 |
A Better Ten Commandments: A guide to living life with, and on purpose |
In the stylistic and firebrand approach to atheism of Dawkins and Hitchens, A Better Ten Commandments: A Guide To Living Life With And On Purpose supplants the Decalogue and makes a clear cut case for reason and rationality. Pantheistically blending the best of history and philosophy, religion and science, A Better Ten Commandments illuminates a path to fulfillment that takes nothing on faith.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I like Jim Jeffery's version of the 10 commandments. He boils it all down to 1.
1. Don't be a dick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJ-_OTvsqo
I also watch Jim Jeffery’s, he’s hilarious at times but often too liberal me.
@Cognastic
Actually, Jim has watered down a well known Aussie injunction, suitable for every occasion ; Don't be a cunt.
Don't You think that - Faith in a God or FAITH in religion would not be needed to be lost or forgotten in order to follow the ideas that You suggest ??
These are great Ideas and I wish that the entire world would listen to You and take Your advice. because You speak of a great world with peace and prosperity and beauty and freedom for all.
But I feel that many people put their faith and wasted time in many lies and falsehoods for which there are no manuscripts - { of The religion } - for their ideas and faith. And that many Atheists greatly misrepresent the Bible Manuscripts as they sort through mistranslated - incorrect translations.
You made a movie about making the world a better place and what sane person can hardly disagree - However Religions people and Non Religious people all have the same problems with sexuality. For example, you could also detail the fact that the Roman Catholic has handed the keys to the church over to the gay community - would You see that is is very important to place the blame on the group or party that committed the act of sexual abuse, instead of focusing all of the guilt, blame and problems on the religious faiths and fantasies of people regarding a god or deity.
The homosexual community infiltrated a religious organization and these sexual acts were not committed by heterosexual men.
Your ideas were very good and would help the world if they were to follow Your ideas BUT I believe that these problems would still exist even though there was no such a concept of a god and faith.
I have been inspired by Your great video and ideas that are a true method for all people to follow. And even if Donald Trump was an atheist, His latest sex scandal would still exist but it would not be an issue because he would not be doing anything illegal or wrong by having sex with a woman who was not His wife.
But because He has aligned Himself with religious organizations and people and their ideas - suddenly He is in a sexual scandal. The atheists and American people were not concerned with Bill Clintons rape accusations and adultery. Because in Athiestism there is no such a thing as adultery, fornication, and rape.
Atheists prove this. They are not pointing fingers at homosexuals who abused little boys - Here the atheist finger is only pointed at religion. I will study Your movie in deeper depth and I thank You for your great advice and it will improve the lives of many people to understand Your message.
@ cup of tea with me
"Atheists prove this. They are not pointing fingers at homosexuals who abused little boys - Here the atheist finger is only pointed at religion."
I disagree on the strongest terms, in fact I label this as an outright lie.
I point my finger at those who commit such perversions, and those who attempt to cover up and protect the offenders. I campaign, I write my local politicians, I despise and continually fight against such sick perversions. I want the offenders in jail. The fact that a certain organized religion is guilty as hell in covering up these activities does place religion in the cross hairs of criticism, because it was from organized religion these crimes were allowed.
Dawkins a firebrand? Lol!
With no god, I suppose they're ten suggestions.
It made me laugh that the first four religious Ten Commandments were warnings not worship the "wrong" god. Keep the brand sacred!
:-)
I like the ones that Kyle Kulinski mentioned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7jROjU72zc
Have you thought about the law of one?
https://www.lawofone.info
If there is no such thing as polarity, then there is no difference between a left turn and a right turn in a car. It also means there is no difference between up and down in an airplane. This seems to contradict common experience in a very noticeable way.
Nyarlathotep....Take your time to read more before posting back.
This information is so powerful, it can liberate people from religion--all religions. Once you read it there is no going back, you can't undo the reading... I hope by presenting it here it taints your view, and everyone who reads it, the view of the universe in ways that will allow you or anyone reading it the perfect path out of religion. Higher consciousness and the infinite intelligence of the infinite creator are winning and religion is losing.
