Agnostics/Atheists and maybe why they support Ron Paul

[BagOfEyebrows]

I wasn't going to post to this forum anymore, but I needed to share some stuff as a 'last post' that came to mind and heart over the past few days, because I think it will help unite us and give us a better understanding of what is happening. Apologies in advance if this initially offends anybody - it is not my intent to offend. I blogged it with love, and I share it on this forum with love.


~A Former Agnostic Perspective~

A lot of Libertarians are atheists. Some are Christian. Some, like me, were/are agnostic (re: maybe, not sure, no conclusive evidence either way.)

One thing I never doubted, though, is the existance of a man named Jesus Christ. In fact, when I talk with atheists, they, too, have overwhelmingly agreed that a man named Jesus existed, and that the principles themselves are genius and flawless.

Which got me to thinking... what if God is just those principles?

What if that is the equation by which we all agree that liberty and freedom and individualism as well as collectively seeking out 'good will towards mankind' as being only possible via those principles?

P+A=L+F Principles and Action equals Liberty and Freedom

I think a lot of people have had the principles but forgot to 'act' upon them and with them. The principles also get... manipulated and twisted up. In government, in media, and... in churches, the very place that expresses to hold them the most dearly and sacred. I think they forget to hold up their decisions to the light of those principles, as we have done in government with our laws and our bills and our ammendments.

Why would atheists and agnostics come to the defense of the Constitution(s) of the USA so strongly, when it was written with the principles set forth in Christianity? Maybe it's because we ARE born with those principles - and no religion has dibs on those principles as those principles are seperate from any Earthly titles we want to give to them. Some Christians might think that their religion best adheres to the principles... but, as God and Jesus Christ themselves explained, those principles are in individual hearts and minds, they do not have to belong to a collective in order to exist.

Would God, or those principles, cease to exist should the entire planet Earth become atheists? NO. Those principles ARE God. The more I think about it, the more I think I've been wrong all along in my debates with and about God - he does exist, after all - and I have actually believed in him, had faith in him and honored him all along, too. Just not the bible version... not the tv version... not the version of him that I could not logically come to terms with.

God, not as a 'being' so much as a set of definite rules, laws, and logical guide to survival in a complex universe... that might be it. Not just a physical survival, but a mental and spiritual survival, even without a 'religion', one can abide by those principles and have complete 'faith' in those principles, and in essence, actually aknowledge the existance of God simply because they aknowledge the perfection of those principles.

God is perfect. He is those principles. They are flawless. They are common sense and logical.

If God is those principles, then I'll have to state, right now, that I do actually think God exists - not the God laid out in the Bible, as I think he got misrepresented there, but as those principles that are explained in the State and Federal Constitutions of the USA.


Life can not exist (for long) unless thoe principles (re: God) are adhered to and honored and ACTED upon - the principles are: don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal. Don't judge - not even those that break those principles - it's not your job. That is the job of God, those principles, the individual themselves. Your job is to lead by example, and to help folks back up, to re-embrace the principles, even when they have deviated from them. For their very survival - and for yours.

So there's my little mornin' ramble about how I came to terms with the fact I'm no longer Agnostic. I just don't have a religious sect or church to describe my relationship with God. It's personal.

Thank you, God - 40 years I struggled with this. Half way to 80, you decide to finally end the debate with your wisdom and good sense of humor & compassion. You win. Yep, I believe in you. Yep, I honor you. We're cool with each other now... there's no more debate. You are those principles. I love you.

Some other thoughts (and there will be more because this is making more sense to me as it washes over me in peace)

1. I think God realized he was misrepresented in the Bible, and it's why he allowed the creation of the state Constitutions in the USA -

2. Atheists and Agnostics who defend the Constitution are defending the existance of God - just as Christians, Catholics and any other religious sect has -

3. God is actually in each of us - which cracks me up, because I've been thinking it, defending it, and abiding by it and yet denying it for most of my life

4. Governments are severing our connections with each other (more on this next time I blog) as well as with God/Those Principles - but, "Forgive them, Lord, for they know not what they do" - or whatever it was that Jesus said as he was crucified - it's not my job to judge those who are mangling up the Constitution by forgetting to hold up EVERYTHING to the light of the principles/God - it is my job to try to lead by example and with action.

5. God must have been chuckling to himself these past 4 decades as I debated his existance while simultaneously defending it. All morning I've been laughing to myself and at myself, humbled. Hahaha - man, God is a great guy.

6. I can't be the only one who has come to this conclusion - unite. We've got so much work to do.

 

[Xenophage]

As an atheist, my answer is "no, no, and no" to your post... maybe a few more "no's" as well for good measure.

That doesn't change the fact that we're political allies, however, and I don't really want to argue religion or philosophy with you.

There are many varied reasons that atheists might support Ron Paul, but as for me (and I imagine quite a few others) it is simply the condition of a rationalist philosophy. My atheism and my libertarianism are closely related: I trust in logic.

 

[RevolutionSD]

As an atheist, my answer is "no, no, and no" to your post... maybe a few more "no's" as well for good measure.

That doesn't change the fact that we're political allies, however, and I don't really want to argue religion or philosophy with you.

There are many varied reasons that atheists might support Ron Paul, but as for me (and I imagine quite a few others) it is simply the condition of a rationalist philosophy. My atheism and my libertarianism are closely related: I trust in logic.

The notion of religion and the notion of government are currently dying. The new generation consists of mostly atheists. There is no daddy up in the sky and there is no daddy government that is going to take care of you. Freewill is why us atheists are attracted to the RP campaign.

 

[Xenophage]

The notion of religion and the notion of government are currently dying. The new generation consists of mostly atheists. There is no daddy up in the sky and there is no daddy government that is going to take care of you. Freewill is why us atheists are attracted to the RP campaign.

Amen brotha

 

[Conza88]

"Religion does not have a monopoly on morality" ~ me.

 

[robert4rp08]

Freeeeeeeeeeeeedommmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

 

[Conza88]

In respect to the potential future of this thread. Uh oh.

​

 

[wgadget]

I'm a Christian for Ron Paul, but I have a new appreciation for atheism due to Ron Paul's logic!

: )

 

[yongrel]

Yeah... this ain't grassroots.

 

[amy31416]

Mr. B.O. Eyebrows--

Thoughtful post, I see where you're coming from. Atheists, as you might see in the response to your post, are generally much more hardline about the notion of God. Agnostics, like myself, are a bit more fluid and possibly have a shred of optimism that there might be god in some inconceivable form and are, therefore, more open to some metaphysical possibilities like the one that you espouse.

I'm glad that you found something that works for you. I have simply accepted that it's something I'll never know and that works for me.

That said, yeah, this isn't grassroots. Either off-topic or hot-topics, depending on how civil this thread stays. Oh, and I still think you need to befriend yourself with Mitt Romney's Eyebrows.

 

[Roadrcr]

Ever notice Ron Paul has not had any preacher drama as of yet ? I am an aethiest and strongly believe in seperation of church and state. If you want to be religious by all means do so thats your right. But do not make me abide by your gods laws and that is only one of the reasons I love Ron Paul .

 

[1000-points-of-fright]

BagOfEyebrows,

You contradict yourself. In the beginning of your post, you describe God "not as a 'being' so much as a set of definite rules, laws, and logical guide to survival in a complex universe". Then later you ascribe to God the qualities of a conscious being such as thought, a sense of humor, being a great guy.

Which is it? As set of unwavering truths or a great guy with a sense of humor?

 

[BagOfEyebrows]

Mr. B.O. Eyebrows--

Thoughtful post, I see where you're coming from. Atheists, as you might see in the response to your post, are generally much more hardline about the notion of God. Agnostics, like myself, are a bit more fluid and possibly have a shred of optimism that there might be god in some inconceivable form and are, therefore, more open to some metaphysical possibilities like the one that you espouse.

I'm glad that you found something that works for you. I have simply accepted that it's something I'll never know and that works for me.

That said, yeah, this isn't grassroots. Either off-topic or hot-topics, depending on how civil this thread stays. Oh, and I still think you need to befriend yourself with Mitt Romney's Eyebrows.

it's ok if the mods want to off-topic it - I wouldn't be offended or mind. I understand where the atheists are coming from - my mind was leaning towards atheism, but the not knowing either way kept me wondering, searching for an answer. For some reason, the idea of the pricniples being God stopped all mental questioning for me. (so much for 'last post', lol)

Mitt Romney's Eyebrows makes me laugh - my nickname just tends to creep people out when they think about it. I've a dark sense of humor.

 

[amy31416]

it's ok if the mods want to off-topic it - I wouldn't be offended or mind. I understand where the atheists are coming from - my mind was leaning towards atheism, but the not knowing either way kept me wondering, searching for an answer. For some reason, the idea of the pricniples being God stopped all mental questioning for me. (so much for 'last post', lol)

Mitt Romney's Eyebrows makes me laugh - my nickname just tends to creep people out when they think about it. I've a dark sense of humor.

Oops! It's Mitt Romney's Sideburns, not eyebrows. I've always appreciated a dark sense of humor, your name made me laugh, it didn't creep me out.

Whatever way you come to it, it's nice to take a break from all the mental gymnastics involved in the whole question and just decide to live the best way you can on your own terms.

Why last post? Personally, I like reading alternate views on most anything.

 

[nate895]

The notion of religion and the notion of government are currently dying. The new generation consists of mostly atheists. There is no daddy up in the sky and there is no daddy government that is going to take care of you. Freewill is why us atheists are attracted to the RP campaign.

Being young myself and living in ultra-liberal Washington, I can say with certainty that the vast majority of young people are Christians. There are a few who aren't, but overall, I'd say it's 75-80% Christian.

 

[BagOfEyebrows]

BagOfEyebrows,

You contradict yourself. In the beginning of your post, you describe God "not as a 'being' so much as a set of definite rules, laws, and logical guide to survival in a complex universe". Then later you ascribe to God the qualities of a conscious being such as thought, a sense of humor, being a great guy.

Which is it? As set of unwavering truths or a great guy with a sense of humor?

I've been trying to figure that out myself - because you're right. It's a conradiction of sorts. Right when I thought I had it 'all figured out' that God was 'just those principles', omnipotent (sp?) and all that fit right in with it, being born with 'Jesus in your heart' and "God" inside you - fit right in as well. Then, without even realizing it was happening, I started smiling and thinking of God in 'being' terms (right when I'd determined he wasn't), because it's 'inside of us' as humans - the principles, we as 'beings' - and they meshed.

Which, yep, makes no sense, but at the same time is just the way it is (at least in my nutty noggin) - that's the part of it that I'll spend probably another 40 years sorting out.

Just a theory about God/Principles - could be wrong, but wanted to share it.

 

[sophocles07]

One thing I never doubted, though, is the existance of a man named Jesus Christ. In fact, when I talk with atheists, they, too, have overwhelmingly agreed that a man named Jesus existed, and that the principles themselves are genius and flawless.

I would not call them genius or flawless; they are good, though. I’m not even sure they were novel at the time he lived. Plato and many others have all outlined and argued for similar moralities; reciprocation, action from accordance with reason and goodwill. Flawless? Anything with the taint of the supernatural as its justification is flawed; his ethical principles are self-evident, there need be no god involved.

I think a lot of people have had the principles but forgot to 'act' upon them and with them. The principles also get... manipulated and twisted up. In government, in media, and... in churches, the very place that expresses to hold them the most dearly and sacred. I think they forget to hold up their decisions to the light of those principles, as we have done in government with our laws and our bills and our ammendments.

I agree. One can eat Whoppers and vote Bush twice and call oneself a Christian; it’s ridiculous.

Why would atheists and agnostics come to the defense of the Constitution(s) of the USA so strongly, when it was written with the principles set forth in Christianity? Maybe it's because we ARE born with those principles - and no religion has dibs on those principles as those principles are seperate from any Earthly titles we want to give to them. Some Christians might think that their religion best adheres to the principles... but, as God and Jesus Christ themselves explained, those principles are in individual hearts and minds, they do not have to belong to a collective in order to exist.

Agree here too. Morality-ethics are natural to man; they do not necessitate a godhead.

