Trump

[Sandydragon]

Quite.

How about those types who have two-way conversations with their God?

Interesting. A basic article of faith in a deity, or most anyway, is that it is possible to pray to and receive communication from that God.

So, in your opinion, are all people of faith mentally ill? That's a big proportion of the worlds population you are now condemning.

That isn't what I said SD.

Praying to a God is fine. It displays a level of faith that I would not be able to handle without some form of divine intervention that I personally witness, but then again, isn't that the whole idea about faith? Following your chosen book and living your life to its wordings, suggestions and advice also fine...as long as someone's interpretations of those words is to harm others.

I think where mental illness comes into it is when the conversations with God become two-way. Hearing voices is never a good thing, especially when the voice appears to be the all knowing, all powerful creator of the universe and all life.

Take religion out of the equation and if someone told you they had two-way conversations with imaginary people/beings, would that sound perfectly sane?

If you were convinced that God didn't exist (major change of topic imminent) then it would. But only if that were your worldview. Receiving communication from God is perfectly acceptable for people with faith - that could include a voice. Again, Ive spoken to a lot of people of faith who are convinced that they have heard a voice, but I wouldn't describe them as being mentally ill or lying.

Someone who is already mentally ill and hears voices that confirm their existing beliefs, which they claim to be a Diety would be a different matter. But then the fella who just crashed a van into a group of Muslims in London may be mentally ill and may not be religious. Mental illness is what it is, regardless of the involvement of religion.

[WaspInWales]

Interesting. A basic article of faith in a deity, or most anyway, is that it is possible to pray to and receive communication from that God.

So, in your opinion, are all people of faith mentally ill? That's a big proportion of the worlds population you are now condemning.

That isn't what I said SD.

Praying to a God is fine. It displays a level of faith that I would not be able to handle without some form of divine intervention that I personally witness, but then again, isn't that the whole idea about faith? Following your chosen book and living your life to its wordings, suggestions and advice also fine...as long as someone's interpretations of those words is to harm others.

I think where mental illness comes into it is when the conversations with God become two-way. Hearing voices is never a good thing, especially when the voice appears to be the all knowing, all powerful creator of the universe and all life.

Take religion out of the equation and if someone told you they had two-way conversations with imaginary people/beings, would that sound perfectly sane?

If you were convinced that God didn't exist (major change of topic imminent) then it would. But only if that were your worldview. Receiving communication from God is perfectly acceptable for people with faith - that could include a voice. Again, Ive spoken to a lot of people of faith who are convinced that they have heard a voice, but I wouldn't describe them as being mentally ill or lying.

Someone who is already mentally ill and hears voices that confirm their existing beliefs, which they claim to be a Diety would be a different matter. But then the fella who just crashed a van into a group of Muslims in London may be mentally ill and may not be religious. Mental illness is what it is, regardless of the involvement of religion.

He may also just be a racist cunt, but that's another topic.

Personally, I think hearing voices that those around you cannot hear is never a good thing. Whether it's under the blanket of religion or people claiming to have a spiritual connection to another world where they can pass along meaningful messages such as the first letter of their name. Obviously, a lot of the people who do that are knowingly taking the piss in order to extort money from desperate/gullible people, but there are others who truly believe they have the skills and talk to dead people.

However, there is another side to the coin when it comes to religion and that could be one's inner consciousness. If someone is religious and seeking advice, what are the odds that the response they get is really their own voice of reason? If that voice of reason is telling someone to drive a vehicle into others or harm people, I think an unbalanced mental state may account for that. In other instances where the 'voice of reason' drives you to a life change, whether it's vocational, moving house, charity work, helping others etc, etc, it would be very easy for someone religious to misinterpret that as words from God. Perhaps if someone was more rational and in tune with their own self, they may be able to identify it for what it is?

[Which Tyler]

Interesting. A basic article of faith in a deity, or most anyway, is that it is possible to pray to and receive communication from that God.

So, in your opinion, are all people of faith mentally ill? That's a big proportion of the worlds population you are now condemning.

Bolded part: it really isn't

It really is. I have had conversations with perfectly sane people of faith who have been convinced that they have received some kind of communication from God - not always a 2 way verbal chat, but some kind of communication.

Exceptions don't change the rule

[Mikey Brown]

Ha. Finally we've reached the crucial discussion 'is there any way that religion isn't complete bollocks?'

