    “A fool lives solely within the certainty of his faith.”

    Faith is not about certainty, it is about trust (in my case trust in Christ based on personal experience) and about the balance of evidence.

    I’m always critically examining my beliefs.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    ….”I’m always critically examining my beliefs.”….

    You’ll get there…..the answer is staring you in the face.

    You’ve wasted most of your life believing in your own hallucinations.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Faith is not as you try to kid your self spawn.

    Faith is a firmly held belief without empirical support.

    The solid evidence for “god” = 0

    Your faith in god only rests on your predisposed belief in his existence.

    Humanity shivering in a cave ignorant of reality clinging to the supernatural to defend his primitive mind against the scary dark

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. Ross12 (1,432 comments) says:

    It looks like Norman has got himself in a corner with his arrogance

    http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/22279647/craig-takes-spat-with-norman-to-court/

    Leaving aside Craig’s party policies etc. he has had plenty of time to consult his lawyers and political advisors. I don’t he is stupid and I’m sure he would not proceed , especially in election year, if he did not think he would win. As I understand it he is not pushing for any monetary payment so he is just pushing on principles –that he believes the standard of political debate and politician’s standards in general needs to have their bar raised.
    So if he does win, where does that leave Norman ?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “You’ll get there…..the answer is staring you in the face.”

    And what would that be then O self apointed wise one?

    “You’ve wasted most of your life believing in your own hallucinations.”

    You’ve wasted your life believing in yours.

    See, anyone can play silly rhetorical games. Get back to me when you have an actual argument to make.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. Don the Kiwi (1,763 comments) says:

    “The solid evidence for “god” = 0″

    On the contrary, their is evidence everywhere for God – you , with your limited intellect and closed mind, do not recognise it. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Faith is a firmly held belief without empirical support.”

    Faith is trust and the balance of evidence.

    “The solid evidence for “god” = 0″

    The solid evidence against God = 0

    “Your faith in god only rests on your predisposed belief in his existence.”

    I was an atheist, thus I did not have a “predisposed” belief in His existence. My faith rests on my experience of Christ working in my life.

    “Humanity shivering in a cave ignorant of reality clinging to the supernatural to defend his primitive mind against the scary dark”

    That looks very much like an unexamined prejudice. Your predisposed to reject God based on your unexamined belief in a secular worldview.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    “If you were shipwrecked on a desert island, what’s the one thing you’d like with you Dai?”

    “A sheep.”

    “Nice. All that lovely roast lamb, mutton broth and some delicious chops will keep you going for ages. Plus the fleece will keep you warm, you can make tools from the bones and you could use the skin for a hammock.”

    “Oh yeh, I hadn’t thought of that.”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    And what flavour Koolaide does your cult prefer Don? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I think he calls it communion wine. A bit of an overdose going on there.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    That the universe exists at all, and that it “just happened” to produce life, and “just happened” to produce creatures capable of love, goodness, beauty and art is pretty compelling evidence.

    On the other hand, “it’s all just an accident with no meaning” makes little to no rational sense. In fact it requires far more cultic koolaid than any religion.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. cha (4,036 comments) says:

    The body and the blood – symbolic corpse bits.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Shawn
    If a god caused the universe; what caused the god?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  171. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    You cling to those beliefs Shawn because they are the only things preventing you from experiencing the spine chilling realisation that you have wasted your adult life following a chimera.

    Back on your knees & weep. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  172. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “If a god caused the universe; what caused the god?”

    The definition of God is that which is uncaused.

    If you say in response, “then why can’t the universe be uncaused” then that would make the universe eternal, in other words, God, which is a religious idea called Pantheism. Theological assumptions are impossible to escape.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  173. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    If god didn’t need a cause, then why should the universe need a cause?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  174. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  175. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    That the universe exists at all, and that it “just happened” to produce life, and “just happened” to produce creatures capable of love, goodness, beauty and art is pretty compelling evidence.

    There’s no evidence involved in any of that.

    On the other hand, “it’s all just an accident with no meaning” makes little to no rational sense. In fact it requires far more cultic koolaid than any religion.

    Does anyone believe anything like that? Sounds like a strawman argument to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  176. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “You cling to those beliefs Shawn because they are the only things preventing you from experiencing the spine chilling realisation that you have wasted your adult life following a chimera.”

    You cling to your beliefs because they are the only things preventing the spine chilling realization that you have wasted your life following a chimera called atheism.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  177. HB (323 comments) says:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11229736
    “Conservative Party leader Colin Craig has confirmed he will proceed with defamation action against Green Party co-leader Russel Norman.

    Mr Craig’s lawyers filed papers with the court today.

    His legal team will seek a retraction from Dr Norman for his comment that Mr Craig thought women should be in the kitchen.”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  178. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Atheism is not a thing to be followed. You are confusing it with religion.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  179. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “There’s no evidence involved in any of that.”

    Yes, Pete, there is, a great deal.

    “Does anyone believe anything like that? Sounds like a strawman argument to me.”

    If they don’t then they must have theological assumptions, which of course everyone does in reality.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  180. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Atheism is not a thing to be followed. You are confusing it with religion.”

    Atheism is a religion.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  181. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, the growing disparity between rich and poor is as real here as in the wider world.

    There is local evidence for this between the 1980’s and now. It is surprising that anyone is unaware of it.

    The top wages move to international market levels whereas other wages stagnate under competitive pressure.

    This is quite part from the growing disparity in wealth – whereby those with capital to invest, the so called 1% (and also the landlords of rental property) have reaped the reward of globalisation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  182. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Atheism is not a religion. FIFY.
    Atheism is a religion in the same way that ‘off’ is a TV station or being unemployed is an occupation.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  183. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “If god didn’t need a cause, then why should the universe need a cause?”

    If the universe has no cause it is eternal, thus God. Pantheism again. Theological assumptions and beliefs are impossible to escape.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  184. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Reid, maybe people get the impression of growing disparity by noting the tax cuts given to those on higher incomes and the increase in net value of those who own rental property (untaxed capital gain). That and how their own wages do not increase but how professionals and management staff seem to get increases in pay that exceed inflation etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  185. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Atheism is not a religion. FIFY.”

    Of course it is. It is a set of theological assumptions and beliefs.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  186. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    By that logic I have a hobby of not collecting stamps……try again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  187. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    The universe is not a god. Patheism might be preferable to you rather than no religion, but the universe requires no theological explanation. It is not known whether the universe had a beginning or not, or indeed whether there might be multiple universes. These things might even be uknowable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  188. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    it’s all just an accident with no meaning

    Guilty as charged.

    Reality is too big.

    It is hubris to look on our tiny grain of earth and find it to have any meaning besides life feeds on itself.

    Some have stared into the void and found it ineffable but not particularly scary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  189. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “By that logic I have a hobby of not collecting stamps……try again.”

    Except you DO have hobbies. Try again.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  190. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, atheism is not a religion, it is a belief that does not lead to religion. A deist believes that there is a God but this does not lead to religion. Belief in a God and a revelation of this God to man leads to religion – following a prophet and obeying their leadership AND order of rule of the cult. A “required” belief and behaviour code is an order of rule.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  191. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    You consider that I DO have a hobby of not collecting stamps.

    This will be good. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  192. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “The universe is not a god”

    But it is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  193. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    That the universe may be all we can know of God does not make it God.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  194. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    These things might even be unknowable.

    It seems unknowable to us, but that doesn’t rule out someone somewhere sometime being able to know.

    Einstein’s theories were unknowable once upon a time.

    “The universe is not a god”

    But it is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent.

    That’s currently unknowable.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  195. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “The universe is not a god.”

    How do you know? That is a theological assumption again. Oops :)

    “Patheism might be preferable to you rather than no religion,

    Pantheism is the default religion of atheists.

    “but the universe requires no theological explanation.”

    The very fact that the universe exists demands explanation, and every attempt at such explanation is essentially theological in nature. If the universe required no explanation then why bother with science? What are all those scientists at CERN trying to do except explain the universe?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  196. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    It will end in spawn shouting his faith loudly to hide his fear…..

    .
    .
    .

