Spidercmb, I don't think Stenger is assuming there is no God, that is your personal, logical deduction after reading his article....

Victor Stenger is writing about our social need for faith and a supernatural belief in God, angels, the devil, astrology,various other occult or supernatural phenomena.


I believe Stenger was writing about a social need for faith, and
I believe individuals need two things to have religious faith:
1) exposure to religion... you are a Christian because you are surrounded by it, if you lived in a Hindu community you would gravitate toward.. I think you get my drift :)
2) a personal need and weakness.... religious people are less responsible for their actions and consequences, they lean on religion to help them deal with life, and use it as an excuse for their actions (religion is imaginary, a delusion, therefore actually a type of psychosis)

We haven't even discussed the ultimate delusion.... prayer
Think about it, by praying, you will cause the forward motion of the universe to change, you will alter time-space relationships... what a naive and selfish concept... prayer :(

Social Security is Strong

Share This

April 23, 2012

A new report on Monday by Social Security trustees showed the retirement program's trust fund has $2.7 trillion in reserves and will grow to $3.06 trillion by 2021, enough to maintain the unbroken record of paying every nickel owed to every beneficiary in full for another two decades. Sen. Bernie Sanders has introduced legislation to strengthen Social Security and guarantee benefits for 75 years by extending the payroll tax that most Americans already pay to those who earn above $250,000 a year.

"The most effective way to strengthen Social Security for the next 75 years is to eliminate the cap on the payroll tax on income above $250,000. Right now, someone who earns $110,100 pays the same amount of money into Social Security as a billionaire. That makes no sense," said Sanders, the chairman of the Defending Social Security Caucus. He also chairs the Senate aging subcommittee.

Defend Social Security Caucus

Under the proposed legislation, the wealthiest Americans would pay the same payroll tax rate already assessed on those with incomes up to $110,100 a year. Social Security officials have calculated that the simple change would keep the retirement program strong for another 75 years. The legislation also follows through on a proposal that President Barack Obama made in 2008 when he was running for president.

The Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act is cosponsored by Sens. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Barbara Mikulski, (D-Md.), Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D- R.I.).

Since it was signed into law 76 years ago, Social Security has kept millions of senior citizens, widows, widowers, orphans, and the disabled out of poverty. Before Social Security, about half of senior citizens lived in poverty. Today, less than 10 percent do.

"I strongly disagree with some of my colleagues who want to balance the budget by cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other programs that are of enormous importance to seniors and the working families of our country. There are ways to address the deficit crisis without attacking some of the most vulnerable members of our society. As chairman of the Defending Social Security Caucus, I will do everything in my power to make sure that the promises made to seniors will be kept."

Social Security provides support for 55 million people, including 38 million retired workers, 6 million widows, widowers and orphans, and 11 million disabled workers. The most successful government program in our nation's history has not contributed one dime to the federal deficit.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=F63D73C1-81DF-4DFB-AAC3-730092ED9406

Of course this will not stop all the lies about "entitlement" garbage and how it is using up the tax dollars.

did you also know that the Quran states "Jews are the greediest people of all mankind,they wish to live for 1,000 years,they are going to hell." it's in the Quran you should read about what Allah wants to do to Israel it gets nasty.

not really......you either know you exist or you don't

why would someone pick any other option but "know"

to do so points to delusion or deception

The point is Islam doesn't believe Jews are Gods chosen people and if they(jews) or any nonmuslim for that matter doesn't accept Allah they are punished.

Same goes for christianity if you don't accept Jesus you will be punished.

The Judaic God will punish you if you don't believe in him.

Thing with christianity you have to accept God and Jesus or you're chit out of luck.

I don't believe in any of it so which hell am i going to?the Islamic hell or the Judaic christian hell?

you then clearly have not read a Quaran then. Read up on conduct pertaining towards infidels.

AdventureBegins..you either "know" that you exist or not ....there really wasn't a reason to include "believe" into the question except to watch how belief limit thought

But again what if the core tenants of a faith are to lie, kill, harm, and do mean things to those NOT of your faith? Christians are annoying but they don't have a holy war on everyone else. Can you tolerate a faith out to either force you to their way or kill you?

Cowboy...once again you are arguing with yourself...because didn't you follow the rules and picked one option "believe"...so if you can follow the rules...explain why MsHarmony and AdventureBegin are incapable of doing so....

are you more open-minded than them?

and with that you just explained why your religious belief is abusive because it forbids you to pick only one of the options ....

clear case of limiting thought

AdventureBegins...it's a simply question that ask one to choose from one of two options that represents their existence

it's not a question to trick you....just to enlighten you....

AdventureBegins...."both" was not one of the options ....the options were "Know" or "Believe"

all you have to do is pick one....why do religious people find this impossible to do .....especially when it pertains to their own existence

so come on AdventureBegins here's the question again, give it the old college try...do it for the Gipper, if you have to do an "Eeny Meeny Miny Mo" ...but pick one...you can do it

THE QUESTION
do you "Know" that you yourself exist or do you "Believe" that you yourself exist

AdventureBegins...either your using parables or you have a mild case of dyslexia but either way the question pertains only to your existence

here's the question again ....remember choose either "know" or "believe" when answering the question about "your" existence

THE QUESTION:
do you "Know" that you yourself exist or do you "Believe" that you yourself exist?

All the quoting of a post means is showing what the post is in response to. Doesn't mean the quoted post agrees or disagrees with what comes forth in the post of the quoting.

It shows what it's in response to and helps keep the discussion organized and clean, rather then looking like a bunch of random comments.

AdventureBegins...the question was constructed to include no other existence but the one that dared to answer the question

which is why your attempt to use parables to include my existence is an attempt to deceive ....

the fact that the religious are not willing to answer the truth about their own existence is why they can't be trusted to tell the truth about a so call God existence and an example of why religion is abuse...and abuse to children...because it teaches them how to find ways to lie to others and to themselves

I muddied no post. I replied to some words, I knew not if they were your words or joe bob's down the road. I responded to the comment, not the person nor did I alter anything of what the person said.

This is a community forum for those of Mingle2, if your post was at a specific person in which you only wished for that person to respond, you would have placed their name prior to your message. This was not done, so it was posted to the general community of Mingle2 which I am part of.

Jesus can not be between someone and God, for again Jesus is God.