… be completely and utterly dependent on the government for provision of your needs
OR
be completely and utterly dependent on God (even if atheist etc) for provision of your needs?
that has got to be the least fun “would you rather…” question ever asked
In this scenario god has manifested itself and can provide material needs like food, shelter, protection?
Either way: God.
Government is a bunch of people, and therefore has all the short comings of man.
If I’m going to be a slave with no freedom, I’m going to be a slave to an omnipotent, not a bunch of stooges who may or may not know their ass from their elbow.
Neither.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Neither.[/quote]
lol, that isn’t a viable answer. But it is the obvious one.
Just play along dman it.
[quote]Yogi wrote:
that has got to be the least fun “would you rather…” question ever asked[/quote]
Hahaha…no kidding.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Either way: God.
Government is a bunch of people, and therefore has all the short comings of man.
If I’m going to be a slave with no freedom, I’m going to be a slave to an omnipotent, not a bunch of stooges who may or may not know their ass from their elbow. [/quote]
Bingo. God regardless.
I’d rather be dependent upon myself, thanks.
Keep your God and gov’t.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Either way: God.
Government is a bunch of people, and therefore has all the short comings of man.
If I’m going to be a slave with no freedom, I’m going to be a slave to an omnipotent, not a bunch of stooges who may or may not know their ass from their elbow. [/quote]
Bingo. God regardless.[/quote]
I don’t know, it would be tough to stage a coup or mount a revolution when your master is omnipotent. I think I’d take my chances with the incompetent stooges.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Neither.[/quote]
lol, that isn’t a viable answer. But it is the obvious one.
Just play along dman it. [/quote]
Can I choose which god? Because if it were Dionysus or Aphrodite doing the providing, that might not be so bad.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
I’d rather be dependent upon myself, thanks.
Keep your God and gov’t.[/quote]
Sadly, this was not a choice offered in the game.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Either way: God.
Government is a bunch of people, and therefore has all the short comings of man.
If I’m going to be a slave with no freedom, I’m going to be a slave to an omnipotent, not a bunch of stooges who may or may not know their ass from their elbow. [/quote]
Bingo. God regardless.[/quote]
I don’t know, it would be tough to stage a coup or mount a revolution when your master is omnipotent. I think I’d take my chances with the incompetent stooges. [/quote]
You’re 100% correct. However, being a slave would likely destroy me, and I would be the first, too impatient to work up a rebellion. Therefore I’d be fed to the dogs early in the first week by the government as a warning to anyone else that didn’t like it.
With an omnipotent, I’d just give it all up and be like “fuck it, it’s omnipotent, just try and find the silver lining.”
I’d allow God to “break me” and live. I’d die before I was a slave to man. And I rather enjoy being alive.
Invalid question. You cannot remove the creator and leave the creation. It?s the same problem “scientific” testing has with the god issue. By definition there can be no control. Talking about relying on the government without god is like asking about colors with the hypothetical that photons don?t exist.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Invalid question. You cannot remove the creator and leave the creation. It?s the same problem “scientific” testing has with the god issue. By definition there can be no control. Talking about relying on the government without god is like asking about colors with the hypothetical that photons don?t exist.[/quote]
Damn it. You’re not playing along either. lol
Easy. I would declare independence, form the Republic of twojar (bordered on all sides by Montana, or maybe Idaho), and be dependent on government. MY government. Of ME.
Do I win?
but OBAMA is god?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Invalid question. You cannot remove the creator and leave the creation. It?s the same problem “scientific” testing has with the god issue. By definition there can be no control. Talking about relying on the government without god is like asking about colors with the hypothetical that photons don?t exist.[/quote]
Damn it. You’re not playing along either. lol
[/quote]
I once had to write an essay in high school depicting utopia. I ended writing a proof of why any utopia was impossible.
But really and truly in this case I cannot conceivably imagine the government without god concept.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Invalid question. You cannot remove the creator and leave the creation. It?s the same problem “scientific” testing has with the god issue. By definition there can be no control. Talking about relying on the government without god is like asking about colors with the hypothetical that photons don?t exist.[/quote]
Damn it. You’re not playing along either. lol
[/quote]
I once had to write an essay in high school depicting utopia. I ended writing a proof of why any utopia was impossible.
But really and truly in this case I cannot conceivably imagine the government without god concept.[/quote]
This is kind along the lines of what I was thinking. If you believe in a creator I feel like you pretty much are subscribe to the second choice. A least to some degree or on some level anyway.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I once had to write an essay in high school depicting utopia. I ended writing a proof of why any utopia was impossible.
[/quote]
this does not surprise me in the slightest.