    From himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  197. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Oh Griff, I’m seeing a great deal of fear and trembling in my opponents in this debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  198. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Right Now, if there is an order of rule to the universe, how can it be omnipotent. If it is not all, as there is more than one universe, then it is not omnipresent …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  199. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “ShawnLH, atheism is not a religion, it is a belief that does not lead to religion”

    All beliefs are religious at their root.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  200. SGA (1,076 comments) says:

    ShawnLHat 8:38 pm

    Oh Griff, I’m seeing a great deal of fear and trembling in my opponents in this debate.

    As someone who just “tuned in”, all you’ve got is a sad sigh and a shaking of the head.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  201. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “It is hubris to look on our tiny grain of earth and find it to have any meaning besides life feeds on itself.”

    That statement looks very much like hubris.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  202. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Griff. Why is their life that needs to feed on itself in the first place?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  203. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, the idea that creation means everyone needs to have a religious answer to this existence is part of a supposition that everyone is accountable to God for the “religious” answer they choose.

    The main premise of all false prophets of God is that mankind needs to fear this God, be informed about this God through them and accept their leadership of a religious tradition.

    Deists do not like to pander to these false prophets.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  204. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Deists do not like top pander to these false prophets.”

    Except the founders of Deism. Your confusing exoteric religous structures with esoteric religion. Might be just the word. I get that. Swap ‘religion’ for spirituality and you’ll get what I mean.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  205. Fletch (6,410 comments) says:

    By that logic I have a hobby of not collecting stamps……try again.

    And yet you go out of your way to promote your non-collecting, and take opportunities to poo-poo those who do collect. You are not disinterested. You are opposed to there being a God and vigorously defend that position.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  206. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    By the way Griff, ‘life feeding on itself’ is a pantheist belief. Read the Bhagavad Gita or any Vedanta text. You just described your religion. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  207. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    Not really Fletch…..I just enjoy winding you fruitloops up. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  208. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, no one founded deism. No one founded atheism. I do not know who you think the founders of deism are – I have probably never heard of them.

    The distinction between spiritual and religious is that the former do not have a religious identity. Individuals of faith have no group order of rule.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  209. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Not really Fletch…..I just enjoy winding you fruitloops up.”

    I have heard that so many times from people who were on the cusp of finding faith and did so. In fact it’s usually a good sign that someone is in fact struggling with a great deal of doubt about their atheism.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  210. Viking2 (11,491 comments) says:

    “You’ll be fine,” the doctor said after finishing the young woman’s surgery.

    She asked, “but Doctor, how long will it be before I can have a normal sex life again?”

    The surgeon paused, his face turned red and a small tear ran down his cheek.

    The girl was alarmed.

    “What’s the matter Doctor? I will be all right, won’t I?”

    He replied, “Oh yes, you’ll be fine. It’s just that no one’s ever asked me that after having their tonsils out.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  211. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “I do not know who you think the founders of deism are – I have probably never heard of them.”

    Deism appeared in the 17th and 18th centuries and had a number of founders, including Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine among others.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  212. SGA (1,076 comments) says:

    ShawnLH at 8:56 pm

    “Not really Fletch…..I just enjoy winding you fruitloops up.”
    I have heard that so many times from people who were on the cusp of finding faith and did so. In fact it’s usually a good sign that someone is in fact struggling with a great deal of doubt about their atheism.

    And I’ve always found that people who are desperate that everyone else must have a “religion” seem to be hiding an insecurity about their own faith. Which, of course, they deny vehemently (as they must).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  213. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Psychologists note that obsessive behavior is a sign of internal struggle. The obsessive need for some to “wind up” believers says a great deal about their own doubts and struggles.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  214. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “And I’ve always found that people who are desperate that everyone else must have a “religion””

    Not a need on my part, just observation of reality. Ever heard of Carl Jung?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  215. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    ….”says a great deal about their own doubts and struggles”…..

    More that there’s bugger all to watch on TV! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  216. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Oh dear spawn
    it all becomes religion to you
    wake up.

    Pantheism is the belief that the universe (or nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity,[1] or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God.[2] Pantheists thus do not believe in a distinct personal or anthropomorphic god.[3] Some Eastern religions are considered to be pantheistically inclined.

    Reality is not a god. belief that the universe exist does not need or require a belief in god

    in religious terms, divinity is the state of things that come from a supernatural power .

    supernatural /reality are not the same thing.

    I find no need for or trace of divinity in the reality I inhabit

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  217. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, deism was no more founded by anyone than belief in there being a God was founded by anyone.

    Spinoza for example regarded the Torah as bad religion and worse history, but did he need declare himself an atheist to do this?

    For an anarcho-monarchist you seem a little too inclined to belief in organised identity groups.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  218. SGA (1,076 comments) says:

    ShawnLH at 9:06 pm

    “And I’ve always found that people who are desperate that everyone else must have a “religion””
    Not a need on my part, just observation of reality. Ever heard of Carl Jung?

    Oh yes, and Freud and Adler.
    Most of the psychoanalytic school would have a field day with your careful edit of my sentence, btw.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  219. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “I find no need for or trace of divinity in the reality I inhabit”

    Life feeding on itself for eternity is a form of divinity. What you tell yourself and what is really going on in your unconscious are likely not the same thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  220. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    By that logic I have a hobby of not collecting stamps……try again.

    well NOT collecting stamps beats the fuck out of collecting them ! :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  221. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, the idea that life/creation is God is central to much of eastern philosophy. However it is the consciousness of that life that they associate with being of a higher kind “of life”.

    Western philosophy separates creation from God, but via concepts such as logos find a place for reconciliation of creation back to God.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  222. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    SGA,

    all religious ideas, including Deism, have roots and proponents (founding fathers). The founding fathers of the US did not create democracy out of thin air, and Deist religious beliefs did not just appear out of a vacuum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  223. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “More that there’s bugger all to watch on TV!”

    Actually, the season finale of The Walking Dead is on shortly. Bye for now.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  224. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, your conviction that all ideas had founding fathers is nonsense,

    You have no idea for how long humans believed that there was a God, even the Creator God concept.

    And no one needed to know of this person and their belief to share it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  225. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    Life feeding on itself for eternity

    It is your words you added that you try to use against me not my own

    eternity is a meaningless word.

    an end and beginning needs time

    Time is a dimension from within our own universe and does not continue for “eternity” or need to take the same form in other universe

    A plane continued for eternity is a Möbius strip.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  226. Fletch (6,410 comments) says:

    Actually, most people ARE religious – nearly 90% of the planet.

    According to the CIA website, there are approx 7 billion people in the world –

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html
    (Click on the [+] People and Society link)

    According to the same site, 88.54% (6.2 billion) are religious in some way – Christian 33.35% (of which Roman Catholic 16.83%, Protestant 6.08%, Orthodox 4.03%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.43%, Hindu 13.78%, Buddhist 7.13%, Sikh 0.36%, Jewish 0.21%, Baha’i 0.11%, other religions 11.17%.

    Only 9.42% are non-religious and 2.04% are atheist.

    So, if you’re atheist you’re kind of a minority.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  227. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Fletch, I know of clergy who do not believe that there is a God. Yet they are of a religion/religious tradition and counted as such.

    Cultural identity is not the same as belief/faith.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  228. nasska (11,589 comments) says:

    ….”So, if you’re atheist you’re kind of a minority.”….

    It’s a cosy little clique Fletch but you’re welcome to join. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  229. Fletch (6,410 comments) says:

    Fletch, I know of clergy who do not believe that there is a God.

    Then they oughtn’t be clergy. That’s the whole point of clergy isn’t it? What’s he there for otherwise?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  230. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Fletch, why should loss of faith result in loss of a job, the cleric is still capable of pastoral care for those who still believe. After all the church accepts laity who use the pill and condoms, despite being told those of the faith should not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  231. Scott Chris (6,155 comments) says:

    By that logic I have a hobby of not collecting stamps

    Jean-Paul Sartre is sitting at a cafe, revising his draft of Being and Nothingness. He says to the waitress, “I’d like a cup of coffee, please, with no cream.” The waitress replies, “I’m sorry, Monsieur, but we’re out of cream. How about with no milk?”

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  232. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    It occurs to me Shawn watching you try to explain religion to these people is a lot like me trying to explain to you that my view of the world isn’t false, for they come up with precisely the same shallow, unfounded and illogical arguments on religion that you make on that and for the same reason: simply because, like you, they are unaware of the how the true and actual subject matter works.

