The only VJ that had relevance. Opinionated, smart and pationate. MTV used to matter and was relevant. Do not agree with her views but I respect this woman.
Kennedy is a very moderate libertarian. More of a conservative with libertarian leanings. I used to listen to her show on KFI radio in LA, I remember her talking about legalizing weed and taxing the hell out of it. I say, legalize weed and ALL drugs, then DON'T tax any of it at all. END the wars and vote Ron Paul. haha. I like her though.
@kbr7171 No, there were plenty of libertarians at MTV back then. Her, Kurt Loder, Adam Curry among others. They even got Dennis Miller to host the VMAs a couple times!
Around the six minute mark, Kennedy utters something that should come as no surprise: that she was the only person at MTV who had to have network approval before she uttered a word about politics. Amazing, but not surprising.
I doubt she was the ONLY person who needed network approval.. she was a journalist, and in the 90's all t.v. journalists were much more neutral than now. You did your job in asking the questions. Not make statements! Plus why would a network employ someone outspoken in political beliefs, given that politics is a field that's opinionated, controversial, and alienates viewers. Do they want their viewers boycotting the network just cause of what one of their VJ's said? No! That's why ALL t.v. networks place that in their contract against all their on-camera employees. It's universal. That's why I don't believe Kennedy was the only one
I don't think you're wrong--actually, in one way, you're absolutely right. But I think it can still be argued that it is a religion by definition. One definition of the word stands out to me: "Scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness" I there most definitions require the idea of a higher power, so by most definitions, athieism is not a religion, though I don't think it's limited to that, so I don't think the arguement against it is ridiculous either.
The older she gets the more stylish she becomes. Most of us are the opposite. As the rest of us Gen X went from dope to lame, she went the opposite way. In the 90s she was considered most annoying now she's a weed smoke-n' Fox News Diva.
@xxcrysad3000xx Agreed on that score. Also I think we as a market need to do a little more exploring and seek out the available music outside our comfort zone, and reward those "undiscovered" bands by downloading more of their stuff.
It sounds stupid, but I agree with her when she says atheism is a religion. The word religion is often used the same way the word "faith" or "belief" is used, but they're different. An athiest has no belief or faith in a higher power, but can be just as devout to that as a Jew is to God. I view Penn Jilette as incredibly religious in that he preaches what he believes and practices what he preaches--very religious. But I also understand the arguement against it.
@hannas1234 True, in the old system record labels, concert promoters and radio stations controlled what music was heard. But that's changing now, due to the technological innovation someone mentioned. It used to be nearly impossible to self-publish, now anyone can, and get their music heard on RUclips, iTunes, internet radio, blogs... And all for the better. BUT... Let the poor musicians charge 99 cents for a download, willya? They've got to get something for their work.
@VirtuesPenumbra I've lived in those places you describe (Kansas, Texas), and I'm living in a blue state (California) and my experience is far different. I found more tolerance from those in the former states that I've found in the latter.
@dkoribag1 I like Gary, but at this point, wouldn't you just support Ron Paul? I mean, Gary's unfortunately been shut out. Ron's been fighting far longer and the establishments are finding it harder and harder to shut him out. Let's keep pushing him!
@xxcrysad3000xx Jefferson was an infidel, my point is that to the public he would have appeared socially conservative by modern standards. The sad thing is that it is Jefferson who said this "I never believed there was one code of morality for a public and another for a private man". But anyway, the whole "Jefferson had kids with a slave" thing might also be greatly exaggerated, remember that the penalty for sexual relations with your slave was DEATH.
Lol.....nothing has changed with ATF since then other than being an armed collection agency under the IRS to now being part of Homeland Security and still an armed tax collector. Funny how it is still illegal to use weed, grow and sell under federal law but the IRS wants them to pay tax on the proceeds.
@KpopManiacSFL Vietnam was largely started and escalated by LBJ, later inherited by Richard M. Nixon. Somalia's intervention was initiated by George H.W. Bush but later president William Jefferson Clinton pulled out after the Blackhawk Down incident. Sometimes one side inherits the other's conflict, but I don't necessarily think that means by default that they don't care.
