If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Before you judge Vought too harshly, it might help to see the Sanders' snippet in its proper context. I don't have the link handy but what Vought says is essentially what he states at the end of the Q/A with Sanders.
I was writing a long winded reply explaining my religious background, the description of Jesus in the Quran, how Vought's post was done while a professor at Weaton College, an Evangelical Christian Church in response specifically to a professor stating that Muslims and Christian worship the same god (which cannot be true because Muslims do not believe Jesus was the living embodiment of God which Christianity claims), that Christianity does not distinguish between those who never heard of Jesus vs those that deny him as god when it comes to salvation, etc, when google crashed. Probably for the best. Maybe it was divine intervention :p
So for now I shall just point out the following:
1) Article VI of the US Constitution states: "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.", and the general consensus is that Sander's reason for not being in favor of Vought's nomination is his religious beliefs.
I'm not taking Brad's side in this argument but I am asking you why you twist people's words as you've done above. I don't think Brad said anything close to what you're claiming he said. You complain about trolls and call other posters trolls but isn't provoking people by twisting their words considered troll behaviour?
I have had family members murdered by atheist, communists. I have had family members tortured to get them to sign documents admitting their manufactured guilt which they did not do as the people who signed suffered severe consequences. I have had family members threatened with murder.
Brad has no idea what he's talking about. I do. I lived it.
I have had family members murdered by atheist, communists. I have had family members tortured to get them to sign documents admitting their manufactured guilt which they did not do as the people who signed suffered severe consequences. I have had family members threatened with murder.
Brad has no idea what he's talking about. I do. I lived it.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to explain what you mean when you use the word "atheist". "Cause" right now I'm not sure.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to explain what you mean when you use the word "atheist". "Cause" right now I'm not sure.
Steve
An atheist is someone who does not believe in a deity. Some of my good friends are atheists. Others are agnostic. Not all atheists are evil but a number of them are. To claim that atheists have never been involved in mass killings and genocides goes against the experience of the twentieth century.
An atheist is someone who does not believe in a deity. Some of my good friends are atheists. Others are agnostic. Not all atheists are evil but a number of them are. To claim that atheists have never been involved in mass killings and genocides goes against the experience of the twentieth century.
Just as it would be to claim that Christians or Jews or Muslims had never been involved in mass killings, etc. The trouble with history is that it goes back a long way. And humans have a particularly nasty way of trying to resolve things with violence. Or discussion groups. And one of the problems with blaming things on atheists (or Jews, or Muslims, or Christians, or brown-eyed ladies) is that while a member, or even a leader, of the group may identify themselves as one of the aforementioned scourges of the earth, people usually come up with other names for them (if not already provided). Thus we get the Khans, the Huns, the Marxists, the Communists, the Stalinists, the Nazis, the Maoists, the Kardashians, etc.
There has rarely if ever in history been a person who waged a large war on behalf of atheists with the specific intent of attacking peoples who were religious. There have been Christian Crusades, and Islamic Jihads, but there have not been Atheist Crusades or Jihads.
Yes, Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong and others were insane atheists. But this is beside the point completely. They were not waging their wars as Crusades or Jihads against religious peoples on behalf of atheists. This was not how they obtained their support. I hope this clears up Vlad's confusion, no doubt caused by my poor choice of words.
Now, further to my point was the suggestion that if Jews have suffered more from the affects of racism than other races it might be because their God made them a special and chosen people and is therefore seen by some to be a racist God. In fact, Sid did not disagree with this, but only stated that he had no choice but to believe in this God when he was born and raised.
So, the God of the Jews, whose name we cannot state, is a racist God. This is clear. But, and here is my next point, this God with no name is also Jehovah according to Christians, and Allah according to Muslims. So, thou who shalt remain nameless, Jehovah and Allah are all racists.
Is it any wonder that we have a troubled world considering the Gods we have chosen for ourselves?
I might also add that the nameless one, Jehovah of the Christians and Allah of the Muslims, who are all One and the same, is/are completely homophobic and misogynistic.
Choose better Gods and we might get a better world. The atheists are not the problem.
A central tenet of the communist revolution both in China and Russia was atheism. Non Atheists were very much oppressed by those that did not hold the party line. Respectfully your position that the motives are "Completely" unrelated is incorrect.
And so the current day answer to this is to have a U.S. democracy of which a central tenet is Christianity, in which non-Christians are to be very much oppressed by those who DO hold the party line? What is this, an eye for an eye? Isn't that what Jesus preached AGAINST?
Brad's point was very well made and is very accurate, if maybe a little overdone using the words "completely unrelated".
Vlad brought up the Cambodian killing fields. Atheism was not a central factor in these killings. From Wikipedia,
"Process
The judicial process of the Khmer Rouge regime, for minor or political crimes, began with a warning from the Angkar, the government of Cambodia under the regime. People receiving more than two warnings were sent for "re-education," which meant near-certain death. People were often encouraged to confess to Angkar their "pre-revolutionary lifestyles and crimes" (which usually included some kind of free-market activity; having had contact with a foreign source, such as a U.S. missionary, international relief or government agency; or contact with any foreigner or with the outside world at all), being told that Angkar would forgive them and "wipe the slate clean." They were then taken away to a place such as Tuol Sleng or Choeung Ek for torture and/or execution."
Nothing about atheism there, or religion at all. The crimes were engaging in free market activity or contact with a foreign source. A lot of people who were killed were likely atheists!
Vlad also brought up China's cultural revolution. Again, not much to do at all with atheism. Here is something known as the May 16 Notification which summarized Mao's ideological justification for the Cultural Revolution:
"Those representatives of the bourgeoisie who have sneaked into the Party, the government, the army, and various spheres of culture are a bunch of counter-revolutionary revisionists. Once conditions are ripe, they will seize political power and turn the dictatorship of the proletariat into a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Some of them we have already seen through; others we have not. Some are still trusted by us and are being trained as our successors, persons like Khruschev for example, who are still nestling beside us."
Again, nothing about religion or atheism at all. And I again imagine that a lot of atheists were victims in China's cultural revolution.
The position that atheism being a central tenet of a group of people who commit a crime makes it a crime of atheists against non-atheists is false narrative.
The truth of the matter is that Christians are just as likely to commit mass crimes against humanity as any other religious group. We have had the Crusades, we have had the Spanish Inquisition, we have had the wipeout of the Maya and the Aztecs by primarily Christian peoples from Europe, we have had native Americans nearly wiped out by primarily Christian "white men", and in more modern times, we have had the dropping of the atom bombs on Japanese cities for maximum killing effect by none other than American Christians. In all these cases, one can argue that the actions taken were necessary for self-preservation, which only means Christians are as self-preserving as anyone else.
Atheists have no monopoly on crimes against humanity, not even close. Totally false and hateful narrative.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Vlad brought up the Cambodian killing fields. Atheism was not a central factor in these killings. From Wikipedia,
Also from Wikipedia.
The Khmer Rouge, under its policy of state atheism,[49] actively persecuted Buddhists during their reign from 1975 to 1979.[50] Buddhist institutions and temples were destroyed and Buddhist monks and teachers were killed in large numbers.[51] A third of the nation's monasteries were destroyed along with numerous holy texts and items of high artistic quality. 25,000 Buddhist monks were massacred by the regime.[52] The persecution was undertaken because Pol Pot believed that Buddhism was "a decadent affectation". He sought to eliminate Buddhism's 1,500-year-old mark on Cambodia.[52]
Religion was also banned, and the repression of adherents of Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism was extensive. And according to Ben Kiernan, the "fiercest extermination campaign was directed against the ethnic Cham Muslim minority"
Originally posted by Paul Bonham
Vlad also brought up China's cultural revolution. Again, not much to do at all with atheism. Here is something known as the May 16 Notification which summarized Mao's ideological justification for the Cultural Revolution:
Again , also from Wikipedia
Traditionally, a large segment of the Chinese population took part in Chinese folk religions[58] and Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism had played a significant role in the everyday lives of ordinary people.[59][60][61] After the 1949 Chinese Revolution, China began a period of rule by the Communist Party of China.[62][63] For much of its early history, that government maintained under Marxist thought that religion would ultimately disappear, and characterized it as emblematic of feudalism and foreign colonialism.
During the Cultural Revolution, student vigilantes known as Red Guards converted religious buildings for secular use or destroyed them
And some more pearls of wisdom the great Paul Bonham has decided to share with us today.
Originally posted by Paul Bonham
Brad's point was very well made and is very accurate, if maybe a little overdone using the words "completely unrelated".
Originally posted by Paul Bonham
The position that atheism being a central tenet of a group of people who commit a crime makes it a crime of atheists against non-atheists is false narrative.
From Wikipedia
State atheism was an official policy in the Soviet Union and other Marxist–Leninist states.[8] The Soviet Union used the term gosateizm, a syllabic abbreviation of "state" (gosudarstvo) and "atheism" (ateizm), to refer to a policy of expropriation of religious property, publication of information against religion and the official promotion of anti-religious materials in the education system. Governments that have implemented official policies of anti-clericalism oppose religious institutional power and influence in all aspects of public and political life, including the involvement of religion in the everyday life of the citizen.