    It’s a shame for you that you do that, since you’re missing a critical part of the religious puzzle – that of Satan operating in the here and now. Which is the only reason I’ve troubled to familiarise myself with it.

    But never mind, by all means continue in your self-righteous slumber. At least you’ve got half the answer. Which is half better than the rest of them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  233. RichardX (326 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (922 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 8:05 pm
    That the universe exists at all, and that it “just happened” to produce life, and “just happened” to produce creatures capable of love, goodness, beauty and art is pretty compelling evidence.
    On the other hand, “it’s all just an accident with no meaning” makes little to no rational sense. In fact it requires far more cultic koolaid than any religion.

    Classic argument from ignorance

    ShawnLH (922 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 8:27 pm
    “Atheism is not a religion. FIFY.”
    Of course it is. It is a set of theological assumptions and beliefs.

    What assumptions?
    What beliefs?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  234. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Reid, classic. The existence of others, who do not share your world view, is proof to you that there is a being called “adversary” as the cause of this.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  235. srylands (410 comments) says:

    Yes they have flipped out. There is a serious discussion at The Standard on banning polling.

    “How about, either instead of or in addition to, banning news organisations or companies like Roy Morgan polling the public on their voting plans, we ban all political parties from doing private polling? By this I mean that they cannot poll the public on what they think of particular policies or a particular wording for their policies.”

    http://thestandard.org.nz/the-trouble-with-political-polls/#comment-792587

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  236. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    The existence of others, who do not share your world view, is proof to you that there is a being called “adversary” as the cause of this.

    SPC the fact you concluded that from what I said above indicates your inductive logic capabilities are around 0 on a scale from 1-100 where negative integers aren’t permitted.

    Educate yourself, my friend.

    Or just keep getting surprised as the world turns to custard before your very eyes.

    Your choice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  237. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    RichardX

    “Classic argument from ignorance”

    And yet you don’t say why it’s wrong. Just saying it’s wrong is not an argument, of any sort.

    “What assumptions?
    What beliefs?”

    It is the assumption/belief that there is no divinity, as opposed to agnosticism which simply claims not to know one way or another.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  238. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Reid, classic again. Those who do not agree need to get an education that instructs them to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  239. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “It’s a shame for you that you do that, since you’re missing a critical part of the religious puzzle – that of Satan operating in the here and now. ”

    Of course I believe in Satan and his ongoing war against God. But generally (unless I’m in a bad mood or pissed off with someone, as I was last night) I try not to associate him with any particular group or organisation, and certainly never with any ethnic group.

    Believing in Satan does not require me to accept your very odd, and imo dangerous, global conspiracy theories.

    “Or just keep getting surprised as the world turns to custard before your very eyes.”

    The world is turning to custard because of the sin in all of our hearts, not because of reptilian shapeshifters or Zionists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  240. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, there is nothing theological in having an opinion on whether there is a God or not, there is to the nature of the God belief.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  241. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Fletch, why should loss of faith result in loss of a job, the cleric is still capable of pastoral care for those who still believe.”

    Thats called being a social worker. It’s not the same as being a priest.

    ” After all the church accepts laity who use the pill and condoms, despite being told those of the faith should not.”

    Only the Roman Church does that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  242. RichardX (326 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (923 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 10:58 pm
    RichardX
    “Classic argument from ignorance”
    And yet you don’t say why it’s wrong. Just saying it’s wrong is not an argument, of any sort.

    DO I have to explain to you what a logical fallacy is?

    “What assumptions?
    What beliefs?”
    It is the assumption/belief that there is no divinity, as opposed to agnosticism which simply claims not to know one way or another.

    Have you actually looked at the definition of an atheist?
    No matter how many times it has been explained, a lack of belief is not a belief, not matter how many times you assert it is.

    There is no evidence that any deity exists, the claim that a deity exists has not met its burden of proof.
    I am not saying a god does not exist but until there is sufficient evidence, why should I believe anything just because someone else believes it?

    Do you believe big foot exists?
    Do you believe in alien abductions?
    Both of these phenomena have people who hold a genuine belief that they are real and will cite personal experience to back up their claim but that belief is not sufficient to allow me to hold the same belief

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  243. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Those who do not agree need to get an education that instructs them to.

    Agree to what, SPC?

    I’m simply saying, if you don’t educate yourself in the material that’s out there, then you’ll almost certainly be surprised at world events, which are heating up as we speak.

    For example, since Turkey got its false-flag outed by the youtube conversation, will they still invade Syria?

    Or are Russian troops really massing on Ukraine’s border or is that merely Western media bollocks?

    These are just two minor examples, but if you don’t educate yourself and simply follow Western media, you’ve got absolutely zero chance of understanding the world today.

    Not to mention the markets.

    But one assumes you don’t have any investments so you won’t be hurt at all and you won’t be able to take advantage either, when various things happen there.

    That’s all I’m saying SPC. Quite elementary, really.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  244. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “ShawnLH, there is nothing theological in having an opinion on whether there is a God or not”

    All questions concerning God are theological by their very nature of being about God.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  245. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, no not all questions. Certainly not belief or lack of belief.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  246. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “DO I have to explain to you what a logical fallacy is?”

    It would be helpful if you actually made an argument. Is that difficult in some way?

    “Have you actually looked at the definition of an atheist?”

    What atheists claim and the reality are not the same thing.

    “No matter how many times it has been explained, a lack of belief is not a belief”

    A belief that there is no God is a belief. Obviously.

    “There is no evidence that any deity exists”

    That to put it mildly is debatable. I and most of humanity disagree.

    “It has not met the burden of proof”

    Nothing does. You cannot prove you exist. There is no proof of anything this side of death.

    “why should I believe anything just because someone else believes it?”

    I’m not saying you should.

    “Do you believe big foot exists?
    Do you believe in alien abductions?
    Both of these phenomena have people who hold a genuine belief that they are real and will cite personal experience to back up their claim but that belief is not sufficient to allow me to hold the same belief”

    I would argue that your assumption concerning the evidence for God has little to do with evidence itself. Human beings have a remarkable ability to ignore evidence when it suits them, or pretend to themselves that it is not there, when it suits them. Your assuming the ability to see, when I believe you and every human being is blind from birth.

    By the way, I’m not trying to convince you or anyone else of anything. I’m just tired of the usual suspects flinging insults at anyone who affirms God and pointing out their oh so very convenient metaphysical hypocrisy.

    Question: Do you believe in gay marriage?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  247. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “ShawnLH, no not all questions. Certainly not belief or lack of belief.”

    They are both metaphysical assumptions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  248. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Believing in Satan does not require me to accept your very odd, and imo dangerous, global conspiracy theories…The world is turning to custard because of the sin in all of our hearts, not because of reptilian shapeshifters or Zionists.

    I wouldn’t if I were you, discount things before you understand them simply because in your limited understanding they are too fantastic to be the case.

    After all that is precisely the error the pharisees made when Jesus told them he would rebuild the temple in three days.

    Forget about reptilian shapeshifters, you don’t even know what they are, you just use that because in your limited understanding they form a useful ridicule for the children reading, but if you’re serious, you need to look at the zionists in the perspective of Rev 2.9 and 3.9 and think to yourself what the Israeli govt has been doing to its own people since the God-given miracle in 1968.

    As you know Deuteronomy states the Jewish people will be blessed provided they obey and that book and others are full of the consequences of Jewish rebellion. It’s not an absolute promise it’s a conditional promise but that’s what the zionists have ignored in their promulgation of the current Jewish state which is nothing like a people who bow to God. They break every rule God ever set for them, just look at it. And, just like the pharisees did, they do it all the while promising the people they are the chosen ones.

    You can see this clearly in numerous examples. The links I gave you the other day which I bet you didn’t click gave you the origin of the diaspora. It also gives you the origin of the troubles Israel suffers to this day.

    I mean do you really think that God intends for Israel to behave toward the Palestinians as they behave? Do you really think that? Really? Operation Cast Lead for example was simply fine? Really?

    It’s a complex subject and this question about the Jewish state is a mere fraction and a tiny fraction at that, of the whole. If you care about the truth, use the wayback engine and google senderberl.com and read it, the whole site. And take it as a small example. If you want to educate yourself. BTW, the reason you need to use the wayback engine is because it hit home so hard, the PTB needed to remove it. Think Google is your friend? Another hallucination.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  249. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, do you conflate opine/knowledge of the metaphysical with theology?