Type some topics in the search form and see what comes back. I think it will change your life. You won't be able to undo what you read, don't go back unless you are ready.
Try this -> https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=mohammed
See also:
https://www.lawofone.info/synopsis.php
Enjoy!
@asystemarchitect
Well I'm not interested in glowing reviews and testimonials; that is how commercials sell soap. I'm interested in hearing how you can reconcile the statement about there being no such thing as polarity, with our experiences in daily life.
Nyarlathotep,
As human beings we can share new ideas and information, hopefully without hostility and disrespect, this is what real humanity is all about. If the material does not resonate with you, so be it. My original post was about as efficient as it could be. I did not go into a lengthy post originally to allow people to follow the link, READ THE MATERIAL, and then, respectfully respond back, or ignore it.
So far you have insisted on answers that are in the material, IF you actually read it.
Keep in mind the material is RESEARCH. Inconclusive. Deep. Thoughtful. Something to think about and ponder, not a competition for who is right or who is wrong. Something to expand your mind, something you conclude on your own. What you conclude is all yours, I respect you whatever you think. But you first have to read the material. Your responses so far indicate you haven't read much of it at all.
And if you ask questions, you need to ask with respect, not insisting on your questions be answered, and preambles of what you are or are not interested in, as if you sit in judgement on a throne, eager to cast down ideas you don't understand.
Peace to you Nyarlathotep. Death to Dogma. May your journey find real joy and a happy life. May you grow with new information that expands your mind, and allows space for others to be in your orbit without feeling like they're talking to a tyrant--the very reason most of us are atheists. We reject religion because of its tyranny, it would serve you well to allow others who are traveling with you the space to breathe and share new ideas without feeling like an authoritarian tyrant is in their midst eager to attack them.
Asystemarchitect, you wrote, “And if you ask questions, you need to ask with respect”
Help me understand something, why do you consider yourself the arbitrator of how questions are to be asked?
That is what I have done. I followed the link, read the material, noticed a contradiction, and responded back outlying the contradiction I saw. I'm still hoping you will address the contradiction.
--------------------------------------
Since I have not done that, I don't really know what to say without being insulting.
Yes, but Your O N L Y - target is only - { RULE LEGION / Meaning - Religion -
The fact that Homosexuals and Bi - sexuals are attracted to males and also to females
and Hetrosexuals are only - ALWAYS - EEternally - attracted to females only.
Is This problem an argument that Atheists feel they must in joint hand in hand with every child molester on the earth - in DOWN playing a clownish prankish falsehood - to get an - earning of a dollar.
@Cup of tea with me Re: "Yes, but Your O N L Y......."
Um, just out of curiosity, do you even bother to proof-read some of the things you type before clicking the "SAVE" button? If you are trying to make some type of point and make people understand your views/thoughts, then you might want to consider writing in a slightly more comprehensive manner. Granted, I ain't any type of English major by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm afraid I am even far less qualified in deciphering Gibberish. They didn't start offering that course in school until after I graduated.
Also, you seem to have some type of overly obsessive hang-up about gays and lesbians and such. You might want to try to get over that as soon as possible. Just sayin'....
Cup of tea,you wrote, “Hetrosexuals are only - ALWAYS - EEternally - attracted to females only.”
I’m heterosexual. I am not attracted to females only. In fact, those I most frequently find sexually attractive are males. Hmmm....now how could that be?
Definition of homosexuality.
1 : Romantic attraction, sexual attraction or sexual behavior between members of the same sex, sexual attraction to another male is a homosexual attraction.
Making up a set of definitions and fantasies of a role that You play is Your right to pretend anything that You wish. I pretend that I am a black tire rolling through space with a banana and a hot dog in my eye sockets.
However, were a man and only attracted to females and never to males You would be a straight heterosexual. Even as an atheist, I can not understand what You are trying to be.
@ the universal,
It would be extremely helpful to readers for you to use the name of the person to whom you are responding.