What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
19 Comments
- Ceeman, on 01/18/2008, -0/+8Lets make fun of them both !
- demonbaby, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6Actually, I drive past the Church of Scientology every day and it has big signs advertising a "FREE STRESS TEST." Just like drugs, the sample is always free. Other religions are certainly less forward about taking your money - but even the mega-churches pass the donation jar around to fund their next LCD screen, and the phone numbers displayed displayed 24/7 on the Trinity Broadcasting Network certainly take advantage of peoples' faith in the interest of getting their money.
- Napoleone, on 01/17/2008, -1/+7Great comment.
People would be wise to be more practical than ideological when choosing a candidate for whatever office. It matters not what they want to do, it matters entirely what they can do. It matters not what they believe in, it matters completely what they might require you to believe in turn, if anything. It doesn't matter what they promise, it matters only whether or not their past promises have been kept.
It's a shame, but most individuals seem more interested in having their immediate emotional needs satisfied by a candidate that makes them "feel good", rather than voting for one that would make a tangible, positive difference in their lives once in office.
Human nature in the end. - Albionshores, on 01/18/2008, -1/+6But you can go into a church and hear all they have to say for free, the Gideons will even give you a free instruction book.
The business Scientology makes you pay. - VIrus9, on 01/18/2008, -0/+5No support for Democratic candidates over Republicans?
FTA- Democratic candidate Mike Gravel is the only candidate with the balls to say something truly awesome about the intelligent design issue, and sadly his candor is one of the many reasons why he'll never be President: When asked if creationism should be taught in public schools, he said'Oh, God, no. Oh, Jesus. We thought we had made a big advance with the Scopes monkey trial... My God, evolution is a fact, and if these people are disturbed by being the descendants of monkeys and fishes, they've got a mental problem."
As much as I agree with Gravel there, I don't think his statement was all that "awesome" and his ideas on many domestic policies leave much to be desired. Every Democratic candidate, including Gravel, advocates interference in they lives of American citizens, and that is much more dangerous than whether or not a candidate believes that the world is only six thousand years old. - Napoleone, on 01/17/2008, -1/+6Granted, Scientology is rather kooky. But we all are, at the moment, or at some moment in time, slaves to our own preferred indoctrination.
Political partisanship is as pervasive and destructive as any religious dogma. There are people who will not even consider the possibility that their political opponents might at times be right. They won't allow themselves to vote for a person if they don't have the right letter before their name. They won't allow themselves to consider the vices or inconsistencies of their own party and its champions if the potential truth makes them feel uncomfortable.
People don't want the truth. They want what makes them feel good. If Tom Cruise feels best by pretending some evil alien race has his soul trapped in a volcano or whatever the ***** it is he believes, so be it. It's less dangerous than political ideology. - vervalsing, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4I don't think I've ever laughed so hard reading someone's opinion on religion. Anything that includes putting stickers on your penis as an explanation for religious faith is definitely worth a digg.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3I've actually been in one. The biggest Hollywood Center. They really ARE cooky nuts. I found out that not only was I allergic to stupid people (literally), but they DO consider themselves a church, actually praying every morning and noon, by standing in front of a L. Ron Hubbard photo and chanting, RON! *hands outstretched resembling Nazi soldiers*
Oh yeah.. They're crazy. Another interesting tidbit is that they UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES openly talk about what's "at the end of the rabbit hole". And they try to sell things to the members, as if we don't know that there's really nothing in the books detailing their beliefs in Xenu and extraterrestrials. They've got dozens of books, all, literally over 300 pages, all written by l. Ron where they hold them and worship him all day. "Ron is great this, Ron is great that, he's really a genius."
*sighs*. But damn do they have a great facility. What a bad ass sauna. The spoils of conquering the idiot public who still buy their idiot books. - poopysnacks, on 01/17/2008, -1/+4I think this article makes a strong argument as to why it IS important what a candidate's ideologies are, but it also says quite plainly "certainly this is far from the only thing, or even the first thing, you should consider when deciding which candidate to support." It also in no way shape or form supports Democrats over Republicans as Virus9 seems to suggest. It merely states the FACTS about what religious ideologies the candidates have, and singles out the two candidates who have actually said they don't believe in evolution.
- VIrus9, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2That doesn't mean Christianity is any less crazy.
- ATLien74, on 03/04/2008, -0/+1Oops! I Just Made Fun Of Scientology. No, Really.
http://digg.com/comedy/Diarrhetics_National_Lampoo ... - atheinostic, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2Partisanship can be a bad thing, but it can also be a good thing when it isn't mindless. After all, more (Democratic) partisanship would end the occupation of Iraq, warrantless wiretapping, torture, etc.