[WaspInWales]

Ha. Finally we've reached the crucial discussion 'is there any way that religion isn't complete bollocks?'

Well, now you mention it...

Mike Brown passed three times in the second test and setup two tries in the process. If that isn't proof of divine intervention, then I don't know what is.

Hallelujah. Praise be.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Sandydragon]

That isn't what I said SD.

Praying to a God is fine. It displays a level of faith that I would not be able to handle without some form of divine intervention that I personally witness, but then again, isn't that the whole idea about faith? Following your chosen book and living your life to its wordings, suggestions and advice also fine...as long as someone's interpretations of those words is to harm others.

I think where mental illness comes into it is when the conversations with God become two-way. Hearing voices is never a good thing, especially when the voice appears to be the all knowing, all powerful creator of the universe and all life.

Take religion out of the equation and if someone told you they had two-way conversations with imaginary people/beings, would that sound perfectly sane?

If you were convinced that God didn't exist (major change of topic imminent) then it would. But only if that were your worldview. Receiving communication from God is perfectly acceptable for people with faith - that could include a voice. Again, Ive spoken to a lot of people of faith who are convinced that they have heard a voice, but I wouldn't describe them as being mentally ill or lying.

Someone who is already mentally ill and hears voices that confirm their existing beliefs, which they claim to be a Diety would be a different matter. But then the fella who just crashed a van into a group of Muslims in London may be mentally ill and may not be religious. Mental illness is what it is, regardless of the involvement of religion.

He may also just be a racist cunt, but that's another topic.

Personally, I think hearing voices that those around you cannot hear is never a good thing. Whether it's under the blanket of religion or people claiming to have a spiritual connection to another world where they can pass along meaningful messages such as the first letter of their name. Obviously, a lot of the people who do that are knowingly taking the piss in order to extort money from desperate/gullible people, but there are others who truly believe they have the skills and talk to dead people.

However, there is another side to the coin when it comes to religion and that could be one's inner consciousness. If someone is religious and seeking advice, what are the odds that the response they get is really their own voice of reason? If that voice of reason is telling someone to drive a vehicle into others or harm people, I think an unbalanced mental state may account for that. In other instances where the 'voice of reason' drives you to a life change, whether it's vocational, moving house, charity work, helping others etc, etc, it would be very easy for someone religious to misinterpret that as words from God. Perhaps if someone was more rational and in tune with their own self, they may be able to identify it for what it is?

If someone were rational, then they would be able to make a judgement call on any input received. Would a mentally ill person reading Mein Kampf (sorry) find justification for murdering Jewish people? Of course they would. I would argue that a majority of people seek views that reinforce their own beliefs, regardless of the source and 'religious people' are probably no more or less susceptible to that than non-religious people.

Some 'religious' people have been talked into committing atrocities, mostly I would suggest by other people. There are plenty of examples of athiests doing the same. Conclusion, some people are more easily led and some people are cunts, regardless of worldview.

[jared_7]

If you were convinced that God didn't exist (major change of topic imminent) then it would. But only if that were your worldview. Receiving communication from God is perfectly acceptable for people with faith - that could include a voice. Again, Ive spoken to a lot of people of faith who are convinced that they have heard a voice, but I wouldn't describe them as being mentally ill or lying.

Someone who is already mentally ill and hears voices that confirm their existing beliefs, which they claim to be a Diety would be a different matter. But then the fella who just crashed a van into a group of Muslims in London may be mentally ill and may not be religious. Mental illness is what it is, regardless of the involvement of religion.

If someone hears a voice that tells them to be loving and caring its not mental illness.

But then a week later that voice tells them to hurt people it is THEN mental illness?

Not really sure that makes any sense at all. The voice hasn't changed, surely? If you say its OK to accept the voice in the first instance you pave the way for accepting it in the second instance. Its at the very least a warning sign. If someone told me there was a voice in their head, that they believed to be a God, I would suggest they get help just in case that voice starts changing its tune. Like WiW suggested, hopefully its just their inner conscious and they need to be aware thats what it is, rather than a divine all-knowing being. It will also get them on the radar of the authorities.

[Sandydragon]

If you were convinced that God didn't exist (major change of topic imminent) then it would. But only if that were your worldview. Receiving communication from God is perfectly acceptable for people with faith - that could include a voice. Again, Ive spoken to a lot of people of faith who are convinced that they have heard a voice, but I wouldn't describe them as being mentally ill or lying.

