It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Social programming + the collapse of religion and values.

page: 19
30
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 11:29 PM
link   

@mOjOm You have now demonstrated perfectly how and why people dehumanize others. You hate Homosexuals so you dehumanize them, removing in your mind their status into subhuman.
I don't hate anyone and I am not dehumanizing anyone...and I did not use words like ''subhuman''. So stop being dramatic.

Included with them you have also added anyone who thinks different than you because as you put it, they "are driven by lower instincts" as opposed to you with your "higher sense of self."
I said the media can only program those who are driven by their lower instincts... i.e- without belief in God and the divine, they have no sense of moral direction, except for (a)what they make for themselves and (b)what society/media tells them can be accepted. Which is why they are receptive to the idea of homosexuality being ''acceptable'', as projected by the media. That is clearly the case here in this thread. So despite being celebrities, succesful, smart, talented and wealthy...they really cannot do more than address material needs while functioning as biological beings. Which is why concepts of homosexuality, deviant sex, degenerate behavior etc. are NOT moral issues to them, or rather should not be. ____________________________________________________Those who let their belief in God influence their choices and actions also function as biological beings... but they also have a higher self through their acceptance of a higher reality both in this world and beyond. They are less likely to blindly absorb whatever ideas are portrayed in the media as being ''normal'', ''acceptable'', ''entertaining'' etc. especially if it goes against their religion. So therefore they resist changes to traditional values, marraige and family.

You are the same and think the same as all genocidal maniacs throughout history. All the while claiming Moral superiority over others and using arguments ripe with double standards.
personal comments. Not going to respond.

In another thread that quote was given by you as the definition of Evil. That is exactly what you are doing to others and so by your very own words personify exactly what you define as "Evil".
regarding my statement that ''evil is what you wouldn't want done to you'' and this thread....I have accepted that being criticized and ridiculed for my beliefs is a part of this world. I can hanle it and I am INDIFFERENT to it. So it does not count as ''evil'' that I wouldn't want done to me.
edit on 14-2-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-2-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-2-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   

@Lucid Lunacy....Daughters of Bilitis and Mattachine Society were both groups in the US advocating gay Rights and encouraged its members to integrate with heterosexual culture. Those were early 1950s. These ideas are not a few decades old.
There may have been people pushing for gay rights. But the idea of it becoming mainstream culture was out of the question in the 50s. That idea, over time was introduced to society as ''normal'' and ''acceptable behaviour'' through the mass media.

What about the information Wandering Scribe gave you about Native American's acceptance of the 'two spirit' people? You don't think any of the settlers noticed it? You really believe the idea of accepting homosexuality didn't exist in the World prior to 30 years ago??...

Did you miss the part in the OP where I said gays ''kept a low profile''? That means I acknowledged their existence. Also please tell me... how exactly did you arrive at the 30 year figure? I don't recall saying anything about a 30 year timeframe. Are you trying to misrepresent me on the forum? Because I will not deal with users who do.
edit on 14-2-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Is Good and Bad a force in this universe or a only perceived thing by the living entities.
Choice was given to us and we can see the good and bad in our choices no?

The idea of God is with us, whether or not its right or wrong is unknowable maybe because it was either that or choice.

However to me signs point to our choice of Good or Bad as relevant.
The simplest is do we think this universe good or bad, that is an individuals given choice which doesn't effect this universe directly (i.e Gods judgment): yes over time seeing bad will effect you of course, but its the subsequent choices that count. Harder choices we base on good and hope. I feel those will be judged more by man. Its the obvious ones that God possibly would judge us on or defines us.

As for religions, was the reason for the way the story was told good or bad, I think this is important. It seems the morals were good but some of the teachings were bad. Such as Gods continued direct input. Possibly analogies (burning bushes, Old Testament style) but then we have grown to want facts rather than being taught as children. Scaring us tries to take our choice and we don't appreciate that. It makes us ignore good and bad and act thoughtlessly. Warnings OK but scarring and even fabrications are bad choices.

So I believe there was some bad choices on how to teach people about Good which can be fixed without losing the actual original good intentions and understandings.

People are using the doubts from these bad choices to push more bad choices. If we can reestablish the good in the universe we can make good choices for ourselves. If we don't see good what chance do we have?

Not sure if this fits in with the thread but I see people arguing good and evil and like to share my view on that.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 12:10 AM
link   

@Lucid Lunacy.... What about the information Wandering Scribe gave you about Native American's acceptance of the 'two spirit' people? You don't think any of the settlers noticed it?