People tend to join a party because they share principles, and the widespread notion that they should sell out their principles just so they can look pretty and bipartisan has had some bad consequences. - inactive, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1believing in god is free...
- Berkana, on 01/26/2008, -0/+1The problem with this article is that it misses what it is that people are opposed to. The Scientologists may believe whatever the hell they want; that's their freedom. It's not their beliefs that people are pissed at; it's the behavior of the Church of Scientology, their "fair game doctrine" (Scientology's version of Jihad) and their totalitarian practices that has people all riled up. Ditto when people get upset at Islam; its not their beliefs that people object to, its their doctrinally sanctioned practices against dissenters.
- meridimus, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1It was a good read, I live in the UK and hated to know that Blair was a born again Christian. I think all leaders should be Agnostic, I think putting religion in charge of multi-culture is a ticking time bomb.
- egopoetics, on 01/28/2008, -0/+0Christianity does not charge you for your beliefs, nor is it a pyramid scheme perpetuated by a criminal phony-PHD war-deserter. Christianity takes attacks on the chin and does not sue over nor stifle any anti-Christian statements (case in point - this article). Christianity is about giving hope to the masses and a message that they firmly believe in, which is why Christianity is nothing like Scientology in any way.
Let the members of the Cult of Scientology believe what they like. But stop the elders from killing, defrauding, lying and thieving. - thomoore, on 02/11/2008, -3/+2Scientology may not be as bad as lots of people seem to think. This digg http://digg.com/politics/Thumbs_Up_for_Scientology explains that when they were fighting to get the usual religions tax deduction for Scientology, they worked out a compromise with the IRS so that they could deduct 80% of what they gave the church as “religions education.” Now a Jewish couple wants a tax deduction for the cost of their religious education. Making religious education deductible could offer greatly-needed competition to our failing public school system. http://digg.com/politics/Government_Don_t_Know_Jac ... Scientologists may have done American taxpayers a GREAT favor!
- VIrus9, on 01/17/2008, -11/+7This is a great article, at least until it becomes apparent that the author lives in some fantasy land where Democratic Presidents are no more likely to force their values and beliefs on others than most Republicans.
Let's face it, all of the candidates running for President espouse Christianity. In a perfect world that would mean that every last one of them is too hold the job. Unfortunately most of the population of the United States is at least as crazy. It's up to those of us who are capable of some degree of rational thought to support the least crazy among them, or at least the one who wants to limit the amount they can interfere in our lives the most.
Which makes for a better leader of the United States, someone who doesn't believe in evolution but would immediately withdraw our troops from Iraq or someone believes in evolution and thinks it would be fine to keep our forces there for 100 years? Should we have a President who is willing to change our foreign policy to one in which we will stop making enemies around the world, or one who thinks that we should double the size of our detention facility at Guantanamo Bay so that we can keep those suspected of being our enemies incarcerated off U.S. soil without trial? Should the President of the United States recognize that people who differ from his beliefs are entitled by law to their own, or should he want to change the Constitution to give his beliefs the weight of law?
As for the Democratic candidates, I can sum up my distaste for them in two words: social programs. I think it is immoral to deprive an individual of the fruits of his labor by force in order to give them to another individual, and even worse it drives up prices. I hear lots of people talking about how rich people and corporations need to pay more taxes, so I will now let you in on a little secret; rich people and corporations effectively pay NO taxes, they just pay other people to do the paperwork. Any tax increase for those who control the means of production is simply passed along to the consumer. When you tack on the costs of their accountants, the price goes up a little more. We might as well be paying a VAT like the Europeans for all the hidden taxation that goes into our goods and services. Next time you go to a store, ask yourself how much of what you spend is going to paying some tax, from the sales tax you pay right then and there to the payroll taxes the manufacturer pays for it's employees and the income taxes that are taken out of the employee's paychecks. If it wasn't for all these taxes, businesses would be able to sell their goods and services at lower prices while maintaining their profit margins, giving those currently "in need" of social programs more access to the things the successful among us take for granted.
I greatly thank the few of you who have actually bothered to read this far, and I apologize if it my rant seemed to veer a bit off topic, but my point is this: Even if a person has some crazy ideas about some things, they might have some good ideas about others, and if they don't want to shove their crazy ideas down your throat there's no harm in giving them a little of your attention. I just wish more of my fellow atheists could get down off their solopsistic soapboxes and realize this. - tehnoir, on 01/17/2008, -4/+0Is that you or Tom Cruise in the picture?
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is