    Theology is related to belief there is knowledge of truth for which man needs divine help.

    Whereas, humans have the capacity to know things without special divine help – such as our knowledge of the universe, which leads us to determine a wisdom for ourselves – such as whether to believe God made it, or not. We decide this without having absolute certainty or knowledge whether there is a God.

    Thus the deist argument can exist without need for divine revelation – upon which knowledge of the truth (in theology) occurs.

    Do you need a back to school refresher?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  250. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    My question about gay marriage (it could be any number of issues) is this. I have heard people claim not to have any metaphysical/religious beliefs at all. Then five minutes later they will say that they agree with gay marriage because people should be treated equally.

    Now, using your physical senses, can you discern equality? Can you show me equality? Can I see it, hear it, touch it, taste it, smell it?

    No.

    Equality is a metaphysical concept, as is justice, fairness, goodness, badness and so forth.

    This is what I mean by metaphysical hypocrisy. Some people will insist on evidence and proof for God, but happily affirm a whole slew of things that cannot also be “proved” in the same way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  251. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Thus the deist argument can exist without need for divine revelation”

    Yes, but it is no less a religious belief because of that.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  252. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Reid, so Jews are an exemplar to you of the good Jew of the right synagogue and the bad Jew of the wrong synagogue. Those with the truth and those without the truth. Divide and conquer by building a cult that separates the world …

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  253. SGA (1,076 comments) says:

    ShawnLH at 11:27 pm

    Human beings have a remarkable ability to ignore evidence when it suits them, or pretend to themselves that it is not there, when it suits them. Your assuming the ability to see, when I believe you and every human being is blind from birth.

    ShawnLH,
    Can you see the parallels between your response to others who don’t believe what you believe, and Reid’s response to others who don’t believe what he believes.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  254. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, there needs to be an order of faith for there to be a religion, belief there is or is not God is insufficient.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  255. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Can you see the parallels between your response to others who don’t believe what you believe, and Reid’s response to others who don’t believe what he believes.”

    Reid assumes I have not explored the issues he is talking about, and weighed the evidence. That is not the case.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  256. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “ShawnLH, there needs to be an order of faith for there to be a religion, belief there is or is not God is insufficient.”

    Religion simply means any set of metaphysical beliefs, including simply belief in God. I disagree that religion rightly understood requires anything else.

    If I changed ‘religion’ to ‘metaphysics’ would that help?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  257. SGA (1,076 comments) says:

    ShawnLH at 11:50 pm

    “Can you see the parallels between your response to others who don’t believe what you believe, and Reid’s response to others who don’t believe what he believes.”
    Reid assumes I have not explored the issues he is talking about, and weighed the evidence. That is not the case.

    Reid knows you haven’t explored the issues enough or weighed the evidence properly because if you had, you’d agree with him. Sound familiar?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  258. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Reid assumes I have not explored the issues he is talking about, and weighed the evidence. That is not the case.

    Terrific Shawn. So as one tiny example of your vast, vast deliberation, what’s your explanation for Operation Cast Lead? Was that the action of a God-driven nation, or what?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  259. SGA (1,076 comments) says:

    ‘night all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  260. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “I mean do you really think that God intends for Israel to behave toward the Palestinians as they behave?”

    You assume Reid they are behaving wrongly. I don’t. The “Palestinian” myth is an invention of the Arab states to justify their war against Israel.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  261. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Reid knows you haven’t explored the issues enough or weighed the evidence properly because if you had, you’d agree with him. Sound familiar?

    and

    You assume Reid they are behaving wrongly

    Not even close SGA. I’d love to have an informed debate about the issues, but when I raise the issues, everyone goes on and on about how anti-semitic it all is and they never even move past first base, which is the elementary factual recognition the govt of Israel does not act in the best interests of the Israeli people and acts outside of the will of God. Everyone in the world, if you haven’t noticed, hates Israel. This is not because the world is anti-semitic, it’s because Israel always acts like a bunch of arseholes. That’s not me making them act like that, it’s simply because they do. And who makes them? Their govt. And why? Go figure. And don’t argue that’s not a fact, it is, and everyone knows it apart from a handful of idiots in the West who hallucinate it’s defensive, in a country with 300+ nukes. The question is, why does their govt do that, when they claim to be God driven?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  262. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, belief in there being a God is not a set of (plural) beliefs.

    What religion is someone if they believe that there is a God, but do not believe there is any divine revelation?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  263. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Reid is not talking about metaphysics but about a political conspiracy. He should be able to prove that one way or another. I’m not claiming to be able to prove anything.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  264. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “What religion is someone if they believe that there is a God, but do not believe there is any divine revelation?”

    Theism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  265. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, if Palestine does not exist, if Palestinians do not exist, then no wrong can be done to Palestine or Palestinians?

    If Israel exists, if Israelis exist, they can do know wrong. For once they do they have betrayed the covenant and are then lost to history.

    Therefore once there is a renewed Israeli state, its security is dependent on not seeing or hearing of any wrongdoing by them … lest …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  266. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Shawn, is not theism based on divine revelation, one feature that distinguishes it from deism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  267. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Therefore once there is an Israeli state, its security is dependent on not seeing or hearing of any wrongdoing by them”

    I’m not sure I follow your argument here. Can you explain a little more?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  268. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Shawn, is not theism based on divine revelation, one feature that distinguishes it from deism.”

    Not necessarily no. A person can believe in a personal God without also believing in divine revelation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  269. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Reid, Everybody hates Chris. It’s only the “adversary” who wants everyone to hate Israel.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  270. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, is not theology required for theism, what theology can there be without divine revelation?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  271. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    I think your confusing Theism with Deism. I think you may be a Theist, not a Deist. Deism is a very specific take on God, with a number of beliefs associated with it. I was assuming you were referring to the movement that began in the 18th and 19th centuries.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  272. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, the 12.15am post was based on the idea that the “unsaved” Jew is to be judged in the world for any wrongdoing without mercy. It’s a response to your post on what Palestinians are there for Israelis to wrong and reid’s belief that the “unsaved” peoples nationalism and related Zionism being the especial wrongdoing in the world.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  273. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Reid is not talking about metaphysics but about a political conspiracy.

    No I’m not and have never mentioned anything like that, you fool. I’m talking about things that happen: i.e. history. Operation Cast Lead for example. Was that the will of God? And what did that do to Israel’s international reputation and was that in the best interests of the Israeli people? All factual observable questions for a clear, logical thinker.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  274. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “is not theology required for theism, what theology can there be without divine revelation?”

    The very affirmation of God is a theological statement in and of itself, without any need for divine revelation, but I think we may have different understandings of what theology is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  275. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “I’m talking about things that happen: i.e. history. ”

    Your talking about your interpretation of historical invents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  276. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, no – I see no evidence of God active in the organisation of the universe after creation. So I cannot be a theist, or of any theocracy.

    My rationale is more deist. The rationale, its obvious why God would not be active, to enable dominion to life and maximum free will.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  277. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, the affirmation of God is also deist and deist is not theist. The difference is theology, and theists belief that God is active in the universe is part of their religion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  278. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “reid’s belief that the “unsaved” peoples nationalism and related Zionism being the especial wrongdoing in the world.”

    Ah, I see. My view is that the Jews are saved by virtue of the eternal covenant that God has made with them, and that this is a sovereign decree of God that is not dependent on anything else.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  279. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, Reid seems to be disappointed that the Jews (and their collective nationalism) are not perfect and relates this lack of perfection to some conspiracy to oppose God in the world.

    Some individuals who struggle to be all they can be also postulate some force opposing their endeavour.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  280. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “ShawnLH, the affirmation of God is also deist and deist is not theist. The difference is theology, and theists belief that God is active in the universe is part of their religion.”

    Yes. Deist’s do not believe that God is active in the world. Would that be right?

    If so, then is not the view that God is not active in the world a theological view?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  281. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Your talking about your interpretation of historical invents.

    No I’m not. I’ll repeat the same questions since you’re quite slow.

