Proof for the Nonexistance of America

Here is the proof by evil for the nonexistence of god: (1) If there is a God he is good and omnipotent(2) An omnipotent God can prevent evil (3) There is evil (4) Therefore, God does not prevent it. (5) A good being would prevent evil. (6)Therefore, God is either not good or not omnipotent. (7) Therefore, there is no God.

{If you care, BTW, God is not omnipotent. Also, good is a term that only applies to humans, not God. And of course, there are times when a good being would permit evil Just for starters.}

Okay, well, dig on these stories:
A teacher was sentence to prison for allowing a bear to be named Mohammed.
A rape victim was sentenced to 90 lashes and prison.
And a 12-year-old girl was charged with having illicit sexual relations with her abusers.

(Thanks Matt for providing me with the last one.)

So, you’re a part of the world super power. What do you do about it? These stories are weeks old, they represent ongoing oppression of women. In the story linked to the second story about, the President said that the Saudi king knows that the President objects. Can we do anything else? Apartheid eventually went away. Could we have done more to help the process move more quickly? See Iraq & Vietnam. Do we have to sit around and not exercise our power like some non-existent God?

13 thoughts on “Proof for the Nonexistance of America”

  1. I really don’t follow your existence for God proof.

    In terms of what the U.S. should do: I have no idea. It seems we should feel an obligation to every woman living in the Muslim world to do what we can to break the hell they live in every day. But then the complicating factors start rolling in: how many of those women would oppose being “helped”? How many deaths is it worth? Can we even do it? etc. etc. etc.

    I think a concerted campaign of getting goods, services and information into the Middle East can’t hurt.

  2. I find even a hint of comparing the lone super power to god creepy. This is the path to neo-conservatism. This idea that we are alone on the world stage with all this power so we can and should be remaking the world into a better place.

    I’m getting more and more sympathetic to the old school, non-interventionist conservatism. I agree we don’t need to respect their beliefs. I don’t think there are many options for changing their culture, however.

  3. But changing culture happens all the time. It’s inevitable.

    Apartheid ended. It’s hard to point to causal links, but it did change. Germany now *almost* agrees that it isn’t more special than everyone else. Japan seems to hate Koreans a little less than they used to.

    So if cultures will change, shouldn’t we do something to help it become better rather than worse?

    And as much as it makes you uncomfortable, we find ourselves in the position of superpower. With a defense budget larger than the 10 next largest defense budgets combined, it’s hard not to project force.

  4. Hmm, I’m not getting notified of new posts. I’ll have to look into that.

    Matt,
    It is a proof for the non-existence of God by evil, does that help?

    The expanding western quality of life is an attractive response, for sure.

    Josh,

    The question is, should we stay out because we can’t help, or because it is not advantages for us to help.

    This is why I am uncomfortable with peace through globalization. It seems so convenient for me.

    But, obviously not every right move is a hard move.

  5. Matt, yes, cultures do change. Rarely because of programmatic efforts of outside cultures, other than conquest.

    Also, the we should be doing “something” with this huge military feeling, fight it. Just because you have a sledgehammer doesn’t mean you should be smashing things.

    Jim, I think we are very limited in what we can do to help. Should we make an enormous effort to help, at sacrifice to ourselves, if we think that sacrifice would help? Interesting question.

    I think the thing we could most do to help the Middle East, would be to stop buying their oil. I think we could help the whole world by an internal move to energy efficiency and alternative forms of fuel and energy. I’m for that effort

  6. Josh, I didn’t mention the military.

    And I so much don’t think the Middle East becomes a better place if we don’t buy oil. First of all, there are plenty of markets in India and China for oil, but even so, the murdering will continue. It’s been going on since people were speaking Aramaic as a mother tongue, hybrid Toyotas in Los Angeles aren’t going to stop it.

    Jim I think I understand the argument now, I just think it’s weak enough logic to not even be very interesting.

  7. Ron Paul wants us to abandon efforts to change government action through coercive means. He basically wants us to trade, trade, trade and then folks will come around.

    I think he’s wrong, but whenever someone says something no one else is saying it gives me pause.

  8. Josh, I didn’t mention the military.

    You certainly mentioned the military, but now I’m not sure what you meant by this from your following post.

    And as much as it makes you uncomfortable, we find ourselves in the position of superpower. With a defense budget larger than the 10 next largest defense budgets combined, it’s hard not to project force.

    Did you mean we should shrink the defense budget so we had the resources, and the inclination to us other means?

    As for not buying their oil helping, well, I don’t think any meaningful social change is going to happen there while royal families and dictators rule, buoyed up by oil. You think getting goods and services in there would be good, but their economy is so distorted I don’t see a transforming power of the market happening. If your a rich sheik you have plenty of western good and services. And that’s probably helping support traditionalists. I mean the Sauds have power as an explicit trade, we got the oil money and you clerics get to push ultra-conservative Islam. Oil is the worst thing to happen to the Middle East in modern times.

  9. You think getting goods and services in there would be good, but their economy is so distorted I don’t see a transforming power of the market happening. If your a rich sheik you have plenty of western good and services. And that’s probably helping support traditionalists.

    I can’t speak for Matt, but I see globalization helping by improving the standard of living for the everyday folks. Materialism is a real bummer for people in a lot of ways, but I do think it makes them more peaceful. I think it also allows a conduit for our subversive women & Blacks are equal message to get in.

  10. I see globalization helping by improving the standard of living for the everyday folks.

    I think the current economies of the oil producing nations are so distorted by oil that its a barrier to the market integration you want.

    Of course, there are countries like what you described in the post that don’t have oil.

  11. The Middle East without a monstrous natural resource is like… Afghanistan, Sudan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Eretria, Rwanda, etc.

    Not so great.

    What I meant before was that intervening in other countries could happen without war. It’s happened a lot and can happen again.

  12. What I meant before was that intervening in other countries could happen without war. It’s happened a lot and can happen again.

    What are the successful interventions that we might use as models?

  13. East Germany is a fine example of non-military intervention.

    India as well, Russia, South Africa, Iran prior to Ahmedinijad. Counter examples abound as well, though, for backsliding. Spain, Iran, Sudan, etc.

    You’re earlier point about complexity rings awfully true.

Leave a Reply