Um, no... she can't argue that S.O.D. was very conservative, because by Scott Ian's own admission the whole thing was a joke. Speak English or Die wasn't a title invented to take a stance and piss people off, it was blowing conservatives views so far out of whack to see how far they can take the joke. And if any of it pissed people off, it's their fault for taking it too seriously. But now modern conservatives are behaving just like that, except what's worse is that they really mean it.
Well said re: letting others define you. I have a glen beck loving aunt who keeps trying to call me a socialist because shes too fucking stupid to understand what I DO believe. Pisses me off - I know what I am and what I am not.
Libertarianism seems to me like the new political counter-culture, so its not surprising a new young generation is taking to it like gangbusters. Its come full circle, its now hip to be conservative... not socially conservative of course, but in the classical liberal sense... which of course sounds very appealing to people who are tired of the hackneyed left and right caricatures and the ubiquitous punditry that are their bullhorn..
@Ralph66 I'm saying its high time the recording industry starts looking beyond its old business model.. post-Napster they fought tooth and nail against digital distribution when they should've been adapting. We've seen chain record shops eat the ma & pa operations, then big box retail eat the mega-chains, then online retailers swallow big box, and now digital distribution is king. I was poking fun at the first post, obviously "free music" is silly--I happen to like paying for what I consume.
I'm really confused by this tendency to conflate libertarianism with conservatism. It seems like a very sloppy use of labels. And perpetuating the left-right spectrum concept. No, I don't think I'm being "more libertarian than thou". I honestly think this sloppy, even contradictory use of labels serves the conservative movement more than the libertarian. It almost seems like it's some sort of Machiavellian effort to impede the spread of real libertarian ideas, to keep libertarianism submissive and subservient. I also have a lot of problems with "left-libertarianism", not just "conservatarianism".
the primary concern of the human person is a great definition and would certainly make atheism a fully fledged religion for many of it's hapless and reliably miserable adherents
You don't need to base a lack on anything, it should be the default position. Also this is the way most atheist and "celebrity" atheists define the word. It's also common to distinguish between theism/atheism and agnosticism/gnosticism as dealing with two distinct questions. The first is about ontology (what is) and the latter about epistemology (how we know what is). Also accepting a belief on the writings of another does in no way a religion make. At least this is a very unusual definition
"Also accepting a belief on the writings of another does in no way a religion make". I got to disagree once again. The two are very similar in that regard. Everything you do in your life and how you feel about those things are attributed directly to your personal belief system. If you are atheist or a deist, you may not have guilt for the same kinds of transgressions. Likewise a Muslim may not have guilt about stoning a woman for dating outside her respective sect, and you might feel awful...
Is lacking a belief in gods a stunning way to live my life? How does this imply a closed mind? I'm an atheist, but very open to new evidence. I actively seek it, and until I see any evidence og Gods existence, I'll have no choice but to remain an atheist.
Because it is a group of people that believe an ideal despite the vast majority of them not being fully versed in that ideal. Most atheists do not have a degree in any of the scientific categories that would refute creation, yet they believe it because someone told them that was the way it is. To a Christian/Buddhist/Muslim etc., it is much the same but at least the religions admit they take a leap of faith.
Not anymore than my belief in God makes me religious. I'm not a "religious" person. But, I have seen atheist organizations that operate and even get tax exemptions in the same way some churches operate. Even having summer camps to educate atheist children. So, when I see these things, it seems to me the similarities are too overwhelming to ignore.
Artist and musicians need to come up with a new business model to make money, other than selling stupid records. Artists already make most of their money from live concerts while they gain popularity by free means. This prohibition won't solve anything, mark my words.
@xxcrysad3000xx We already have free music. Many artists give their music away for free. What you want to do is remove the right from an artist to charge anything for his or her work. Why not leave that choice in the hands of the musician? I'm assuming you're talking about illegal downloading here, so let me know if you're talking about something else when you say "free music" -- wouldn't want to go off on a tangent.
But there wasn't always free music. Sure there was/is FM radio, but that didn't let you listen to whatever song whenever like on RUclips. Sometimes the radio didn't even play your favorite song.. forcing you to buy the album to listen to it. And artists don't have the choice now.. to make money selling records. Records don't sell. Artists must tour/play live more than ever to make bucks
There are similarities for sure, but they have nothing to do with not believing in God, which is what we're taking about being called a religion. The fact that some atheist might be religious is without a doubt true (for example some Buddhists or conspiracy theorists), but calling atheism "a" religion is something completely different. There is no religion of atheism.
You can very much be a social conservative and a libertarian, I for instance am a social conservative and a libertarian. True political libertarianism(classical liberalism) is INSANE and IMPOSSIBLE unless tempered by social conservatism (traditional Christian values), this is something which our founding fathers understood very well. The original libertarians (classical liberals) like Edmund Burke and Jefferson would be considered extremely socially conservative by todays standards.
Is it possible in your view to not be religious? If so how? If I happen not to have a belief in the existence of a god, does that automatically make me religious?
Actually, my understanding is dead on. Your definition sounds more like an agnostic, or deist to me. And, the fundamental principals are the same. Acceptance of a stance on God(s), or a lack thereof based on writing/teachings of another human being. Yep, sounds pretty similar to me.
@WorshipInTruth Drawing comparisons across vast swaths of history is always problematic and usually pretty stupid. It goes without saying that most figures from the era of the Revolution would appear to us as very socially conservative--you could also say they seem utterly backward in about a thousand other regards too, or racist, or shoddy dressers. All you're doing is misrepresenting history by judging it in a contemporary light that happens to coincide with your beliefs.
@hannas1234 Ah, I see. We're in agreement then! Sorry, a lot of times I hear things like "I shouldn't have to pay for this" as an excuse to pirate music or movies. Although movies today... Yeesh!
It's very simple. First you have to find a good defenition of religion and then see if atheism (lack of belief in gods) fits under it. Good luck. Of course an atheist can be religious, but that in now way makes atheism a religion. Atheism and religion are often separate issues. Many Buddhists are in fact atheists, but very religious. This does not mean atheism is a religion, but that Buddhism is. And I don't think preaching in what you believe makes you religious. This is an uncommon defenit
@hannas1234 Easy--free music leads to the elimination of paid musicians. You've heard amateur musicians. What if all music you heard was made by those guys?
...about it, yet the two are not related to a belief system? At the very least a personal code or set of morals? Where do morals come from? Are they taught by parents? Where did those teachings come from? There are too many questions that cannot be answered by science, and there are too many answers for science not to be valid. The point is atheism is a very stunting way to live you life. You learn more with an open mind, and atheism requires a very uniform way to process thought.
@19TEC85 How do we pay for things? Consumption tax? I am all for ending these illegal wars but we can't just disband the military, as nice as it sounds.
@xxcrysad3000xx Furthermore.... you are, in fact, the one who is looking at modern social changes through "very fancy rose tinted glasses" by even referring to them as "progressions" in the first place when they are in reality moral REGRESSIONS, history is not a steady and continuous progression into enlightenment as you have been conditioned to believe, that is an extremely haughty oversimplification of the reality.
@xxcrysad3000xx I know that sin is not some new innovation, I always keep in mind that there is "nothing new under the sun", but back then sin was not as ACCEPTED as it is today where people prance around acting as if they are PROUD of their shameful behavior. The fact that you immediately connect technological progress to "social progress" just shows how completely indoctrinated you are. You can thank Bible believers like Sir Isaac Newton and James Clerk Maxwell for our modern tech innovations.
@dkoribag1 my vote would go to Ron Paul. Gary is a colorless figure, and although he has similar views as Ron, he has no charisma and therefore no chance of winning.
@fatguyonthc The way we pay for most things, through voluntary transactions. Also, legalizing drugs and not taxing them would save money...Because billions go into enforcing the war on drugs.
@Ralph64 That would be fantastic.. I can't remember the last time I listened to anything on the radio. If you all are truly about free markets, then that means you're for embracing technological innovation, and if that's putting the squeeze on music as we know it, all the better. That just unleashes a wave of creativity... right? Isn't that the whole libertarian gimmick? If you don't evolve and innovate, get outta the way, ya loser bums!
@xxcrysad3000xx You don't seem to realize that I wish society was more like it was at the time of Americas founding fathers, they were not as stupid and "bigoted" as you may think. If we could return culture to the point it was during 1776 yet with modern technology I would be well pleased.
@uk6strings Atheism is a single answer to a single question. That's how the word is mostly used. I have no faith. It requires no faith to say "I don't know".
@xxcrysad3000xx Political libertarianism makes perfect sense if it is within the bounds of the Christian culture we had at the founding of this country, with the modern abundance of libertines true political libertarianism has become an impossibility, we as a society have become so degenerate [now viewing morality as being subjective] that government feels it has to take upon itself the paternal role to keep us from rolling in our own shit.