    I’m talking about things that happen: i.e. history. Operation Cast Lead for example. Was that the will of God? And what did that do to Israel’s international reputation and was that in the best interests of the Israeli people? All factual observable questions for a clear, logical thinker.

    Note that none of these questions are “invented” and neither is the event itself “invented.” Perhaps in your fantasy they were, but I assure you, Cast Lead actually did happen, I’m surprised you didn’t notice it.

    Simple questions Shawn, let me repeat them just in case you didn’t grasp them:
    Cast Lead for example. Was that the will of God?
    What did that do to Israel’s international reputation?
    Was that in the best interests of the Israeli people?

    Reid seems to be disappointed that the Jews (and their collective nationalism) are not perfect and relates this lack of perfection to some conspiracy to oppose God in the world.

    No I’m simply saying the Jewish people are ruled by people who as per Rev 2.9 and 3.9 are the “Jews who say they are Jews but are not” and that this is why they do things like Operation Cast Lead, which turns the world against the real Jewish people. And history bears this out. Like I ask above. Are those the actions of a leadership that cares about the reputation of the Jewish people? Yes or No?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  282. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Yes. Deist’s do not believe that God is active in the world.

    Why, observation. Based on reason – why, and backed up by evidence/observation. As it is not based on divine revelation it is not a theist opine.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  283. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Reid seems to be disappointed that the Jews (and their collective nationalism) are not perfect and relates this lack of perfection to some conspiracy to oppose God in the world.”

    Yes, I have discerned that view in his postings. I guess this becomes then a fairly subjective opinion about whether or not Israel is behaving badly in some major way. Personally I don’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  284. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Cast Lead for example. Was that the will of God?”

    Yes.

    “What did that do to Israel’s international reputation?”

    That does not concern me as I expect people to hate Israel no matter what they do.

    “Was that in the best interests of the Israeli people?”

    Yes. All military actions to defend Israel against Hamas and other such groups are in the Israeli peoples interests.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  285. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Why, observation. Based on reason – why, and backed up by evidence/observation.”

    What evidence or reasoning leads to that conclusion?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  286. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Yes. All military actions to defend Israel against Hamas and other such groups are in the Israeli peoples interests.

    https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=cast+lead+white+phosphorus+images&num=100&espv=210&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=YFU5U5DeEoPIlAWu-IHgAw&ved=0CCoQsAQ&biw=1422&bih=1067&dpr=0.9

    Yeah, right.

    That does not concern me as I expect people to hate Israel no matter what they do.

    Well then you don’t understand God very well do you. How can Israel be a leading nation bowing before God if everyone simply hates its guts? And why would it itself encourage such actions, when it has all the military might it needs and more, to act reasonably? And yet it doesn’t. Every single time in negotiations on anything, it acts like an international arsehole. And that’s not anti-semitism, that’s just fact. Read it and weep. As you would if you weren’t blind as a Western useful-idiot bat.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  287. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ME politics is pretty simple. Fear of the God of Israel does not work on jihadists, fear of the IDF prevents violent jihadism being the national policy of its neighbours.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  288. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Reid I could show you pictures of Israeli victims of Arab/Islamic terrorism, including children. Pictures of war do not prove your claim.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  289. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    See 12.30am

    I see no evidence of God active in the organisation of the universe after creation. So I cannot be a theist, or of any theocracy.

    My rationale is more deist. The rationale, its obvious why God would not be active, to enable dominion to life and maximum free will. A God that can redeem the mortal from their mortality has no need to interfere in our affairs.

    Evidence – the inhumanity that occurs without any intervention. No matter to whom and to what extent. No God in active rule or organisation of the world would allow the suffering.

    You are free to cite Job if you want. But I do not see it as “Reid’s” adversary doing a test of faith.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  290. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “How can Israel be a leading nation bowing before God if everyone simply hates its guts?”

    Satan promotes hatred of Israel. Always has, and will do so until judgement day.

    And not everyone Reid does hate Israel.

    “And why would it itself encourage such actions, when it has all the military might it needs and more, to act reasonably?”

    It is acting reasonably, to defend itself.

    “Every single time in negotiations on anything, it acts like an international arsehole.”

    That again is merely your opinion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  291. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “The rationale, its obvious why God would not be active, to enable dominion to life and maximum free will.”

    That’s a huge philosophical claim about the nature of free will. Your assuming that for human free will to exist God cannot also be active, that one cancels out the other. From my pov that is not at all the case.

    ” No God in active rule or organisation of the world would allow the suffering.”

    Unless that suffering has a larger purpose. Another possibility is that God is active to a degree, but also allows a degree of freedom, and freedom means we can do bad things, or that bad things can happen.

    The argument over this, which has raged for over two thousand years in one form or another is called Theodicy, or ‘the problem of evil’ which is a theological debate.

    Your confusing your philosophical take on the theodicy issue with reason and evidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  292. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, I said what would allow dominion to life AND maximum free will. And this is in accord with the evidence of suffering – a theory confirmed by the way the world is.

    The difficulty of theists, to explain suffering – that theodicy – is irrelevant to a deist. Especially when suffering will occur without wrongdoing on anyone’s part.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  293. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “And this is in accord with the evidence of suffering – a theory confirmed by the way the world is.”

    The assumption is that God must not be active because there is suffering. But that is less to do with observing how the world is, than an opinion that the fact of suffering must mean God is not active.

    “Especially when suffering will occur without wrongdoing on anyone’s part.”

    That still does not mean God is not active in the world.

    And no matter how you slice it, this view is an attempt to answer the problem of suffering and evil, which is a theodicy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  294. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, read your bible and consider the word logos while reading Genesis.

    The first premise is that God made the universe/world. A foundation to build on very carefully (see tower of Babel and the hubris of empire).

    The second is that God allowed life dominion and free will – because man had this. An observation.

    The third is about why there was/is suffering, because the world/universe is outside God’s realm/kingdom. God could redeem the mortal back to life.

    Serious (religious) wrongdoing by man only occurred when they claimed to be theist agents of God in the universe (declare right from wrong while in place of God). And then they invented some bad guy that tested the faith of man by being associated with the cause of suffering/separation from God’s rule, so that men would obey them/be obedient to the agents of God so they could return to God’s kingdom through them.

    Your theodicy is no rock/first premise.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  295. Reid (16,522 comments) says:

    Satan promotes hatred of Israel. Always has, and will do so until judgement day. And not everyone Reid does hate Israel.

    Yes Shawn least of all me, but sadly, it appears you hate her, by encouraging the Synagogue of Satan to destroy her.

    It is acting reasonably, to defend itself.

    That was the purpose of showing you the white phosphorus google link. Hardly anyone thinks it’s reasonable to use white phosphorus on civilians Shawn, but that’s precisely why Israel’s leaders authorised its use.

    That again [that Israel is a pariah state] is merely your opinion.

    No that’s the point, it’s not my opinion, it’s most of the world’s opinion, and that’s why their leaders are doing it.

    The reason you don’t get it is because you’re hallucinating their leaders are interested in acting in their own people’s interests, but that’s a fool’s view of Israel Shawn and if you look at the history, with eyes that see and ears that hear, that fool’s view is writ large, in flaming letters and newsflash my naive friend, recognising that treachery is not anti-Israel, that’s pro-Israel. Not to mention what the bible says about those with eyes and ears that work properly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  296. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    Seventh heaven for Griff: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/global-warming-dials-our-risks-un-report-says

    If the world doesn’t cut pollution of heat-trapping gases, the already noticeable harms of global warming could spiral “out of control,” the head of a United Nations scientific panel warned Monday.

    And he’s not alone. The Obama White House says it is taking this new report as a call for action, with Secretary of State John Kerry saying “the costs of inaction are catastrophic.”

    Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that issued the 32-volume, 2,610-page report here early Monday, told The Associated Press: “it is a call for action.” Without reductions in emissions, he said, impacts from warming “could get out of control.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  297. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    post it on todays one as well manolo :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  298. RichardX (326 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (949 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 11:27 pm
    It would be helpful if you actually made an argument. Is that difficult in some way?

    Examples of arguments from ignorance include;
    We don’t know what caused thunder so it must be Thor
    We don’t know what caused a storm at sea so it must be Neptune
    We don’t know why the volcano erupted so we must sacrifice a virgin to prevent it from happening again
    Your “ShawnLH (922 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 8:05 pm
    That the universe exists at all, and that it “just happened” to produce life, and “just happened” to produce creatures capable of love, goodness, beauty and art is pretty compelling”
    was another example
    I am assuming a certain level of comprehension but can you see why these do not constitute evidence for the existence of a deity?

