I’m a libertarian. I’m also an atheist, but agnostic on the technicality that you can’t disprove the existence of an undefined God. I’m socially liberal, fiscally conservative. I’m a capitalist.
This blog leans toward the libertarian, but is considered a conservative blog.
You can find this site at www.marinalee.net or at http://marinalee.wordpress.com
I’m sixteen, and am currently an intern at the Colorado GOP headquarters. I’m loving the political experience, and may end up interning with the Governor (D) as well. The democrats tend to be more organized and better at involving the youth, even if they are a bit delusional sometimes. =P
~~~My Mini Journal~~~
November 4: Four people asked me,”wait what’s socialism?” in response to the T-shirt I was wearing, which read,”Barack Obama: Bringing you socialism, with a smile.”
My math teacher, a hard-core liberal, said,”I hope you come to school sad tomorrow.” Of course, he doesn’t really have to hope: Obama has won it at this point. =P
June 25: I am headed to Northwestern Debate Camp in just a few hours!
October 22, 2008 at 8:03 am |
Hmmm interesting!
October 30, 2008 at 7:54 am |
As a agnostic, I’m assuming you are pro-choice. I know MANY pro-choice women that vote Republican. We are willing to put this issue aside in order to move on with the economy and national security. I don’t understand why the pro-choice/pro-life movement doesn’t just agree to disagree and move on. Let this be a decision between woman/doctor. Let’s call a truce. How about agreeing that abortion is illegal after 25 weeks. I’ve seen babies in ICU that are 26 weeks old, the majority will not develop normally either physically or mentally. Yes, there’s hope, but at what cost to the health care crisis?
November 3, 2008 at 7:55 pm |
So you pretty much go the opposite way everyone else does and try to make your false statement true? God does exist. And if we have Barack Obama as president, we would have a better everything.
November 3, 2008 at 8:07 pm |
Why do people comment on my Bio…?
Anyway, John, none of those statements can be false as they’re all opinions.
Secondly, what would be better if Barack Obama were president? Other than your wealthfare check, that is. =D
November 3, 2008 at 9:18 pm |
Wow, a profile I can leave a comment on. Neat. OK, just two things:
1) You’re hot.
2) I’m married.
3) Thanks for visiting my blog.
In base-10 math with a third identifier arbitrary, that list consists of only two things. Really. If you don’t know what I just said, that’s because your IQ is lower than Sarah Palin’s.
November 4, 2008 at 8:48 pm |
Alright Militant, you win. My IQ is lower than Sarah Palin’s. Care to explain that?
November 20, 2008 at 7:21 pm |
I’ll send a defense for the existence of God later!
November 20, 2008 at 8:51 pm |
Why waste your vote on Libertarianism. As a practical matter Libertarianism isn’t practical! On the matter of being an agnostic because you can’t disprove an undefinable god. Here’s my definition, “God is that lone perfectly good and holy being of whom it can be said, ‘We can conceive of none greater. He is that lone non contingent being.” Since God can not be proved of disproved, we must go on the basis of evidence for or against His existence. I find the preponderance of evidence overwhelmingly in favor of God’s existence.
November 23, 2008 at 9:33 pm |
Because you can.
orly? That’s lovely. If you don’t care to elaborate on that I’ll go back to waiting for the sky to start raining copies of The Book of Mormon or something else that’s… miraculous and would indicate some conscious supernatural being playing an active role in the running of the natural world.
November 24, 2008 at 2:31 pm |
In answer to spendidelles, For now, cute doesn’t cut it in the world of logic!
November 24, 2008 at 5:38 pm |
I don’t see how my statement was “cute” but illogical. Cute is a subjective enough term, but I’m afraid I can’t see the flaw in my statement that if there’s a supernatural being playing an active role in the running of the natural world they would leave evidence that seemed rather miraculous.
November 25, 2008 at 11:41 pm |
to splendidelles
I guess “cuteness” in in the eye of the reader! Now then, in order to establish some ground for debate, I’ll tell you that my “worldview” is the Evangelical Christian worldview. What’s yours?
November 29, 2008 at 9:19 pm |
I am agnostic on the technicality that I am not omniscinent.
November 29, 2008 at 9:21 pm |
Anyone who isn’t agnostic must be really smart to be absolutley sure about something which cannot possibly be prooved or disprooved.
November 29, 2008 at 9:23 pm |
But if you look at my initials…
November 29, 2008 at 9:27 pm |
Unless you look at my initials…
February 25, 2009 at 10:40 am |
Hi ~
My new web page is highlighted by a book Dennis Prager inspired by his July 3rd column of two years ago.
FLAKJACKETBOOKS.COM ships books to our soldiers overseas and stateside FREE OF CHARGE.
It is financed through the sales of these 10 books to the general public.
I would be grateful if you could link my site at yours – after checking it out, of course.
Sincerely yours,
JACK HONIG
Debary, Florida
February 26, 2009 at 11:18 am |
One doesn’t have to be !00% sure of something. A percentage greater than 50% should constitute some level of belief. One doesn’t have to be omniscient to believe God exists. One only has to acknowledge the fact that God has revealed Himself in numerous ways. Instead of seeking to know God in order to believe, one ought to believe God in order to know Him.
June 24, 2009 at 9:40 pm |
Wait, so if you are 50% sure that something is true you should take it as fact? And the second part of your statement doesn’t make much sense. You must believe before you have proof? Doesn’t that negate the purpose of the proof?
June 25, 2009 at 8:14 am |
50% would cause a state of ambivalence. 51% percent would induce a “mimimal level of belief. ( We’re talking degee here, not fact or not. For instance, if I’m 51% sure it isn’t going to rain, I still might take an umbrella with me, but if I believe 99% it isn’t going to rain; forget the umbrella.
Pertaining to the second part of my previous comment. We’re not talking proof here. No one can prove or disprove the existence of God. We’re dealing with probability. (I know you like math!) We can’t know all about God or we would be God. But God has revealed enough about himself for an objective person to reasonably believe. By believing we “experience” God, and by experiencing God we come to truly “know” Him. For Example without being a parent I can “know about” parenting, but as a parent,experiencing parenthood I “know” parenting. knowledge comes through more than just our senses or scientific methodology.
Have you finished “The Question of God” yet? I have another “MUST READ” for you, “I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist” by Norman Geistler and Frank Turek.
July 5, 2009 at 9:57 pm |
You have to be at 51% for minimal belief? What rules of statistics are you operating on? Wouldn’t a 0.00001% also count as a level of belief because it is higher than 0%?
Surely if I cam up to you and said that “unicorns are real because by believing in unicorns I experience unicorns” you would disagree. God shouldn’t be different.
Parenting isn’t a fair analogy because you don’t have to believe in parenting in order to gain experience from it. Parenting doesn’t involve circular reasoning.
July 7, 2009 at 4:59 pm |
I’m using a continuum Disbelief vs Belief; 0 represents total disbelief, 100 represents total belief. If I have more disbelief that belief logic says to act on the disbelief, even if ever so slightly.
I don’t see what your comment about unicorns has to do with my argument. Besides unicorns aren’t real, God is!
I’m dealing with reality not fantasy.
I’d like to find the one who has experienced parenting who doesn’t believe in it!