• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Frediano

  • Rank

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Fred Bartlett
  • Relationship status
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. The practice of homosexuality is jealously protected by secular leftist libertines who regard it as a Holy Sacrament of their political religion. Perhaps. But my politics are somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun. I view the issue as a primary example of free association, in the most personal and individual sense of free association; the choice of one's life partner. I also see the issue as emblematic of what was once also an American principle; that one of the best ways to defend our freedom in this nation is to defend the freedom of our peers. So, yes, in that political sense-- defe
  2. Glad you asked, Fred. It helps to clear up misunderstanding. You can always presume I speak solely for myself, and for no one else, or for anything else for that matter. That's pretty close. Again, speaking only for myself... Men created by God were given the free will to choose to live in the good universe, or to create an evil which to live. No. It's good that he created men with the free will to choose to do evil, because it is also the free will to choose to do good. Without the potential for the existence of evil, it would be impossible to know good. So it's good
  3. Brant: There is an implicit 30 day money-back return policy, as long as it is returned in the original packaging. But only for store credit. Be glad the anti-you didn't read that post in the anti-universe; your forthcoming dementia would have been pushed ahead five years. regards, Fred
  4. There are two moral universes. One created by God and the other created by men. They're commonly known as good and evil. Is that speaking for you, or is that speaking for God? If I understand what you are saying, the moral universe created by God is the good universe, and the moral universe created by men created by God is the evil universe. Said another way, that which God creates is the good, except for man, and that which man creates is the evil. And, this was told to you, or you know it on faith, or you know it. Have I characterized that unfairly? Am I characterizin
  5. ... and for all I can know, that is how God chose to create two universes.
  6. Brant: Isn't the wrestling over 'universe'...' multi-verse'....'mega-verse' ... 'physical reality'.. etc., just kicking the can down the road? What I mean is, no matter how far we kick that can down that road(up that road?)the concept 'supernatural' is by definition forever outside the range of that concept. Otherwise, we could have just arbitrarily stopped the definition at Chicago's United Center and, finding Michael Jordan inside, declared him the God of all that is basketball. You said 'reality' and I qualified that with 'physical reality' but I think(correct me if I'm wrong)you intended
  7. Reagan's folly: making the 'a little more guns in exchange for a lot more butter' deal with O'Neill. Folly because, the little more guns lasted for barely a few years; Clinton immediately leveled off the planned Reagan defense buildup. No '600 ship' Navy (We're currently glad to be around 300). The 'alot more butter' however has remained to this day, and has compounded itself. All so that this nation could do an end zone dance in a game already long won. The fact that the Soviets were farming with ox carts in the 80s and this was known by our Intelligence communty was publicly dis
  8. I am not saying it is necessary to define a purpose; I've said before, even folks who never ponder the questions answer them, simply by living their lives. In the end, their lives are their answers, plural, whether the questions were pondered along the way or not. My definition of religion is simply, when any of us actively ponder those questions, then we are actively engaged in religion/philisophy and are actively seeking an answer and a purpose to our life. At different times in our life, we might arrive a different purpose. Others assert there is one purposeful answer or reason applicab
  9. To clarify, by 'Why am I here?" I mean to ask why as in purpose, not 'what was the physical means of my coming from a state of non-being to a state of being.' For human beings, even that restrictive interpretation of 'why' is no longer singlularly answered; we have moved beyond coitus as the only means of procreation. For sentient beings, it is easy to see in the near horizon even more answers to that restrictive interpretation of 'why', with individual instances of sentient beings in the future having multiple answers even to -that- question. But that isn't the question I meant by 'Why am I h
  10. When we ponder the question "What is the meaning of life?" we have already accepted, as a Truth, that there is only one such meaning. Why? On what basis? Doesn't that question need to be answered first, before looking for 'the' answer? regards, Fred
  11. There is no doubt that religion succeeds because it works as a means of navigating to a set of answers, and even, that some 'R'eligions work better than others(a 'R'eligion being an instance of religion.) . There is a 6000 yr tradition, for example -- the Hebrew 'R'eligion, the shared old testament foundation of the Judeo-Christian religious tradition. The Hebrew 'R'eligion has some very conservative tenets(I'd say that a tradition that spans 6000 yrs is 'conservative' of those traditions.) Those traditions include things like cherishing education and family and hard work, and as well, a
  12. it has no answers to 'the meaning of life', or the purpose and morality a man can live by. Speaking only for me, now, there is a real act of faith without knowing: a -default- belief in the singular, that there is only one such meaning, and only one such purpose and morality a man can live by. Tell me that belief isn't at the foundation of every pile of corpses rotting under the Sun. It goes directly to my personal meta-defintion of the word 'religion': any conscious pondering of the questions "Why am I here? What am I supposed to be doing now as a result of that why?" Notice how quickly thos
  13. I can (and do) believe that the physical universe was my Creator, and I am even grateful for that fact; but that bears no real answer to the concept of a God outside of the physical Universe as an entity that, for example, chose the means of this physical universe as the means of my Creation. Those are the stories of 'faith' from people who simultaneously claim 'faith' and 'knowing' in the same breath. It requires no faith to 'know;' deliberately or not, knowing voids the possibility of faith. But I am as certain that I was created as I am of anything else. As 'me' I once was not; as '
  14. Brant: I of course only 'know' of Scott Nearing by reading about him and his own works; he was of a different age. But he was clearly an intelligent, motivated, energetic, charismatic, and effective seller of ideas that he passionately believed in, with well meaning. The essence of his (early) thought was that , dammit, Jesus nearly 1900 yr old (then) mission on earth was stalling, and apparently little closer to being achieved than when it started; classical religion, especially in a wealthy nation like the USA, was ineffective in advancing Jesus mission fast enough as it could without
  15. Greg: Then, God your Creator has given you special access to knowledge within your religion that he has not granted to others within the context of their own. You should feel blessed. Speaking only for me, my Creator -- whoever or whatever that was, including, the Universe as it is, with me in it, -- has granted me only doubt on the subject of the supernatural, ever since my Creator sent me a message with that glowing log along the river when i was 14, and my half a day of absolute certainty on the subject of the supernatural. Our Creators, it is said, work in mysterious ways, and so on.