    What atheists claim and the reality are not the same thing.

    That is a baseless assertion
    What you claim is reality is not reality. See, I can do it too.

    A belief that there is no God is a belief. Obviously.

    I have never claimed there is no god. I have never claimed to believe there is no god. This has already been pointed out to you
    There is a difference between not believing that something exists and believing that something does not exist. If you can produce evidence for the existence of a god, I will consider the evidence and my position. Logical fallacies, personal revelations and ancient texts are not evidence

    “There is no evidence that any deity exists”
    That to put it mildly is debatable. I and most of humanity disagree.

    Which is why it is being debated and will continue to be debated

    “It has not met the burden of proof”
    Nothing does. You cannot prove you exist. There is no proof of anything this side of death.

    There are 2 aspects to your response. The first is that the person making the claim has to prove why their claim should be believed. I have made no claim. You have claimed the existence of a god. I could go further and state that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. A claim that you have a pet dog is not an extraordinary claim and it may be true. It can be determined fairly easily but even if it wasn’t true I don’t really care.
    To claim you had an invisible pet dragon that was responsible for the fate of the universe would be an extraordinary claim and would require something more than you, a billion other people and an ancient text telling me it is true.
    The second point is that the nature of knowledge, and particularly absolute knowledge, is a whole different debate and can be used to examine any claim you make of having knowledge such as the existence of a god

    I would argue that your assumption concerning the evidence for God has little to do with evidence itself. Human beings have a remarkable ability to ignore evidence when it suits them, or pretend to themselves that it is not there, when it suits them. Your assuming the ability to see, when I believe you and every human being is blind from birth.

    I would argue that humans are even more adept at seeing evidence where it doesn’t exist. We have evolved to seek patterns as a survival mechanism and the reality is that some of these patterns do not exist. Science is a great tool for exploring reality. To date, it is the most successful way of determining and explaining reality. To ignore ‘evidence’ that does meet certain standards, such as the lack of logical fallacies, is not being blind.

    By the way, I’m not trying to convince you or anyone else of anything. I’m just tired of the usual suspects flinging insults at anyone who affirms God and pointing out their oh so very convenient metaphysical hypocrisy.

    You are the hypocrite who projected motives and flung insults at atheists based on your flawed interpretation of what an atheist is.
    I know that you are unable to change your beliefs
    I do have an issue with intellectual dishonesty

    Question: Do you believe in gay marriage?

    Irrelevant nonsensical question

    ShawnLH (949 comments) says:
    March 31st, 2014 at 11:38 pm
    Now, using your physical senses, can you discern equality? Can you show me equality? Can I see it, hear it, touch it, taste it, smell it?
    No.
    Equality is a metaphysical concept, as is justice, fairness, goodness, badness and so forth.

    As evolved empathetic social animals, we have relied on groups to survive for far longer than religion has existed. The concepts you list are labels applied to the behavior of individuals within the dynamics of a group working together to ensure survival. Some are positive for the group and so are labeled as desirable, some are not. You do not have to invoke the supernatural to explain the presence of these traits even though this was a common occurrence throughout primitive cultures.
    Is it possible that you are seeing evidence for something that may not exist in the way you perceive it, based on your beliefs?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  299. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, read your bible and consider the word logos while reading Genesis.

    Genesis was not written in Greek.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  300. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “I do have an issue with intellectual dishonesty”

    Except your own obviously.

    Claiming “evolution did it” does not at all prove that notions like equality are not at root metaphysical beliefs that cannot be proved one way or another.

    Saying that humans evolved to cooperate does not prove the existence of equality as cooperation and equality are not the same thing, nor is the latter necessary to the former.

    That said, unlike Griff I do not try to highjack every thread to harp on the same topic, so let’s give it a break for today for the sake of other’s and other topics.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  301. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Claiming “evolution did it” does not at all prove that notions like equality are not at root metaphysical beliefs that cannot be proved one way or another.

    What do you mean by “proving equality one way or another”?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  302. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Oh wait, we are back on yesterdays thread. My bad.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  303. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    So pick it up in today’s thread. This looks more interesting than climate change and I was too busy doing actual work yesterday to see this one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  304. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “What do you mean by “proving equality one way or another”?

    Ryan, ideas like equality cannot be proved using human senses. They are metaphysical, in the sense of transcending the physical world. Richard tries the “evolution did it” meme, but this at best conjecture and an ideological reading of evolution.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  305. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    To make the point about ideology rather than science in Richard’s posts, he uses the loaded language of “primitive”, a chronocentric arrogance that assumes we know better, but this is debatable to say the least.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  306. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    Our own addled Griff will play the leading in this comedy (read farce): http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/31/climate-change-to-make-it-off-broadway-debut-thanks-to-national-science/

    The National Science Foundation has spent nearly $700,000 on a climate change-themed theatrical production, leaving some in Congress questioning if the organization’s grant funds could be put to better use.

    The play is being produced by New York-based activist theater group The Civilians. According to a plot description on the theater company’s website, “focuses on a woman named Phyllis as she tries to track down a friend who disappeared while filming an assignment for a nature show on a tropical island. During her search, she also uncovers a devious plot surrounding an international climate summit in Auckland, New Zealand.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  307. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “We don’t know what caused thunder so it must be Thor
    We don’t know what caused a storm at sea so it must be Neptune”

    There is a huge and unprovable assumption here, that Divinity arose simply to explain the natural world. But any number of other factors could and imo like were involved, including the near universal personal experience of the divine among human beings, including in today’s world.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  308. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Ryan, ideas like equality cannot be proved using human senses. They are metaphysical, in the sense of transcending the physical world. Richard tries the “evolution did it” meme, but this at best conjecture and an ideological reading of evolution.

    Again, I don’t understand what “proving equality” means. “Equality” is not a true or false statement. “God exists” is.

    If you’re talking about the statement “equality exists” and comparing it to “God exists”… They’re completely different kinds of claims, and there’s no inconsistency in demanding evidence of God’s existence while holding equality as a value.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  309. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Again, I don’t understand what “proving equality” means.”

    My point was that people who claim to only view the world through reason and science (unless you were born on the planet Vulcan nobody actually operates that way) will in the next breath insist on equality for all.

    Now, yes you can choose to hold equality as a value, but at that point we are back to metaphysics, and I can just as easily demand evidence for equality as a value.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  310. thedavincimode (6,803 comments) says:

    Who is the fuckwit who raised religion today?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  311. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Exactly where in the natural world do we see equality? On the contrary, it is not present. In order to arrive at equality as a value, we have to transcend the natural world and claim that equality is a higher moral value we should aspire to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  312. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    But a call for equality might well be based on a rational response to the human condition. Rawls’s ‘veil of ignorance’, for example.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  313. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “But a call for equality might well be based on a rational response to the human condition.”

    “Might be” is the problem. It could just as easily be claimed that a rational response to the world and the human condition necessitates heirachy, strong leadership, and a military social structure, given the violent nature of the world.

    In fact Fascism made exactly that claim, citing evolutionary competition between species for scarce resources to back it up.

    What is “rational” is very often in the eye of the beholder.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  314. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    The fascist claim was based on a complete misapprehension of what Darwinism might imply. I never said that equality was the only rational response, just that acceptance of equality as a value might be arrived at through a rational process.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  315. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    ” I never said that equality was the only rational response.”

    But if reason is a source of truth on it’s own then it should arrive at only one conclusion as truth is not contradictory. If there are multiple “reasons” then it ceases being that source solely by itself, and other factors must also come into play.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  316. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    My point was that people who claim to only view the world through reason and science (unless you were born on the planet Vulcan nobody actually operates that way) will in the next breath insist on equality for all.

    Which is not a problem.

    Now, yes you can choose to hold equality as a value, but at that point we are back to metaphysics, and I can just as easily demand evidence for equality as a value.