After the Russian Civil War, anti religious movements in the Soviet Union (gosateizm) attempted to stop the spread of religious beliefs and remove "prerevolutionary remnants".[8] The Bolsheviks were particularly hostile toward the Russian Orthodox Church (which supported the White Movement during the Russian Civil War) and saw it as a supporter of Tsarist autocracy.[9] During a process of collectivization of land, Orthodox priests distributed pamphlets declaring that the Soviet regime was the Antichrist coming to place “the Devil’s mark” on the peasants, and encouraged them to resist the government.[9] Political repression was widespread in the Soviet Union, and while religious persecution was applied to most religions,[10] the regime's anti-religious campaigns were often directed against specific religions based on state interests, that varied over time. The attitude in the Soviet Union toward religion varied from a total ban on some religions to official support of others.
From the late 1920s to the late 1930s, such organizations as the League of Militant Atheists ridiculed all religions and harassed believers.[11] Anti-religious and atheistic propaganda was implemented into every portion of soviet life: in schools, communist organizations such as the Young Pioneer Organization, and the media. Though Lenin originally introduced the Gregorian calendar to the Soviets, subsequent efforts to reorganise the week to improve worker productivity saw the introduction of the Soviet calendar, which had the side-effect that a "holiday will seldom fall on Sunday".[12]
Within about a year of the revolution, the state expropriated all church property, including the churches themselves, and in the period from 1922 to 1926, 28 Russian Orthodox bishops and more than 1,200 priests were killed (a much greater number was subjected to persecution).[10] Most seminaries were closed, and publication of religious writing was banned.[10] The Russian Orthodox Church, which had 54,000 parishes before World War I, was reduced to 500 by 1940.[10] A meeting of the Antireligious Commission of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) that occurred on 23 May 1929 estimated the portion of believers in the USSR at 80 percent, though this percentage may be understated to prove the successfulnes of the struggle with religion.[13]
Here is the entire article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Friday, 16th June, 2017, 09:10 AM.
It is of course true that attempts were made to impose atheism and eradicate theism in many places. But if you talk about Mao Zedong or Joseph Stalin, the primary and initial motivations which eventually lead to power were Marxism, a social/economic/political philosophy. It was believed by these Marxists that the best way to hold onto power and continue with their program was to eliminate theism. This is why they tried to impose atheism. If the Marxists had believed that promoting a certain faith would enhance their chances of success, then they would have promoted this faith. But their Marxist doctrine suggested to them that atheism was the best method of controlling their populations. Hence their motivations.
Again, the target of Stalin and Mao Zedong was the capitalistic economic structure. That is who they were out to get, not the theists. Hitler was no Marxist, but he too was not out to get the theists, he had other motivations.
Last edited by Brad Thomson; Friday, 16th June, 2017, 09:32 AM.
Yes and so? Millions of Jews that did not embrace all of the tenets in the religion or for that matter none of them should be discriminated against? Because they "chose" a biased God? What nonsense are you espousing?
You are being unfair. I did not suggest that the racism directed against Jews was justified. Of course it is not, racism is never justified. I suggested that it was a natural historical result of a religion which professes a biased, or racist God who has a chosen people. It is not surprising to me that a race of people, whoever they are, would be subject to terrible racism if they claim to be God's chosen people. That is it, that is all I said.
. He makes a horrible argument because all he cites are reasons why Islam is potentially dangerous. That's not a reasonable argument that he's not Islamophobic. It is, however, the basis of a reasonable argument that his Islamophobia is rational.
Insofar as stating the horror's of radical Islam I would agree that is not a good basis to argue that I am not Islamophobic. A more accurate characterization would be that I am RADICAL Islamophobic. Over the years I have employed dozens of people in companies I ran of the Islamic faith and over the years have had close friendships with many of them from work and outside of work. On that basis i would submit that I am not Islamaphobic.
As far as Vought is concerned citing a religious belief that those that do not accept Christ are condemned in the after life does not necessarily mean that he is Islamaphobic. I certainly would not consider him Judeophobic even though I am sure he holds the same belief for the Jewish faith.
You are being unfair. I did not suggest that the racism directed against Jews was justified. Of course it is not, racism is never justified. I suggested that it was a natural historical result of a religion which professes a biased, or racist God who has a chosen people. It is not surprising to me that a race of people, whoever they are, would be subject to terrible racism if they claim to be God's chosen people. That is it, that is all I said.
Originally posted by Brad Thomson
. It is not surprising to me that a race of people, whoever they are, would be subject to terrible racism if they claim to be God's chosen people.
As you implied Judaism is not the only religion that makes outlandish claims about their particular religion being the best. However, unlike many other religions Jews do not actively proselytize outside of their faith. The cause and effect that you believe results in antisemitism is misplaced. You may want to educate yourself on this before coming to conclusions about the causes of antisemitism.
Tweet
Comment