Carlin in the Morning

I feel consistantly obligated to share my evolving and simplfying perspective on the word god.

Do I believe in a physical being who created us in our image, and an afterlife in the heavens?  Hell no, for the same reason I don’t believe in astrology or ghosts, show me the evidence and have a logical argument.  The foundation of all these beliefs are on andecdotal evidence, not legitmate facts, which creates blatant fallacies in their arguments.

That being said, I am not about to burn the Horoscope section of the newspaper nor block people from entering their church of choice, anachronistic though I find both to be I believe in our freedom to whatever we want (as long as its all consenting) is much more important than my personal annoyances.  I also am willing to admit that possibly, though very highly unlikely, I could be wrong.  I’ll bet we are all wrong to be honest, most likely there are stranger things in heaven and earth than is dreamt in our philosophy.

But I can say, that the Idea of God is real and has always been very real because we defined the idea of god by assigning language (the communication of ideas) to what was before just a fluid thought.  Every culture and language throughout mankind has had a word and concept for God.  So in a sense I do believe in God, but I only believe in the idea of God.

Does that make me an atheist? If sticking labels on things makes you feel better I suppose, though I see myself more as a Nihlistix Taoist with Marxist politics.  Ain’t I a barrel of fun?

So with that in mind, here is George Carlin having a spirited debate where both he and the woman  (I didn’t see her name sorry) make very valid points.

This election has me pretty bummed, and when Politics depresses me one man always succeeded in putting the fire back in me.  RIP Carlin, a real rebel.

Published by James J Jackson

I'm a poet from California.

6 thoughts on “Carlin in the Morning

  1. George Carlin knows the truth now. Sadly Its too late for him though.
    Like a lot of baby is he used the laws of nature that we understand to try to judge the existence of something that he doesn’t understand. We live in a box and are confined by the laws of Nature and Science as we know them. God created those laws and he lives outside that box and those laws are subject to him but he is not subject to them. It’s totally illogical to try to judge the existence of Supernatural being based on the laws of nature. That isn’t logical by any standards. Yet Hitchens Dawkins and yes even George Carlin have made same mistake.

    I would challenge you to look at the proof that isn’t science that points to the miraculous and the fact that God is the most plausible answer to the things that science cannot explain.

  2. Look up dr. John Lennox on YouTube doesn’t save videos couple of debates where he trashes Hitchens and Dawkins. Linux S3 doctorates and taught at Oxford and Cambridge 1 in pure mathematics one in science and one in philosophy.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: