6 votes

Stefan Molyneux Animation: Amazon Boobs, Ancient Gods and the End of Evil

Stefan Molyneux presents: Amazon Boobs, Ancient Gods and the End of Evil


http://youtu.be/VQxqCw0B6Co



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I FEAR HIS FANTASY OF

I FEAR HIS FANTASY OF NON-VIOLENCE WORLD CAN ONLY BE COMPRISED OF CHILDREN, OFF-SPRING, SPAWN OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY IN SUBMISSION. FOR HIM HE MUST THINK EVIL IS MANUFACTURED. IN MY DOTAGE I'VE COME TO REALIZE THAT EVIL IS INNATE... OR AT LEAST RECOGNITION THAT IT EXISTS. DEBATE AND MEETING OF THE MINDS IS A LONG WAY OFF I FEAR UNLESS THERE IS SOME DNA ENGINEERING...(like I'm kidding?)THROUGH THE AGES, THE MESSAGE SEEMS TO BE THE SAME...WE CAN KILL OFF ALL THE MESSENGERS YOU LIKE BUT THE MESSAGE PREVAILS.

What are you talking about?

What are you talking about? He isn't talking about a society with no violence what so ever. He is talking about a society that isn't based on violence, huge difference. Of course you have to have some way to enforce rules, the difference is that we wont have rulers.

Anarchy = no rulers
Anarchy ≠ no rules

Do the two negatives cancel each other?

(Anarchy ≠ no rules) = Anarchy rules? :D

In a truly free society no

In a truly free society no one is forcing you to abandon your religious freedoms, as long as your religious dogmas don't hinder anyone else's freedoms. If you feel the need for a religious basis in society then keep it. As most people on this site should understand he is using the non-aggression principle to follow a philosophic argument of the neccessity of the state. As long as your religious beliefs or dogmas dont violate the non-aggression principle you are free to do whatever you want.

He is using religions history of time and time again violating the non-aggression principle and how society abandoned those ideas to make a society more free. If that offends you, maybe you dont understand the non-aggression principle?

Good video but not sure it was necessary to talk down religions

No need to offend people. I'm not religious myself and understand his point of view but abandoning religious dogmas is a personal, subjective journey of SELF discovery and should not be imposed onto others.

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Upon watching it again...

I realize that his intended audience is generally his fellow atheists, those that have already shed overt religious delusion. Molyneux sees many statists that claim to be atheists. Molyneux considers the terms "atheist" and "statist" to be mutually exclusive. His message is to those who already embrace atheism yet still embrace The State. He says if you embrace The State you are not yet an atheist, keep going, you're still in delusion, keep shedding. However covert, Statism [or Nationalism] is the nastiest religion of all, the grand-daddy, the alpha vampire, drive a steak through its heart and lay it to rest.

"steak"? -oops! :D

funny. Knowing how much Molyneux

funny. Knowing how much Molyneux detests religion, I quite noticed now careful he seemed to not actively engage offense as such. Kind of a tight rope for him as he tried to remain focused on The State. The two subjects are tightly knit together in his mind.

Molyneux is right about 90% of the time, and I too don't

necessarily like how he comes down on religion so hard. Idolatry is of course destructive, so I wonder if he's taken into consideration the fact that the 10 commandments decree that no images of God should be made at all?

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

anyone who enjoys this...

might also enjoy this episode of The Tom Woods Show

Companion reading material - 'People of the Lie'

by M. Scott Peck:

http://www.amazon.com/People-Lie-Hope-Healing-Human/dp/06848...

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

I like his story.

I admit to doing double-takes and rewinding to better catch the contexts in which he twice used the term "myth". Both were well put, upon review. Had I scripted it myself I may have contexted the second reference with, "When myth transcends delusion..," but hey, his terms do just fine in making the point [getting the word out :D]. The presentation is top-shelf. Thanks for posting!

Not bad. I think it slanted

Not bad. I think it slanted toward Atheism a little too much though, especially denouncing local culture's religions. Man has created gods for a reason as part of our collective consciousness and cultural identity. Without the State, we will need this cultural identity to help bond society.

I did like the part about raising children though, the first thing we need to do is get our kids out of Public Schools. The government indoctrination in conjunction with bullying and social pressure to conform to the Hollywood counterfeit culture creation is destroying our future. (Interesting fact- the “Holly Wood” is the type of wood traditionally used by magicians and sorcerers for wands, it also grows around the Georgia Guidestones)

We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

So how do you negotiate

between a cultural icon that acts as some social glue, and a superstition that is used to coerce people, and to support authority. King's used religion to justify their tyranny, as do nation states today. Popes and priests were as abusive to people as the state.

I'm having trouble seeing how you keep one without the getting the other.

Excellent Question

Most of the power you mentioned stemmed from government using religion as a tool to control the masses and the organized religions have in turn used state power.

In a free society we should be able to worship who we choose. The God(s) we choose to worship are not what is controlling people, it is people using religion. In some cases, culture and religion can be a counter to tyranny.

You do make a good point though about religion being a double edged sword.

Take Christianity for example-

There are many instances in Jesus' teachings that speak of the non-aggression principle and the concepts of our rights being endowed by our creator. The fact we have many Christians here on the DP is evidence of that.

On the other hand, priests have often followed the soldiers into occupied lands throughout history and have destroyed local cultures to more easily subjugate people ie the Conquistadors.

I think in the end it all falls back to the non-aggression principle that must supersede any beliefs. Although many dogmas are built on this, (but are often not followed) such as the Biblical Golden Rule, Karma, Three Fold Law etc. People may worship what they like but only on their free will and not force others into their beliefs.

We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

...

I can't help it, it's in my nature.

All rights reserved and no rights waived.