So what of Native American beliefs? Its not like you subscribe to their version of spirituality, so how exactly does their spiritual understandng of homosexuality even matter to you? Or are you bringing it up for the sake of arguing that homosexuality is normal? This tactic of pointing to some tribe or culture and saying ''X is okay because those guys think its okay'' is downright fallacious and ridiculous.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 





Or are you bringing it up for the sake of arguing that homosexuality is normal?


Are you saying it is not normal?

We know it is normal in nature so we know it is natural for many species.

So if you say it is not normal we need to know your basis for that statement.

What is your definition of normal?

BTW I haven't owned a TV in over a year. I don't listen to much radio either.


edit on 15-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Lucid Lunacy...


I have addressed this in my long reply to user mojom. (first post in this page)I've also described why non-theists are more likely to be more receptive to media programming.
edit on 15-2-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Are you trying to misrepresent me on the forum? Because I will not deal with users who do.

You said "a few decades". A decade is 10 years and 'few' typically means 3 colloquially. Perhaps you should have used specificity yourself.

I honestly don't care if you won't deal with me. I lost interest after you repeatedly dodged our questions and failed to acknowledge points clearly demonstrating you were in error. It's not a discussion, it's you wanting us to listen. Kinda like the propaganda machine you speak of. Drill the same tripe over and over until we start to believe you.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


I've also described why non-theists are more likely to be more receptive to media programming.

Perhaps the theists are less receptive to media programming because their minds are at max capacity with religious programming.


Its not like you subscribe to their version of spirituality, so how exactly does their spiritual understandng of homosexuality even matter to you? Or are you bringing it up for the sake of arguing that homosexuality is normal?

You don't subscribe to Christianity. So how exactly does their spiritual understandng of homosexuality even matter to you? Or are you brining it up for the sake of arguing that homosexuality is not normal?

I thought the intention of why I said it was obvious. Sorry if you're not following the train of thought. Try harder.

You said the idea of accepting homosexuality was a new phenomena. A few decades old. Native Americans practiced that acceptance in their society. When us white people came over here we would have noticed this. It was merely an example to illustrate the idea of acceptance was not this brand new phenomena orchestrated by the media recently, nor would recent media been our first exposure.


I don't hate anyone and I am not dehumanizing anyone

All evidence to the contrary.
edit on 15-2-2014 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Lucid Lunacy.....You said "a few decades". A decade is 10 years and 'few' typically means 3 colloquially. Perhaps you should have used specificity yourself.

oh thats rich. ''few''...''typically'' means three, therefore skorpion must have meant three decades. Ridiculous.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Lucid Lunacy....after you repeatedly dodged our questions and failed to acknowledge points clearly demonstrating you were in error
None of your points ''clearly demonstrated' I was in error. All I heard was some fallacious arguments and opinion. I presented PROOF that the media indeed influenced people to accept homosexuality as normal, and strangely not a single person addressed it.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


There we go another religious person claiming the relopus have a monopoly on morals. Utter bs.
Humanist s do good because it feels right not like the religious whom do it out of fear.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


Sorry on my phone.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Lucid Lunacy... You don't subscribe to Christianity. So how exactly does their spiritual understandng of homosexuality even matter to you?
Islam believes in the prophets of Christianity. The story of sodoms destruction is mentioned in the Koran as well. Its the same source, which is why muslims refer to the Bible as well.
edit on 15-2-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 

Try being less ambiguous and actually provide some substance. Make a cogent and compelling argument for your case. Right now it amounts to "I believe in this mysterious force and that you've been brainwashed by it so you should believe it's true". You reiterate that same basic proposition without any meat over and over. Try engaging in discussion and we might make some progress.

Now as for your PROOF. The Joe Biden bit. lol. Sorry this is laughable that's why I didn't address it. Anyways. Acceptance of homosexuality predates modern media. Your whole premise is shot in the foot over that fact. If people could come to accept and embrace gay people into their culture prior to modern media [and there is plenty of that throughout our history], then it clearly defeats your notion that the only reason we would now accept it is due to the media telling us to.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Islam believes in the prophets of Christianity. The story of sodoms destruction is mentioned in the Koran as well. Its the same source, which is why muslims refer to the Bible as well.

Sodom and Gomorrah.

