0 votes

What is the purpose of this forum?

The title of this forum is Religion, and its on a liberty website. I had a post discussing how a religion is at odds with liberty and it was locked.. So I ask, what is the purpose of having a religious forum? To pat each other on the back and be hive minded?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

The original purpose....

of the Daily Paul was to provide communications to help people UNITE behind Ron Paul's presidential bid and message of liberty through small govt, less war and sound money.

The original purpose of the religion forum was to isolate DIVISIVE squabbling over religion off to it's own corner. Along the lines of, "if you are going to squabble do it over here out of the way".

Two points:

1) Nystrom was being gracious when he created the religion forum since it did not and does not serve to unite people behind Ron Paul.
2) Ron Paul is deeply religious since childhood. He claims to be "born again" and that he has "committed his life to Christ" and claims his political views are based on Christ's teachings.

To create forum posts like "How is it even possible that christians/atheists/hindus/mystics/etc can be libertarians or supporters of individual libertary?" is about as extreme an abuse of the original purpose and spirit of this website as it can get. And is an abuse of Nystrom's graciousness in allowing the religion forum to even exist.

How the various worldviews affect the growth and establishment of individual liberty is an important debate and should and must take place. It's just not the purpose of the Daily Paul. Which was/is to unite people behind the ideas of small govt, less war and sound money regardless of which worldview got them there.

~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

What is the purpose of this forum?

Evidently for you it is someone activated one of their Alt accounts they have evidently been using to upvote/downvote for the past 1 year 8 months and 27 days.

Probably a Chris Christie/Hillary supporter who doesn't want to see Christians and Libertarians start to like each other, so tries to sow dissent at every opportunity.

As for your other topic, G_d is not human, so how can we apply Libertarian principles to non-human entities?
Must gerbils follow Austrian Economic principles?
Shall Zeus henceforth hurl balanced budgets?
Will all beavers be required to quit cooperating and learn to compete?

Your argument is fail.

I don't appreciate you making

I don't appreciate you making such wild accusations about who I am in your character assassination. Have some class, and while your at it respect Nystrom's wishes for this conversation to not continue, while realizing you didn't even read half of my original post.

If Nystrom didn't want...

this conversation to continue you would not see the big fat red "add comment" bar or "reply" in the bottom right corner of each comment. Nystrom knows how to make them both disappear.

I don't appreciate you trying to divide people who are for small govt, less war and sound money. Since we are a small minority we need all the uniting we can muster at this critical time.

~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

Woah you are a mind reader?

Woah you are a mind reader? That's a cool trick buddy. I think you might need to practice your skills some more though.

I don't know anymore what the

I don't know anymore what the purpose is...

I thought the purpose of this forum was to discuss anything that had to do with freedom - including disagreement, but now the refs are throwing their yellow hankies all over the field to the detriment of the game itself.

As Marv Levy would say, stop being, "over officious jerks," and let us say what we want to say and let the game play on instead of acting like a freaking bunch of lame black and white zebras pretending to know it all.

No offense, but the officiating sucks here at the Daily Paul.

Religious holding happens on almost every post, but seldom gets called. The moment someone rips off a big run of a rant, it gets called back for a 10 yard holding penalty and deleted from the official stat sheet on a phantom call.

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.


"Where would you rather be than right here, right now?"


They that give up liberty for security deserve neither.

I thought the idea of the

I thought the idea of the voting system was to regulate what people saw.. unless they went specifically searching. Edgar Allen Poe is rather dark.. I wouldn't call his words vomit.

As for the responses to the previous thread, our supreme dictator locked that thread. If anyone would like to continue you can PM me in the chat.

Do you have any...

ideas or suggestions on how to unite people behind small govt, less war and sound money? Regardless of what worldview brought them to entertain or hold those ideals?

~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

Rational arguments. Sadly we

Rational arguments. Sadly we have people who think they can read minds and the like in this community.

You sound like...

Charlie Brown's teacher.

~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

I imagine I would to someone

I imagine I would to someone as yourself. Party on yolo mother fucker yaaeaahh

Michael Nystrom's picture

Good. Thanks for sharing.

BTW, I'm the one who unpublished your 1000 word rant on how much you hate New York, which begins:

If anyone hasn't heard yet, New York State sucks.

That is, unless you're a worker who receives a check courtesy of the taxpayer funded state government bloodletting monster sucking the life out of what's left of the private sector economy outside of their castles in NYC.

I've just about had it with this hellhole of a state I call home. The only thing that keeps me here is my family. For every friend I have, 4 left for greener pastures down south and never came back...don't blame them. Why would they ever come back to get tortured?

Because it sounds like someone spewing VOMIT all over the forum and adds absolutely nothing of value to anyone. Not to mention that it goes on for another 800 words!

Hate New York, Hate Hot Weather.

"Hey here's something negative, I think I'll post it on the Daily Paul!"

Screw that. Telling the world what you hate does not enrich the world.

If you're upset about the "officiating" here, then take it to the wasteland that is Facebook. No doubt they'll be happy to have it.

This will be a tough...

…rule to not slip up on occasionally, since philosophy and theology are such central things that form our views on every topic imaginable. Guess we'll just have to do our best to go into 'public school' mode with our comments here, with a secular filter. :)

But I suppose this sort of goes along with my feeling earlier today that maybe I should go silent on these topics here and internalize it a bit more at this point anyway.

Passion for metaphysics and the like is probably just a turn-off and an irritation a lot of times. And maybe sometimes the stillness of solitary meditation on deeper topics is better for a season.

Love and Peace to you all, whatever those words mean. :)

I was interested in your

I was interested in your post, ItMakesYou..., I read it then stepped away for dinner, looking forward to formulating some thoughts for you. I came back see the thread closed.

I guess most folks here are bored by such discussions. I'm not. I'm sorry that so many people voted your explorations down on your original thread. Seems kind of weird to me. You were asking a legitimate question, giving evidence of your struggle. A series of questions and a struggle that has gone on since man first confronted God, by the way.

You're in good company. The Christians I've admired most are those who have contended with God on these very issues.

On to what I would have written had your early post been open.

Yes, there are many, many passages in the Bible that go down hard, or come back up on the way down. God does terrible things. He aggresses. You will find a million voices telling you to stop this line of inquiry and most of them will use some version of Paul's "who are you, oh man" and "we see through a glass darkly." In other words, don't ask because you won't get answers you'd understand.

And yet...the Bible is a huge text blooming with difficulties, with calls to reason, to the amazing capacities of man, to man's culpability before God. It calls readers to confront a God that comes off as not so sweet, compassionate. Dare we say it? Not so moral as we aspire to be. (Were I god, I would never had hardened Pharaoh's heart so that he changed his mind and refused to let the Israelites go, therefore leading to the killing of masses of people and even innocent babies. Were I god, I would never kill Job's wife as part of some bet with my own underling-angel turned knee-high nemesis.) The list goes on. You don't even need to take verses out of context to prove the point.

God doesn't conform to our ideas of morality. God, however he expressed himself in the written words that have come down to us as the Bible, rubbed that fact in our faces -- over and over. When you attempt to relate to God truthfully, you have to contend with that.

I suppose I shouldn't say what I'm going to say (let others be where they've chosen to be, live and let live, and all that) but I'll say it anyway. (One thing my lifelong attempt to carve out a relationship with God has taught me is that there's a place for dissent, for bucking the crowd and the trends. And that that place is always with those who try to tell you how you're allowed to relate to God. Because God never assigned such sheepish behavior to man. Throughout the Bible, God favors the rebels, the skeptics, the upstarts, the contenders. Right? Adam and Eve rebelling with the fruit. Abraham, the skeptic for most of his life. Jacob, who wrestles. David who sins any time he gets a chance. Job, who speaks the final words from man to God, saying, "Sure, you're super powerful. I know it now that you've taken everything form me," in other words, calling fowl. The list goes on)

So to say it: Christians who want to chastise anyone for having a tough time with God's dismal moral record in the Bible, are the worst. They're of the sort Jesus condemned as the most wicked, preventing others from entering the kingdom of God.

The kingdom is a relationship with God. It's not a set of stuff you have to believe. It's not a book. If you find the bits you get from the Bible rich with problems, you contend with God about them. That's a relationship. An honest, worthy relationship.

Far more honest and worthy than the paper-over-the-hard-parts folks are willing to engage in. Far more like the sinful, terrible patriarchs of the Bible. Far more like those folks God actually seems to find interesting.

You can take that into account as you read the Bible. This isn't a text that's been scrubbed and redacted. It's unsightly and upsetting. An honest reader must contend. The Bible demands it; God demands it. I suppose that's reaching. I suppose one can simply stuff away the questions (perhaps even be of a sort who never had any to begin with), but throughout the Bible, God seems to be all about those who have a little more to offer in the relationship.

God seems to be into those folks who exercise their liberty at this lowest and highest order.

Your questions are valid. Thinking Christians have wrestled with them for centuries. There are many attempts at good answers, none of them satisfy me. I don't think they're supposed to. Our contentions are with God and we will get what we demand. Eventually. And with all the responsibility that the freedom God so dearly loves comes burdened and blessed with.

wolfe's picture

From what I read...

It was baiting Christians. I agreed with most everything he said and could take it much further than he did. I was a fundamentalist Christan for 25+ years. Now I am an atheist, and for good reason.

But I also don't see the purpose in preaching my beliefs to people who are unlikely to listen, and very likely to get upset.

If I am sincerely questioned, then I preach. But until then, I understand that religion is one of those few things that logic can't fix for most people.

(I have had moments of weakness on that... But I try to keep it very few and far between.)

The Philosophy Of Liberty -

"Religion is one of those few things that logic can't fix...

for most people." So agreed, Mr. Wolfe, so agreed.

Raised a pagan until willingly, by grace through faith, I received the gift I could never earn; I have met at times those who describe themselves as you do, "an atheist...for good reason."

Many times, respectfully discussing differences with atheists is much more worthwhile than pacifying passive believers who simply want to sound like they believe much the same as I do.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

I'm a Christian, albeit a

I'm a Christian, albeit a contentious one, and I didn't take the post as baiting. The poster seemed to be laying out his/her difficulties in squaring biblical tenants with libertarian tenants. He did it in the form of an argument and invited counter arguments.

I'll have to give you that a good many of the responders must have felt "baited," judging from the defensive line that formed. But some folks' hyperactive guard doesn't create a baiting question. It is, however, a tell, hinting that they're not comfortable with the discomfort their (my) very own religion pretty much demands.

This poster wasn't preaching, he/she was asking for rebuttal, discussion, a place to start contending on pretty serious issues about whatever god is out there, if any, and about how all that figures into fundamental libertarian moral philosophy.

wolfe's picture


But the line of reasoning he laid out is ex-Christian -> Atheist 101 and truly had little to do with libertarianism (despite the attempted slant that direction). It is unlikely that he was seeking true discussion. But I will agree, that I can not know exactly what the intent was.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -

Having only managed to cross

Having only managed to cross the line between Christian and agonist, I don't know. Perhaps your right that the author's arguments are Atheists 101. I know that his beefs were mine as a crossed back and forth between Ch and Ag and that his beefs continue to shape and shade my beefs with God now that I've waded back into a wary Ch.

Does that make the question invalid or unworthy of libertarian thought? There are lots of libertarian-minded folks who hold to some sort of god, most of whom offer some sort of moral grid. If a god's moral grid doesn't align with the constructs of libertarian thought, isn't it a legitimate line of inquiry to parse and wrestle with the perceived misalignment?

Thank You Mister Nystrom

..for cleaning house.
The statistics speak for themselves....
...and I can't remember when a "sleeper" suddenly generated such controversey....yes CONTROVERSEY...only disguised as "Discussion".
Thank You.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

WHAT Is YOUR Purpose?

You've come out of "hiding" after 1 year 8 months.
You "publish" TWO (2) Posts the same day as a "CONCERN TROLL".
(The ONLY POSTS you've EVER "published")

I asked you this question previously, in your post.

Although I never expected you to "really" answer it...your persistence in attempting to drive these "wedge issues" NONSTOP on this forum is certainly suspect.

And NOW you ask Michael Nystrom WHY????


"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

I am a sleeper agent because

I am a sleeper agent because I chose not to post on the forums? How many lunatic haters are on this post? My goal was to see how people justify saying they love liberty and christ at the same time. From what I gather they do so using extremely flawed thinking as has been demonstrated time and time again in that post and this one. I attacked NOONE and was very polite in doing so and this is what I get in return? A bunch of loons flinging their own shit at me.. wonderful.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Yeah, I need to get rid of it

All it does is start fights, and I'm tired of it.

It bores me to fucking tears.

Thanks for the reminder.



Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

wolfe's picture

Chistianity and most major religions....

Really do have positive things to offer the followers and society as a whole. I personally think atheism is more positive, but that is only my opinion. I think the problem, and I do -NOT- mean to speak for anyone else, including Michael, is that most of the religious threads here have been over whelming negative and hateful (and sometimes downright racist, bigoted, and antisemitic). And yes, that includes the "atheist" response threads.

We all have moments of negativity, and probably me more than most, so I am not trying to throw stones. But the constant hateful rants from both sides of the aisle gets old.

-Once again, my opinions, and I was not intending to pretend to speak for anyone else.-

The Philosophy Of Liberty -

Thanks for your kind thoughts, hope you've found some of us fair

Wolfe, you've posted well, even if we disagree. I've been very vocal, without being preachy, or condescending, IMHO, to those who've replied to my threads and posts over my 6 years here on The DP, including those I've inserted comments to, though at times we've strongly disagreed.

Many of my threads and posts have made no mention of faith at all, while not denying any of faith's principles, insofar as I understand them.

Here's hoping for an even better mutual understanding, now that the, "Religion", forum subject category is officially gone.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass


then you delete my comment? Good grief. Satire isn't allowed either?

I've chosen it only to be transfered to "Hidden Knowledge"

And not because I believed either title fit was even close. Only because, between the two seemingly-appropriate options, it was as close an option as was offered to the writers/authors of threads here.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

Well I was very kind in the

Well I was very kind in the entire post I created. I spent a bit of time on it. I don't appreciate it being locked for no apparent reason. I was using the correct forum for the topic politely. Perhaps you should remove this forum instead of playing favorites? Or you could simply let people have a conversation..