I loved Kennedy on Mtv. After she left and alternative nation went away Mtv was never the same.
Good for her! Good interview brings back some old school memories......
Man, I had the HUGEST crush on this woman back in the 90's. Looks like I wasn't alone lol
I still do!
She has aged gracefully. She looks hotter now than in this video. I ❤ Kennedy!
Growing up, i watched this woman prevail.. I absolutely love this woman
Werrrrrrrd!
Libertarians love individual rights... as long as they happen to be the individuals who get most or all of them.
The only VJ that had relevance. Opinionated, smart and pationate. MTV used to matter and was relevant. Do not agree with her views but I respect this woman.
Jesse Camp
Wow she looks and sounds so different. I first saw her on Fox a few years ago.
Kennedy is a very moderate libertarian. More of a conservative with libertarian leanings. I used to listen to her show on KFI radio in LA, I remember her talking about legalizing weed and taxing the hell out of it. I say, legalize weed and ALL drugs, then DON'T tax any of it at all. END the wars and vote Ron Paul. haha. I like her though.
Kennedy was always my favorite. There was no pretense with her.
Manson's quote breaks my heart. A simple misconception that destroys something potentially beautiful.
thats bullshit, me and my friends loved her back then!
and we still do.
she is amazing, listen to her.
Great interview, great to see Kennedy!
Hated her on MTV, but damn if I don't have a whole new outlook on her. Pretty damn awesome.
That shows your inability to understand people, and for constant premature judgment and sticking with it
@@shaheedharun445 ok.... you’re pretty judgy for someone’s tastes...
She called it a religion because if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Kurt Loader was/is a libertarian too.
Kennedy for president! Ha! Bet ya never thought you'd hear that again, eh?
I would definitely vote for Kennedy for President.
@kbr7171 No, there were plenty of libertarians at MTV back then.
Her, Kurt Loder, Adam Curry among others. They even got Dennis Miller to host the VMAs a couple times!
Not your everyday average Kennedy, this one doesn't suck.
each night on MTV's "Alternative Nation" ms. K was 100% best tv show host & i always enjoyed watching her do her zanny stuff on the program!
Around the six minute mark, Kennedy utters something that should come as no surprise: that she was the only person at MTV who had to have network approval before she uttered a word about politics. Amazing, but not surprising.
I doubt she was the ONLY person who needed network approval.. she was a journalist, and in the 90's all t.v. journalists were much more neutral than now. You did your job in asking the questions. Not make statements! Plus why would a network employ someone outspoken in political beliefs, given that politics is a field that's opinionated, controversial, and alienates viewers. Do they want their viewers boycotting the network just cause of what one of their VJ's said? No! That's why ALL t.v. networks place that in their contract against all their on-camera employees. It's universal. That's why I don't believe Kennedy was the only one
She knows nothing of politics
I don't care whether atheism is a religion or not, I just hate how they are always pushing their non-belief on the rest of us.
God Fox News changed her style so much. It’s like Night and Day.
I don't think you're wrong--actually, in one way, you're absolutely right. But I think it can still be argued that it is a religion by definition.
One definition of the word stands out to me:
"Scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness"
I there most definitions require the idea of a higher power, so by most definitions, athieism is not a religion, though I don't think it's limited to that, so I don't think the arguement against it is ridiculous either.
I had a big crush on her in the 90's
this interview could have been an hour long and i would have watched it.
Hey, you still watchin Kennedy?
@@JRGPS903 I still think highly of her.
@@suitandtieguy me too. 10 yrs seemed like a good check in
@@JRGPS903 she's still hot. She never should have straightened her hair though.
They did meet George "What's his Greek name again?" Together.
The older she gets the more stylish she becomes. Most of us are the opposite. As the rest of us Gen X went from dope to lame, she went the opposite way. In the 90s she was considered most annoying now she's a weed smoke-n' Fox News Diva.
Yeah, that makes sense...
@xxcrysad3000xx Agreed on that score. Also I think we as a market need to do a little more exploring and seek out the available music outside our comfort zone, and reward those "undiscovered" bands by downloading more of their stuff.
I thought she was extremely hot when she was on MTV, but knew nothing about her politics. Now I'm in love =D .