I assume you're insinuating both the Christians and the Muslims then have a similar basis for discriminating against the gays. Since Allah destroyed those cities because all them babies living there were super gay.

I've read this story many times. I see no mention of homosexuality. I see rape mentioned. Specifically gang rape.

A group of townsmen came pounding on Lot's door. They demanded the angels disguised as men be brought out to them so they could have nonconsensual sex. There is another term for that and it is rape. In this case gang rape. Gang rape is not homosexuality it's rape. If you don't understand how rape and a sexual orientation are distinguished from each other maybe you should spend some time reading on the topic.

Now I wouldn't exactly reference that story as a blueprint for proper ethics. Lot offered his young daughters [most likely underage] for the townsmen to gang rape instead of the angels. And that wasn't considered wrong.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 01:55 AM
link   

@Lucid Lunacy....
Try being less ambiguous and actually provide some substance. Make a cogent and compelling argument for your case. Right now it amounts to "I believe in this mysterious force and that you've been brainwashed by it so you should believe it's true". You reiterate that same basic proposition without any meat over and over. Try engaging in discussion and we might make some
I've done more than just repeat myself. I've elaborated and expanded on my arguments . Instead its the other side who keep stating theit opinion that homosexuality is normal without making a half decent attempt to address the issues presented in the OP.

Now as for your PROOF. The Joe Biden bit. lol. Sorry this is laughable that's why I didn't address it. Acceptance of homosexuality predates modern media. Your whole premise is shot in the foot over that fact. If people could come to accept and embrace gay people into their culture prior to modern media [and there is plenty of that throughout our history], then it clearly defeats your notion that the only reason we would now accept it is due to the media telling us to.
The bit about Joe Biden is proof positive that ''something'' reshaped societies perception of homosexuality...which is what the OP was about in the first place. So your laughing away of the proof doesn't work. Also if the ''acceptance'' of gays ''predated'' modern media, then why weren't gays marrying and parading a few (*cough* not neccessarily 3) decades ago in the US? Its clear that its only in recent time through the media that societies were manipulated into accepting a shunned behaviour.....Of course, only after the successful dismantling of Christianity as an important social institution.
edit on 15-2-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 02:06 AM
link   

sk0rpi0n
Also if the ''acceptance'' of gays ''predated'' modern media, then why weren't gays marrying and parading a few (*cough* not neccessarily 3) decades ago in the US?

Maybe if all you are doing is looking at the US but even then the first gay pride parade, in the US, was in 1970 with picketing starting 5 years earlier. That was well over 3 decades ago, no matter how hard you cough.
edit on 15-2-2014 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


The bit about Joe Biden is proof positive that ''something'' reshaped societies perception of homosexuality...which is what the OP was about in the first place.

OF COURSE minds are shaped. Of course perceptions change. That's NOT the same thing as your assertion none of us genuinely believe it, and we are all brainwashed by this extreme manipulation. That "something" is not mysterious at all. Minds get influenced by other minds. This is how society functions. People collaborate ideas continuously. Did the media have a role in this? Of course.

To say none of us genuinely believe in equality of LGBT, but are only parroting this mysterious agency, is literally rendering us robots that were programmed. That's an extraordinary claim and extraordinary claim's require extraordinary evidence. You haven't mustered any. I repeat. Any.


Also if the ''acceptance'' of gays ''predated'' modern media

The mere fact that you just said "if" means you're completely ignorant to the topic matter. As such this is absurd. I'm wasting my time.


then why weren't gays marrying and parading a few (*cough* not neccessarily 3) decades ago in the US?

Religious persecution being the main driving force behind that. The erosion of their stranglehold being the main factor in why it's now changing.
edit on 15-2-2014 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Grimpachi ....Are you saying it is not normal?

We know it is normal in nature so we know it is natural for many species.

So if you say it is not normal we need to know your basis for that statement.

What is your definition of normal?

Just because something is normal in nature doesn't mean humans should follow. By that logic, preying on the weak and cannibalism should be considered ''normal'' because some species of animals do it as well.

BTW I haven't owned a TV in over a year. I don't listen to much radio either.

TV is just one aspect of the medias mass hypnosis. Growing up/living in a society that has already been brainwashed by the media...can also leave one with the same effect.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 02:22 AM
link   

sk0rpi0n
Growing up/living in a society that has already been brainwashed by the media...can also leave one with the same effect.

Religion is also media.

Anyone who doesn't see that is also left with the same effect.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join