    You can demand evidence for truth claims. Insisting on equality for all is not a truth claim.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  317. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    For example, I think equality under the law is reasonable. But I cannot get to that conclusion using reason alone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  318. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Rationality does not require reaching the same answer in all circumstances. I can use rational processes to decide between purchasing a car or a motorbike without either decision being irrational.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  319. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “You can demand evidence for truth claims. Insisting on equality for all is not a truth claim.”

    Of course it is. It assumes, however unconsciously, that there is a higher value, a truth about human relationships, that is not accessible to reason alone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  320. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Rationality does not require reaching the same answer in all circumstances.”

    In what way then is reason a source of truth that can be relied upon exclusively?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  321. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “We have used our rational faculties and we have not found truth. We take our Descartes’ Mediations into our room at night and we think and we think and we think. And at the end of the night, not only do we not know truth, we don’t even know if the room exists, if our chair exists, if we are really wearing our dressing gown and sitting in front of the fire. After all our meditating we actually feel farther from truth than we did before. Of course Descartes believed he had found knowledge of God and the external world, but for most philosophers the rationalist project leaves us desperate, sure only of our own momentary existence proven in the cogito ergo sum. We can’t prove God’s existence, we can’t prove the existence of external objects, and we certainly can’t find the wisdom that is the key to the happy life. So our first enflamed passion begins to die, as we fall into skepticism and nihilism. Reason only seems to prove that reason cannot bring us to the truth.”

    http://www3.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/ti99/hockenbe.htm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  322. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    The use of reason may not be perfect, but it remains the only method we can use to discover truths about the world. Alternatives tend to boil down to “my ancient text is better than yours.”

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  323. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Of course it is. It assumes, however unconsciously, that there is a higher value, a truth about human relationships, that is not accessible to reason alone.

    You assume that. People arguing for equality are not necessarily assuming that.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  324. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “The use of reason may not be perfect, but it remains the only method we can use to discover truths about the world.”

    How do you know? Assuming it is the only method is just that, an assumption, a kind of faith in reason. But the 20th century should make us very skeptical about the Western world’s faith in Cartesian rationality given the number of horrors it led to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  325. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    “We have used our rational faculties and we have not found truth. We take our Descartes’ Mediations into our room at night and we think and we think and we think. And at the end of the night, not only do we not know truth, we don’t even know if the room exists, if our chair exists, if we are really wearing our dressing gown and sitting in front of the fire. After all our meditating we actually feel farther from truth than we did before. Of course Descartes believed he had found knowledge of God and the external world, but for most philosophers the rationalist project leaves us desperate, sure only of our own momentary existence proven in the cogito ergo sum. We can’t prove God’s existence, we can’t prove the existence of external objects, and we certainly can’t find the wisdom that is the key to the happy life. So our first enflamed passion begins to die, as we fall into skepticism and nihilism. Reason only seems to prove that reason cannot bring us to the truth.”

    That’s what happens when people start from the mistake of “cogito ergo sum”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  326. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Great, so now you want to show that the use of logical reasoning leads to bad outcomes. Go right ahead with that one.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  327. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “People arguing for equality are not necessarily assuming that.”

    Not consciously, but yes, they are assuming a higher moral value, in this case equality, exists by which human relationships can be evaluated.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  328. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Great, so now you want to show that the use of logical reasoning leads to bad outcomes.”

    No, but it can and has. That does not mean it always will, but it can, and thus reason alone is not reliable exclusively.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  329. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Not consciously, but yes, they are assuming a higher moral value, in this case equality, exists by which human relationships can be evaluated.

    Not necessarily.

    This is your argument? “They don’t even realise that they agree with me”?

    People do not have to believe that equality exists out there in the world independently of human thought in order to argue for equality.

    What’s next? “Oh, you think that Star Wars is better than Star Trek? Oh, you must believe in some sci-fi-goodness metaphysical thing to say that!”

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  330. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    The use of reason may not be perfect, but it remains the only method we can use to discover truths about the world.

    Another method is observation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  331. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “That’s what happens when people start from the mistake of “cogito ergo sum”.”

    Nihilism. The despair that is so much a part of of the modern Western world. Reason alone can give us technology, more wealth and more toys. But alone it results in the existential despair that is one of the most prominent features of modern life.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  332. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Nihilism. The despair that is so much a part of of the modern Western world. Reason alone can give us technology, more wealth and more toys. But alone it results in the existential despair that is one of the most prominent features of modern life.

    Why on earth are you talking about nihilism?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  333. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Yes Ugly. When I observe an aeroplane fly into a building and the building subsequently collapses, I use reason to postulate the cause of the collapse.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  334. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “People do not have to believe that equality exists out there in the world independently of human thought in order to argue for equality.”

    The what do they base their argument for equality on?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  335. Sofia (858 comments) says:

    With the new thrust of the UN Climate Change Report, regardless of all the arguments, what has the ETS actually achieved or is it still only a money shuttle around where polluters just pay [and pass it on to consumers – us] but don’t do a fucking thing about reducing emissions.

    So we pay to allow inaction and then will physically and finacially pay again for the results of inaction.

    Why not some straight forward local solutions, rather than a fucking screwed up international monetary/carbon trading shambles?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  336. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Why on earth are you talking about nihilism?”

    Reason alone, the Cartesian rationalism of the Western world, leads to nihilism and despair.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  337. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Observation of the world as it is would also lead us to other conclusions. That despite the claims of hyper-rationalists, reason alone does not lead to wisdom or human fulfillment. Religion and spirituality has not gone away in the West, quite the contrary. Human beings need more than just rationalism alone. It does not fulfill the deepest desires of the heart for meaning. And a life without meaning leads to despair.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  338. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    The what do they base their argument for equality on?

    It varies. But first you have to ask, what does an “argument for equality” mean? There are different kinds. Is the person trying to convince another that equality is worth pursuing? Or trying to convince another that something is unequal and should therefore be changed? Or demanding that something be made equal without any reference to the views of others?

    In the first case, trying to convince another that equality is worth pursuing, they may believe that equality “exists” in the way you’re talking about, in which case they will have to convince the other person that equality “exists” (perhaps beginning with trying to convince them that values “exist” in general before arguing that equality is one of them). Or they may try to appeal to some other value held by the person they’re addressing – utility, for example.

    In the second case, trying to convince another that something is unequal and should therefore be changed, it doesn’t matter whether or not they believe that equality “exists” – it only matters that the person they’re addressing values equality.

    And in the third case, demanding that something be made equal without trying to convince anyone to agree, it doesn’t matter whether or not they believe that equality “exists” – it only matters that they value equality and therefore want it pursued, whether others agree or not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  339. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Reason alone, the Cartesian rationalism of the Western world, leads to nihilism and despair.

    Descartes starts with a logical fallacy (circular reasoning) and proceeds from that mistake. Whether or not reason alone leads to nihilism and despair, Descartes was unreasonable and is therefore irrelevant to the question.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  340. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Ryan,

    as a Buddhist do you believe reason alone leads to wisdom and enlightenment?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  341. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “it only matters that they value equality”

    Which just leads me back to the question, WHY do they value equality?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  342. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    Yes Ugly. When I observe an aeroplane fly into a building and the building subsequently collapses, I use reason to postulate the cause of the collapse.

    If you’re thinking what I think you’re thinking, then that’s a fallacy.

    http://www.fallacyfiles.org/posthocf.html

    Alias: Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc

    Translation: After this, therefore because of this, Latin

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  343. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    yes Ugly, which is why I only postulated the aeroplane crash as the cause of the collapse. There could have been other reasons for the building collapsing. It just so happens, in the case I am thinking of, there were no other reasons.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  344. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Ryan,

    as a Buddhist do you believe reason alone leads to wisdom and enlightenment?

    Hah. Good call. No, I don’t.

    “it only matters that they value equality”

    Which just leads me back to the question, WHY do they value equality?

    Causally? Upbringing, societal influences, parental influences, personal experiences.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  345. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Causally? Upbringing, societal influences, parental influences, personal experiences.”

    Exactly. I don’t think anyone really sits down and just reasons their way to equality. In fact, despite the claims of some on KB, I don’t think most people’s deeply held values are arrived at by just reason alone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  346. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    Most human beings get to their deepest values by a combination of faith (metaphysics), reason and tradition (what has been passed down to us by our ancestors).