Would God, or those principles, cease to exist should the entire planet Earth become atheists? NO. Those principles ARE God. The more I think about it, the more I think I've been wrong all along in my debates with and about God - he does exist, after all - and I have actually believed in him, had faith in him and honored him all along, too. Just not the bible version... not the tv version... not the version of him that I could not logically come to terms with.

I don’t see why you need to call it “God.” You’re essentially invoking Wordsworth’s “the human heart by which we live” idea; the kingdom of god is within; etc. Why stretch it out to a supernatural projection?

Some other thoughts (and there will be more because this is making more sense to me as it washes over me in peace)

1. I think God realized he was misrepresented in the Bible, and it's why he allowed the creation of the state Constitutions in the USA –

This is riddled with mal-logic. God “realized” something? Wouldn’t he, flawless, omnipotent and perfect, KNOW these things instantly and outside of time? I don’t understand at all why you say that God is the principles, but then you still hang on to this anthropomorphized dream-figure who “acts” just as men do—“realizes” things, cheats on Hera, punishes Job, creates Constitutions.

2. Atheists and Agnostics who defend the Constitution are defending the existance of God - just as Christians, Catholics and any other religious sect has –

I disagree, but at least you’re finding a way to justify complete adherence to the Constitution.

3. God is actually in each of us - which cracks me up, because I've been thinking it, defending it, and abiding by it and yet denying it for most of my life

My disagreement here is one of semantics, phrasing. You can say “God” is within each of us, but I think the word GOD is so meaningless—1,000,000 people use it meaning something different—that I would prefer not use it; why relax onto wasted abstractions when you can describe something much more precisely and variously. I mean, Hindus would agree, but it means something totally different; Rimbaud, who I think was an atheist or agnostic, would agree, but not in the sense of a Christian God in your heart.

5. God must have been chuckling to himself these past 4 decades as I debated his existance while simultaneously defending it. All morning I've been laughing to myself and at myself, humbled. Hahaha - man, God is a great guy.

A laughing god; you ARE a Hindu.

Have you read Jane Harrison, James Frazer, Joseph Campbell, Carl Jung, or William Blake? You might like it (they all have similar, though not exactly similar, views on religion as something “within” but do not reduce it to “God”).

 

[Kludge]

Atheists, as you might see in the response to your post, are generally much more hardline about the notion of God. Agnostics, like myself, are a bit more fluid and possibly have a shred of optimism that there might be god in some inconceivable form and are, therefore, more open to some metaphysical possibilities like the one that you espouse.

Bah... Agnosticism can't exist in a rational world. For you to believe something to exist, wouldn't you need PROOF - evidence - a formula?

I tell you a purple spaghetti monster that can shoot death rays from it's eyes exists - Wouldn't you disagree with me pending proof? Why is there any difference in matters of religion?

Sure, Satan may be my neighbor, but don't tell me he is without proof.



Paul's positions parallel with my own in many cases. I, and many others, are willing to compromise and vote Paul as a moderate - a uniter.

 

[BagOfEyebrows]

Oops! It's Mitt Romney's Sideburns, not eyebrows. I've always appreciated a dark sense of humor, your name made me laugh, it didn't creep me out.

Whatever way you come to it, it's nice to take a break from all the mental gymnastics involved in the whole question and just decide to live the best way you can on your own terms.

Why last post? Personally, I like reading alternate views on most anything.

I'd rather read/listen/learn than join most discussions the past year or two. This forum has linked me to some of the most incredible videos and online websites for study/learning - if I start yapping, I'll miss out on some more learning/research. There's a lotta resources here, too, for off-the-computer stuff and ways to promote the message of Liberty.

It's kinda like a mini university here, if utilized in all the ways possible.

 

[libertarian4321]

Sorry it took so long to reply- I had to use a Q-tip to clean the vomit out from between the keys of my keyboard- and that ain't easy!

I support Ron Paul because he understands the Constitution, it has nothing to do with God, Neptune, Jupiter, Jesus, the Great Pumpkin, Allah, or any other fantasy character/imaginary friend.

I have nothing against people believing in the religion of their choice, however. Heck, I like fantasy, too- Tolkien, etc.

BTW, there is plenty of "thought" in the Bible that is far from "perfect" or "flawless", but I guess thats another topic and certainly has nothing to do with supporting Ron Paul.