Freakin awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It sounds stupid, but I agree with her when she says atheism is a religion. The word religion is often used the same way the word "faith" or "belief" is used, but they're different.
An athiest has no belief or faith in a higher power, but can be just as devout to that as a Jew is to God. I view Penn Jilette as incredibly religious in that he preaches what he believes and practices what he preaches--very religious.
But I also understand the arguement against it.
@hannas1234 True, in the old system record labels, concert promoters and radio stations controlled what music was heard. But that's changing now, due to the technological innovation someone mentioned. It used to be nearly impossible to self-publish, now anyone can, and get their music heard on RUclips, iTunes, internet radio, blogs... And all for the better. BUT... Let the poor musicians charge 99 cents for a download, willya? They've got to get something for their work.
@VirtuesPenumbra I've lived in those places you describe (Kansas, Texas), and I'm living in a blue state (California) and my experience is far different. I found more tolerance from those in the former states that I've found in the latter.
@Dysentery7885 Aren't commies and marxists the same thing?
SIGMA: Don't forget, Bush also expanded federal govt power in the areas of health care (Medicare Modernization Act) and education (NCLB).
@dkoribag1 I like Gary, but at this point, wouldn't you just support Ron Paul? I mean, Gary's unfortunately been shut out. Ron's been fighting far longer and the establishments are finding it harder and harder to shut him out. Let's keep pushing him!
@xxcrysad3000xx Jefferson was an infidel, my point is that to the public he would have appeared socially conservative by modern standards. The sad thing is that it is Jefferson who said this "I never believed there was one code of morality for a public and another for a private man". But anyway, the whole "Jefferson had kids with a slave" thing might also be greatly exaggerated, remember that the penalty for sexual relations with your slave was DEATH.
Lol.....nothing has changed with ATF since then other than being an armed collection agency under the IRS to now being part of Homeland Security and still an armed tax collector. Funny how it is still illegal to use weed, grow and sell under federal law but the IRS wants them to pay tax on the proceeds.
@KpopManiacSFL Vietnam was largely started and escalated by LBJ, later inherited by Richard M. Nixon. Somalia's intervention was initiated by George H.W. Bush but later president William Jefferson Clinton pulled out after the Blackhawk Down incident. Sometimes one side inherits the other's conflict, but I don't necessarily think that means by default that they don't care.
Um, no... she can't argue that S.O.D. was very conservative, because by Scott Ian's own admission the whole thing was a joke. Speak English or Die wasn't a title invented to take a stance and piss people off, it was blowing conservatives views so far out of whack to see how far they can take the joke. And if any of it pissed people off, it's their fault for taking it too seriously. But now modern conservatives are behaving just like that, except what's worse is that they really mean it.
She makes it sound so naughty... hehehe
Well said re: letting others define you. I have a glen beck loving aunt who keeps trying to call me a socialist because shes too fucking stupid to understand what I DO believe. Pisses me off - I know what I am and what I am not.
Libertarianism seems to me like the new political counter-culture, so its not surprising a new young generation is taking to it like gangbusters. Its come full circle, its now hip to be conservative... not socially conservative of course, but in the classical liberal sense... which of course sounds very appealing to people who are tired of the hackneyed left and right caricatures and the ubiquitous punditry that are their bullhorn..
@Ralph66 I'm saying its high time the recording industry starts looking beyond its old business model.. post-Napster they fought tooth and nail against digital distribution when they should've been adapting. We've seen chain record shops eat the ma & pa operations, then big box retail eat the mega-chains, then online retailers swallow big box, and now digital distribution is king. I was poking fun at the first post, obviously "free music" is silly--I happen to like paying for what I consume.
I'm really confused by this tendency to conflate libertarianism with conservatism. It seems like a very sloppy use of labels. And perpetuating the left-right spectrum concept. No, I don't think I'm being "more libertarian than thou". I honestly think this sloppy, even contradictory use of labels serves the conservative movement more than the libertarian. It almost seems like it's some sort of Machiavellian effort to impede the spread of real libertarian ideas, to keep libertarianism submissive and subservient. I also have a lot of problems with "left-libertarianism", not just "conservatarianism".
Why did Kennedy equate religion with science in that Marylin Manson clip?