Someone who is already mentally ill and hears voices that confirm their existing beliefs, which they claim to be a Diety would be a different matter. But then the fella who just crashed a van into a group of Muslims in London may be mentally ill and may not be religious. Mental illness is what it is, regardless of the involvement of religion.

If someone hears a voice that tells them to be loving and caring its not mental illness.

But then a week later that voice tells them to hurt people it is THEN mental illness?

Not really sure that makes any sense at all. The voice hasn't changed, surely? If you say its OK to accept the voice in the first instance you pave the way for accepting it in the second instance. Its at the very least a warning sign. If someone told me there was a voice in their head, that they believed to be a God, I would suggest they get help just in case that voice starts changing its tune. Like WiW suggested, hopefully its just their inner conscious and they need to be aware thats what it is, rather than a divine all-knowing being. It will also get them on the radar of the authorities.

Not what I wrote. I'm referring to someone who is already mentally ill and is receiving confirmation bias via an external source. If that varies in message it doesn't change the underlying fact that the subject has a mental illness.

Your last paragraph suggests to me that because you don't believe in the presence of a God, anyone who does and suggests to you that they have had a message from that God should be referred to a mental health professional? Is that because of your own bias or because you think there is objective evidence that they will go on to harm others?

[jared_7]

If you were convinced that God didn't exist (major change of topic imminent) then it would. But only if that were your worldview. Receiving communication from God is perfectly acceptable for people with faith - that could include a voice. Again, Ive spoken to a lot of people of faith who are convinced that they have heard a voice, but I wouldn't describe them as being mentally ill or lying.

Someone who is already mentally ill and hears voices that confirm their existing beliefs, which they claim to be a Diety would be a different matter. But then the fella who just crashed a van into a group of Muslims in London may be mentally ill and may not be religious. Mental illness is what it is, regardless of the involvement of religion.

If someone hears a voice that tells them to be loving and caring its not mental illness.

But then a week later that voice tells them to hurt people it is THEN mental illness?

Not really sure that makes any sense at all. The voice hasn't changed, surely? If you say its OK to accept the voice in the first instance you pave the way for accepting it in the second instance. Its at the very least a warning sign. If someone told me there was a voice in their head, that they believed to be a God, I would suggest they get help just in case that voice starts changing its tune. Like WiW suggested, hopefully its just their inner conscious and they need to be aware thats what it is, rather than a divine all-knowing being. It will also get them on the radar of the authorities.

Not what I wrote. I'm referring to someone who is already mentally ill and is receiving confirmation bias via an external source. If that varies in message it doesn't change the underlying fact that the subject has a mental illness.

Your last paragraph suggests to me that because you don't believe in the presence of a God, anyone who does and suggests to you that they have had a message from that God should be referred to a mental health professional? Is that because of your own bias or because you think there is objective evidence that they will go on to harm others?

Like WiW pointed out, if someone said they were truly hearing voices you would refer them to a mental health professional. The blanket of religion shouldn't change that.

There are obviously degrees as to the clarity or realness of these voices, ranging from a subtle inner conscious to an actual, two way conversation with a very clear voice possibly telling you to do things. What I'm saying is it is THIS measure by which it should be determined if someone needs help or not, not what the voice is telling them to do. I misread what you were saying it seems on this point.

[WaspInWales]

It would be nice if the voices inside Trump's head advised him to offer condolences and support to the victims of the Finsbury Park attack.

[jared_7]

It would be nice if the voices inside Trump's head advised him to offer condolences and support to the victims of the Finsbury Park attack.

White people doing things doesn't even register on his radar. Look at his reaction, or lack of, to Portland versus London.

[morepork]

Ermmm....yeah. OK. Right on.

Screen Shot 2017-06-20 at 4.17.33 PM.png

[Banquo]

US not for turning....yet...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -in-runoff

[WaspInWales]

US not for turning....yet...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -in-runoff

No surprise really. The first round was the best chance for an upset.

[Banquo]

Solar Wall.............wtf

[Digby]

Solar Wall.............wtf

So in addition to building new roads to allow for construction of a wall, if the wall is actually to be a wall we'd also need power transmission lines, possibly water (?), and the roads would now to allow for ongoing access as the panels would need to be maintained.

Likely building the roads would make it easier once over the wall than having no wall and no roads.

Also how much of the wall would be angled correctly for solar power generation to be even remotely worthwhile?

[Banquo]

Solar Wall.............wtf

So in addition to building new roads to allow for construction of a wall, if the wall is actually to be a wall we'd also need power transmission lines, possibly water (?), and the roads would now to allow for ongoing access as the panels would need to be maintained.

Likely building the roads would make it easier once over the wall than having no wall and no roads.

Also how much of the wall would be angled correctly for solar power generation to be even remotely worthwhile?

and its going to be beautiful and it was Donald's idea and Mexico won't have to pay so much

[WaspInWales]

I love how he takes ownership of ideas and sayings that are clearly not his own.

Some people continue to lap it up though.

He could really shoot someone in the street and not lose support.

[morepork]

Jesus, why give his ranting oxygen? Its not worth analysing.

He thinks wealth = ability, and probably divine right.

Screen shot 2017-06-22 at 8.29.09 AM.png

[Digby]

The Senate healthcare bill is finally published. Doesn't do much in the way of healthcare, other than eviscerate coverage for tens of millions, but on the positive side it's a massive tax cut for those struggling millionaires and billionaires.

Mayn't go anywhere as despite refusing any public scrutiny during the writing of the bill straight out of the blocks they don't have the votes. And really it deserves to fail for an approach to getting a bill onto the Senate floor that is shamefully undemocratic.

[Coco]

The Senate healthcare bill is finally published. Doesn't do much in the way of healthcare, other than eviscerate coverage for tens of millions, but on the positive side it's a massive tax cut for those struggling millionaires and billionaires.

Mayn't go anywhere as despite refusing any public scrutiny during the writing of the bill straight out of the blocks they don't have the votes. And really it deserves to fail for an approach to getting a bill onto the Senate floor that is shamefully undemocratic.

Can you elaborate on this?

[jared_7]

The Senate healthcare bill is finally published. Doesn't do much in the way of healthcare, other than eviscerate coverage for tens of millions, but on the positive side it's a massive tax cut for those struggling millionaires and billionaires.

Mayn't go anywhere as despite refusing any public scrutiny during the writing of the bill straight out of the blocks they don't have the votes. And really it deserves to fail for an approach to getting a bill onto the Senate floor that is shamefully undemocratic.

Can you elaborate on this?

...

1. Retains Obamacare's insurance subsidies. But starting in 2020 this assistance wouldn't be available for most of the working-class who now receive them, nor for anyone ineligible for Medicaid. See #2.

2. Cuts Medicaid more deeply than the House version by giving states an amount per person that grows more slowly than the growth in healthcare costs. This provision won't kick in for 7 years, well past senators' next reelection battles.

3. Ends the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion in 5 years -- gradually reducing the extra federal payments starting in 2021.

4. Continues to protect patients with preexisting conditions, but allows states to reduce insurance coverage to everyone, including people with preexisting conditions.

In other words, all cuts are made through the back door of delays and state waivers. It only looks like a kinder, gentler version of the House repeal of the Affordable Care Act -- but 7 to 10 years from now its result would be even crueler.

[morepork]

The Senate healthcare bill is finally published. Doesn't do much in the way of healthcare, other than eviscerate coverage for tens of millions, but on the positive side it's a massive tax cut for those struggling millionaires and billionaires.

Mayn't go anywhere as despite refusing any public scrutiny during the writing of the bill straight out of the blocks they don't have the votes. And really it deserves to fail for an approach to getting a bill onto the Senate floor that is shamefully undemocratic.

Can you elaborate on this?

Oh come one....

[Lord Lucan]

So whats he done today then?? combed his hair over the wrong way? this campaign of hate against a president has never been seen before, its pathetic to be honest, Clinton lost Trump is president get over it, continually bleating about it isn't going to change that.
You are all jealous, a rich successful man, who doesn't give a fuck about political correctness is the president of the USA, and you can't stand it, too bad.

[Mikey Brown]

So whats he done today then?? combed his hair over the wrong way? this campaign of hate against a president has never been seen before, its pathetic to be honest, Clinton lost Trump is president get over it, continually bleating about it isn't going to change that.
You are all jealous, a rich successful man, who doesn't give a fuck about political correctness is the president of the USA, and you can't stand it, too bad.

Curious. You seem to be able to type but you don't seem to be able to read?

You think the quality and coverage of healthcare is as irrelevant a story as his hairstyle?