The New Year is definitely here !
Submitted by mimi on Sat, 01/02/2021 - 2:38am
Looking forward to this:
[video:https://youtu.be/K4tk7etwBpY]
Thank You to both and all their friends.
Comments
The interview with Marianne Williamson is a golden nugget
for me. I was fully unaware of her and the interview opened my eyes to her and educated me beyond what I could have imagined.
Outsiderism is my tag mow.
https://www.euronews.com/live
Just google Marianne Williamson and Deepak Chopra
You will see what her background and slant is. Chopra is a con artist using science to prop up religious woo. So is Marianne. She's slick. I'll give her that. She had a lot of Hollywood money behind her and that's the only reason she even got on the stage in the first place.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Mimi, could you please
elaborate on what you find impressive about Williamson? To me she seems like a privileged grifter who found a lucrative scam, selling new age pablum to rich Californians. Has she any awareness, never mind understanding, of working class life at all?
Mary Bennett
I lasted less than a minute of the video.
I skipped around a bit to see what all the excitement was about.
In the process, I lowered my previous estimation of Kyle and Krystal.
I will not be able to give them much attention henceforth.
Williamson is quite the scam artist. She has made a good living, so good for her.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
I was impressed with her (Williamson)
She struct me as an old time FDR democrat. Certainly leftist.
The fact that she doesn't bow down to some higher power frightens many people. People are tribal when it comes to supernatural/non- supernatural.
I think she knows atheism is the most hated religion in the world.
IMHO.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
Since when did atheism become a religion?
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
From the agnostic point of view
affirmatively denying the possibility of a higher power in the universe is comparable to a religion affirmatively proclaiming one. They are two sides of the same coin.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
No, they are not.
The difference between the two "sides" as you call it is EVIDENCE. Atheism doesn't affirm the non-existence of any gods out of "faith" or "belief". It denies it out of lack of evidence. The claim that there is/are a god/gods throws the need for evidence out the window or denies all together.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
How Agnostic Differs From Atheist
From Miriam Webster
Based on this definition I see myself more an Agnostic than Atheist, but I also lack any evidence to support either position over the other. I do not know anything with certainty, but have had experiences that point me in the direction of there being much more than it is possible for us to know.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
As I say to my friends who are agnostic...
"Doesn't your butt get sore sitting on that fence?"
Everything that we "know" comes from out own brain and consciousness. There is no outside source of knowledge. The feeling that there is something "higher" or "unknowable" etc. is generated by your own brain and not from outside of it. Mystical experiences are brain generated too. They don't come from some outside source. "God" is brain generated too. That's why when people "pray" to a god, there are just addressing their own brain's imagination, not some entity outside of one's own consciousness.
The claim that gods exist is not based on evidence or reason, it's only based on what one is experiencing in one's own brain, to the argument is moot.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
There is no fence to sit on,
nor choice of side taken required, as I see it. The world is what it is regardless of how we parse it or chose to describe it. How we choose to see and experience is up to each of us. I have many more questions than answers, and feel thankful for that.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
It's a joke.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
It is still a belief system.
Your questioning this is the perfect example of my post. You have already labled it as an outsider.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
Asking you to explain your statement on atheism is not
labelling your post as an "outsider". It's simply asking you to explain your characterization of atheism as a religion.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Perhaps I was unclear
It wasn't the post as labled outside. It is atheism that is seen as outside the norm. An outlier. The other.
The point I was trying to make was Williamson's evasion in matters of religion. She didn't appear to jump fully into Jewism or non- belief, riding the fence with spiritual.
For the record, with a universe as enormous as it is, there must be a higher or greater power than us losers out there somewhere.
Us homo sapiens are shitting in our own kitchen fer sur!
How inteligent is that?
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
Williamson and her cohorts make claims about the nature
of the world that are totally unproveable and useless to us in terms of knowledge. Her crime, and the crimes of people like Deepak Chopra is the attempt to use science (like quantum physics) to make those claims. That's where the con artistry comes in.
What do you mean by a "higher" or "greater" power than us? Those terms are quite unclear.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Oh, just saw your comments on Marianne Williamson now.
I mean, outsiderism makes me blind, obviously. Chopra I remember having heard of him many, many years ago. Couldn't stand him then. So, whatever,
Really, who is a scam and who is not, is beyond my paygrade and viewing power. I can't recognize any little grifter around over the pond. Too many are there and the whole baloney also doesn't interest me that much.
Sorry for having posted the wrong video for your sensibilities. I am going home now, resign and dig my head in the sand in shame. Like Trump.
What a frigging day. I need more fruit vodka. Being sober is just torture.
https://www.euronews.com/live
Well I certainly was not the only one to point out
Ms. Williamson as a fraud in this comment thread. My reply was meant to provide you with information, not cause you to dig a hole and crawl in it. However, if you insist on taking it personally, I'd be glad to join you in that hole and bring my bourbon!
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin