Ron DeSantis wants to ban free speech

submitted by Vulptex from self.conspiracy

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

It makes no sense for atheists to be in on a fundamentally Jewish plot.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

It makes no sense for atheists to be in on a fundamentally Jewish plot.

I would imagine there are Jews who view Jewishness as a racial and cultural phenomenon, of which their religion might be a primary, large, small, or even non-existent part.

Plenty of white supremacists cite their european ancestry and culture rather than religion as the basis of their ideology, this is not terrible unusual

[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

But "white supremacy" is itself a sort of religion.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

But "white supremacy" is itself a sort of religion.

I think you are confusing yourself by having dual definitions for both Jewishness and Religion here

You in one place claim Judaism is a religion in the theological sense, with monotheism as a defining feature, rather than solely an ethnic or cultural identity.

But in another you say ethnic and cultural identity alone forming the basis of an ideology is a religion, in which case you would also have to consider atheist secular Jews with a strong in-group preference to be practicing a separate religion of Judaism. But then you'd also have to say they aren't practicing Judaism at all by referencing your previous definitino

Both of these are reasonable definitions if you are consistent, but lead to seeming contradictions when you apply different definitions in different contexts. This is why defining your terms is considered to be so important

Personally I favor this definition analagous to the idea of inheritance in programming

A religion is a specific type of ideology in the general sense, but an ideology is NOT a type of religion.

I.E. A specific type can be an instance of a general type, but a general type in not an instance of a specific type.

Or in other words, a String is necessarily an instance of an Object in Java, but an Object is not an instance of a String. Ideology would be your 'Object', and Religion your 'String'

Any definition will work as long as you apply it consistently to your chosen definition, this paradigm just seems the most intuitive to me for keeping these different concepts with the same word separated.

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Racial supremacy can be a doctrine of a larger religion, or a religion all by itself. Judaism does lend itself to Jewish racial supremacy, but this would not apply to those who aren't of the Jewish faith. And according to Judaism they are to be "cut off" from the benefits of the Jew.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Racial supremacy can be a doctrine of a larger religion, or a religion all by itself. Judaism does lend itself to Jewish racial supremacy, but this would not apply to those who aren't of the Jewish faith.

You are contradicting yourself again.

Proposition 1: "Racial Supremacy can be a religion all by itself"

Proposition 2: Jews who don't practice theological Judaism are not practicing a religion.

Case 1: An atheist Jewish supremacist

By proposition 1, his culture and racism can be considered a religion, but by proposition 2 it cannot, because theological Judaism is the only Jewish religion according to you so secular Jewish supremacy is not a religion, but you change the standards for secular white supremacists, which you say is a religion. You can't have it both ways here and still be consistent logically.

Again, this is because you are shifting definitions of the word religion and jew because you haven't defined either term. If you choose single definitons for these words and stick to them, I think youll find you can't make the contradictory case you are attempting to justify

[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I didn't say they're not practicing a religion. They're not practicing Judaism.

Yes, an atheist Jewish supremacist is possible, but unlikely, just like white supremacists. And the "Jewry" would not accept them anyway.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't say they're not practicing a religion. They're not practicing Judaism.

Yes, an atheist Jewish supremacist is possible, but unlikely, just like white supremacists. And the "Jewry" would not accept them anyway.

Yeah I think we are the same page then, lol. I wouldn't disagree with either of those statements. I may have been misunderstanding you. Jew and religion are like communism in that its really hard to pin these words down well enough so we are all talking about the same things