Like orthodox Greek?
the primary concern of the human person is a great definition and would certainly make atheism a fully fledged religion for many of it's hapless and reliably miserable adherents
You don't need to base a lack on anything, it should be the default position. Also this is the way most atheist and "celebrity" atheists define the word.
It's also common to distinguish between theism/atheism and agnosticism/gnosticism as dealing with two distinct questions. The first is about ontology (what is) and the latter about epistemology (how we know what is).
Also accepting a belief on the writings of another does in no way a religion make. At least this is a very unusual definition
I also ended up found moving from free market conservatism to libertarianism too Kennedy.
"Also accepting a belief on the writings of another does in no way a religion make". I got to disagree once again. The two are very similar in that regard. Everything you do in your life and how you feel about those things are attributed directly to your personal belief system. If you are atheist or a deist, you may not have guilt for the same kinds of transgressions. Likewise a Muslim may not have guilt about stoning a woman for dating outside her respective sect, and you might feel awful...
It's 2022, and she's still kicking ass on Fox.
Is lacking a belief in gods a stunning way to live my life? How does this imply a closed mind? I'm an atheist, but very open to new evidence. I actively seek it, and until I see any evidence og Gods existence, I'll have no choice but to remain an atheist.
Because it is a group of people that believe an ideal despite the vast majority of them not being fully versed in that ideal. Most atheists do not have a degree in any of the scientific categories that would refute creation, yet they believe it because someone told them that was the way it is. To a Christian/Buddhist/Muslim etc., it is much the same but at least the religions admit they take a leap of faith.
Not anymore than my belief in God makes me religious. I'm not a "religious" person. But, I have seen atheist organizations that operate and even get tax exemptions in the same way some churches operate. Even having summer camps to educate atheist children. So, when I see these things, it seems to me the similarities are too overwhelming to ignore.
Hows Antoneta and Charels
What ever happened to Tabitha Soren. ? One of Kennedys old running buddies?
Artist and musicians need to come up with a new business model to make money, other than selling stupid records. Artists already make most of their money from live concerts while they gain popularity by free means. This prohibition won't solve anything, mark my words.
You mean by talking about it?
you mean criticising ?
@xxcrysad3000xx We already have free music. Many artists give their music away for free. What you want to do is remove the right from an artist to charge anything for his or her work. Why not leave that choice in the hands of the musician?
I'm assuming you're talking about illegal downloading here, so let me know if you're talking about something else when you say "free music" -- wouldn't want to go off on a tangent.
But there wasn't always free music. Sure there was/is FM radio, but that didn't let you listen to whatever song whenever like on RUclips. Sometimes the radio didn't even play your favorite song.. forcing you to buy the album to listen to it. And artists don't have the choice now.. to make money selling records. Records don't sell. Artists must tour/play live more than ever to make bucks
Adam Curry is a big Ron Paul supporter and fairly libertarian (and a "conspiracy theorist"). So, must be something in the MTV water.
There are similarities for sure, but they have nothing to do with not believing in God, which is what we're taking about being called a religion. The fact that some atheist might be religious is without a doubt true (for example some Buddhists or conspiracy theorists), but calling atheism "a" religion is something completely different. There is no religion of atheism.
@waksibra I agree if Atheism is a religion then OFF is a tv channel
You can very much be a social conservative and a libertarian, I for instance am a social conservative and a libertarian. True political libertarianism(classical liberalism) is INSANE and IMPOSSIBLE unless tempered by social conservatism (traditional Christian values), this is something which our founding fathers understood very well. The original libertarians (classical liberals) like Edmund Burke and Jefferson would be considered extremely socially conservative by todays standards.
Yes
Is it possible in your view to not be religious? If so how? If I happen not to have a belief in the existence of a god, does that automatically make me religious?
@WorshipInTruth I'm starting to get the feeling we aren't going to find alot of common ground here, so we'll just have to disagree to agree.
By assaulting religion under atheism's banner in attempt to push religion out of the public arena.
@Steve83B I thought Kurt Loder just was a figment of Greg Gutfeld's imagination who frequently appeared in his dreams. Lol.
Damn she got hot over time !
Actually, my understanding is dead on. Your definition sounds more like an agnostic, or deist to me. And, the fundamental principals are the same. Acceptance of a stance on God(s), or a lack thereof based on writing/teachings of another human being. Yep, sounds pretty similar to me.
@WorshipInTruth Drawing comparisons across vast swaths of history is always problematic and usually pretty stupid. It goes without saying that most figures from the era of the Revolution would appear to us as very socially conservative--you could also say they seem utterly backward in about a thousand other regards too, or racist, or shoddy dressers. All you're doing is misrepresenting history by judging it in a contemporary light that happens to coincide with your beliefs.
👍
@hannas1234 Ah, I see. We're in agreement then! Sorry, a lot of times I hear things like "I shouldn't have to pay for this" as an excuse to pirate music or movies. Although movies today... Yeesh!
It's very simple. First you have to find a good defenition of religion and then see if atheism (lack of belief in gods) fits under it. Good luck.
Of course an atheist can be religious, but that in now way makes atheism a religion. Atheism and religion are often separate issues. Many Buddhists are in fact atheists, but very religious. This does not mean atheism is a religion, but that Buddhism is.
And I don't think preaching in what you believe makes you religious. This is an uncommon defenit
Apple of Ayn Rand s eye
@hannas1234 Easy--free music leads to the elimination of paid musicians. You've heard amateur musicians. What if all music you heard was made by those guys?
I know* most...
his suit is 2 sizes too large.
...about it, yet the two are not related to a belief system? At the very least a personal code or set of morals? Where do morals come from? Are they taught by parents? Where did those teachings come from? There are too many questions that cannot be answered by science, and there are too many answers for science not to be valid. The point is atheism is a very stunting way to live you life. You learn more with an open mind, and atheism requires a very uniform way to process thought.
@19TEC85 How do we pay for things? Consumption tax? I am all for ending these illegal wars but we can't just disband the military, as nice as it sounds.
"I'm so much more complex than that."
Heh. You're pretty sure? ;)
In what way are you defining religion to include all atheists (people with a lack of belief in gods) then ?
@xxcrysad3000xx Furthermore.... you are, in fact, the one who is looking at modern social changes through "very fancy rose tinted glasses" by even referring to them as "progressions" in the first place when they are in reality moral REGRESSIONS, history is not a steady and continuous progression into enlightenment as you have been conditioned to believe, that is an extremely haughty oversimplification of the reality.
@7:11 voluntarily!
What ever your real name is?
Blagh...she's so hard to look at....
@xxcrysad3000xx I know that sin is not some new innovation, I always keep in mind that there is "nothing new under the sun", but back then sin was not as ACCEPTED as it is today where people prance around acting as if they are PROUD of their shameful behavior. The fact that you immediately connect technological progress to "social progress" just shows how completely indoctrinated you are. You can thank Bible believers like Sir Isaac Newton and James Clerk Maxwell for our modern tech innovations.
@dkoribag1 my vote would go to Ron Paul. Gary is a colorless figure, and although he has similar views as Ron, he has no charisma and therefore no chance of winning.
Still Hot.
Is she a Jew? Also its John Leftowitz is his real name.
@LongueTiedNoLunger Dennis Miller?? A libertarian? Thought he's a warmongering neocon.
@fatguyonthc The way we pay for most things, through voluntary transactions. Also, legalizing drugs and not taxing them would save money...Because billions go into enforcing the war on drugs.
@Ralph64 That would be fantastic.. I can't remember the last time I listened to anything on the radio. If you all are truly about free markets, then that means you're for embracing technological innovation, and if that's putting the squeeze on music as we know it, all the better. That just unleashes a wave of creativity... right? Isn't that the whole libertarian gimmick? If you don't evolve and innovate, get outta the way, ya loser bums!
@xxcrysad3000xx You don't seem to realize that I wish society was more like it was at the time of Americas founding fathers, they were not as stupid and "bigoted" as you may think. If we could return culture to the point it was during 1776 yet with modern technology I would be well pleased.
@Riclists Si.
@uk6strings Atheism is a single answer to a single question. That's how the word is mostly used. I have no faith. It requires no faith to say "I don't know".
@1stSgtSurf a sting operation that already took innocent lives
@xxcrysad3000xx Political libertarianism makes perfect sense if it is within the bounds of the Christian culture we had at the founding of this country, with the modern abundance of libertines true political libertarianism has become an impossibility, we as a society have become so degenerate [now viewing morality as being subjective] that government feels it has to take upon itself the paternal role to keep us from rolling in our own shit.