    Nobody on KB was born on the planet Vulcan.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  347. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Exactly. I don’t think anyone really sits down and just reasons their way to equality. In fact, despite the claims of some on KB, I don’t think most people’s deeply held values are arrived at by just reason alone.

    No one reasons their way to any values. You can’t derive an ought from an is.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  348. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, so you do not think that the philosphers who prepared the way for democracy reasoned their way to equal political citizenship. Or that concept that humans are equal before God is based on reason, whether slave or free born, …

    Ryan, you can reason your way from what is not to what could and should be.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  349. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “No one reasons their way to any values. You can’t derive an ought from an is.”

    And on that we are in total agreement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  350. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Ryan, you can reason your way from what is not to what could and should be.

    No, you can’t. Any claim of what “should” be presupposes some prior value for its meaning. Any attempt to move from the premise of “X is true” to the conclusion of “therefore you should do Y” will, explicitly or implicitly, assume another premise: “you should do Z”.

    And when that “you should do Z” is made explicit and the hypothetical rational arguer turns their attention to arguing for that, they can only do so by presupposing some other “should” statement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  351. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Ryan,

    ShawnLH, read your bible and consider the word logos while reading Genesis.”

    “Genesis was not written in Greek.”

    For fucks sake that’s the most banal observation made in the debate so far.

    The bible is translated into English and includes the word logos and in some, Hebrew terminology is used to describe God (confusing many to presume it is a personal name for God). Then there is the Greek word Christos, in the form of Christ to link it to Christian (a bit like how Octavius became Octavian) in place of the Hebrew word Messiah rather than the English word anointed.

    The issue is emanation of enlightenment. From thought to word to action in one aspect and in the premises on which a faith or worldview are created on the other.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  352. UglyTruth (4,551 comments) says:

    yes Ugly, which is why I only postulated the aeroplane crash as the cause of the collapse.

    Rather foolish of you to base your postulate on a fallacy, don’t you think?

    There could have been other reasons for the building collapsing. It just so happens, in the case I am thinking of, there were no other reasons.

    So you weren’t thinking of the NY twin towers collapses then?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  353. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Ryan, there is no constant state of ought, what could and should be is the motivation of life. Life of itself has value.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  354. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Ryan, there is no constant state of ought, what could and should be is the motivation of life. Life of itself has value.

    How do you reach the conclusion that life has value?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  355. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “The bible is translated into English and includes the word logos and in some, Hebrew terminology is used to describe God ”

    Not in Genesis which was written in Hebrew. The word Logos is in the Gospel of John and was written in koine Greek.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  356. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Ryan, life is/has ought.

    You question whether life has value?

    You should check out “The Middle” – On Demand TVNZ (yesterdays one). The child of a family is fearful that anything and everything could go wrong but then comes to accept that nothing lasts forever by becoming a Buddhist. Finding enjoyment of life and being alive by accepting that it does not last.

    The dalai lama appears to be, or puts on a pose of being happy, is this because he thinks his life and the life of others he meets has value or because he accepts that it has no value, nor their lives?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  357. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing, SPC. I was saying that there is no way to arrive at values purely by reason and observation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  358. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    In epistemology, rationalism is the view that “regards reason as the chief source and test of knowledge”[1] or “any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification.”[2] More formally, rationalism is defined as a methodology or a theory “in which the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive.”[3] Rationalists believe reality has an intrinsically logical structure
    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/
    The dispute between rationalism and empiricism concerns the extent to which we are dependent upon sense experience in our effort to gain knowledge. Rationalists claim that there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained independently of sense experience. Empiricists claim that sense experience is the ultimate source of all our concepts and knowledge.

    Some things are hardware. The ecosystem we evolved within “Gaia”*

    Some things are software. The effects of your surrounding culture/s.

    Some things are wetware/operator. The foibles of a specimen. Your personal rationality / world view.

    *The ecosystem we evolved In and exist within is what the word means numskull.

    .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  359. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “but then comes to accept that nothing lasts forever by becoming a Buddhist. Finding enjoyment of life and being alive by accepting that it does not last.”

    I’ll let Ryan deal with that but I can see a problem with that understanding of Buddhism.

    “You question whether life has value?”

    The question is, how do you KNOW that it does without assuming metaphysical values in the first place?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  360. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH

    Thanks for the primary school elucidation, well yeah da.

    Are you being deliberately blind to the point. The bible is translated into English, yet not all words are translated into English.

    Does something similar occur in Islam where Moslems read the Koran in their own language but get the God in Arabic rather than in their own language – so they think that Allah is the name of God rather than just derived from Arab for, the God.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  361. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, how does one know a metaphysical value?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  362. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “The bible is translated into English, yet not all words are translated into English.”

    In an English translation all the words are translated into English. ‘Logos’ is translated as Word.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  363. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “ShawnLH, how does one know a metaphysical value?”

    You can’t from reason alone. It requires faith.

    You assume life has value, but you cannot get to that assumption without faith in higher values.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  364. griffith (1,111 comments) says:

    English

    English arose in the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of England and what is now southeast Scotland. Following the extensive influence of Great Britain and the United Kingdom from the 17th to mid-20th centuries through the British Empire, it has been widely propagated around the world.[7][8][9][10] Through the spread of American-dominated media and technology,[11] English has become the leading language of international discourse and the lingua franca in many regions.[12][13]

    Historically, English originated from the fusion of closely related dialects, now collectively termed Old English, which were brought to the eastern coast of Great Britain by Germanic settlers (Anglo-Saxons) by the 5th century; the word English is derived from the name of the Angles,[14] and ultimately from their ancestral region of Angeln (in what is now Schleswig-Holstein). The language was also influenced early on by the Old Norse language through Viking invasions in the 9th and 10th centuries.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  365. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Ryan, I accept that people will differ in their understanding of terminology if they are not schooled in it the same way. Thus some problem in debate.

    You were saying that you do not agree that values can be arrived at by reason and observation alone. Your point is not the way others ought to see it, though some may agree.

    Yet some do accept values by reason and observation and even propose values to others based on their reasoning and observation. But of course in a diverse world in which others believe in divine revelation there are other influences on value judgments in the society collective.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  366. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    The question is, how do you KNOW that it does without assuming metaphysical values in the first place?

    The form of your question only makes sense if you assume metaphysical values in the first place.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  367. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    You were saying that you do not agree that values can be arrived at by reason and observation alone. Your point is not the way others ought to see it, though some may agree.

    My point is that I can logically demonstrate proof that values cannot be arrived at by reason and observation alone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  368. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “The form of your question only makes sense if you assume metaphysical values in the first place.”

    This has been point all along. Everyone does assume them whether they admit it or not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  369. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH,

    Is “word” an accurate translation of “logos”. I used the word logos in reference to the premises in the Genesis account.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

    You overlook the Hebrew term used in Exodus in English translations (now confused with a personal name for God across languages) and also the use of the term Christ (from Greek Christos from Hebrew Messiah?) so that all of the faith would be Christians. Just as in Islam, the term Allah is across languages.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  370. ShawnLH (5,293 comments) says:

    “Is “word” an accurate translation of “logos”.”

    Yes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  371. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    Ryan, so you think others ought to agree with your logic that more than reason and observation are required to arrive at values (values that we ought to have).

    Is this really your contention?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  372. SPC (5,643 comments) says:

    ShawnLH, adequate?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  373. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    Ryan, so you think others ought to agree with your logic that more than reason and observation are required to arrive at values (values that we ought to have).

    Is this really your contention?

    No, I said nothing about “values that we ought to have”. That sentence is nonsensical – you can only “ought” anything in terms of a value.

    I said that it is logically impossible to arrive at any values purely through reason and observation.

    And yes, I do think that others “ought” to disregard logically impossible beliefs, if they are at all interested in truth.

    Note that what I am saying is quite different from Shawn’s belief that we have some kinds of other non-reasoning faculties that can “perceive” values in some way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  374. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    This has been point all along. Everyone does assume them whether they admit it or not.

    You misunderstand me. Your question is meaningless to anyone who does not accept your conclusion. It is a subtle form of begging the question.

    You ask, “How do you KNOW that life has value?” as if one could be correct or incorrect in the statement, “Life is valuable.” Values are not known, they are experienced. You might as well ask something, “How do you KNOW that you are feeling pain?” as if one could be correct or incorrect in the statement, “I feel pain.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote