2 Peter 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
We have all things that pertain to life and godliness right now. We are connected to life and godliness right now.
Jesus Christ calls is to glory now, as Jesus Christ is risen, so we are risen sons of God. We walk In virtue which is excellence now through the perfect Holy Spirit that is put in us through faith.
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
We are partakers of God’s nature through faith in Jesus Christ and the new birth experience of the Holy Spirit.
We've escaped the corruption in the world. We don't identify with corruption. I am not corrupt and I won't be corrupted, I will not be governed by a corrupt government.
I've known atheists. They comment but take no action. Its like they really dont care.
Then too, not believing in God, they dont believe in sin either. I've known them to be constant liars, always looking to cheat and steal and to them its ok.....they shrug it off as "I'm just smarter than they are".
Not all are like this, but most don't want to have pesky sexual morals questioned. (now, if you take libertarianism, you may disagree with the idea of one man, one woman, one life time, but you will draw the line somewhere; sex must be consensual, children cannot consent to sex because they cannot understand the full ramifications, nor can some young adults, etc.)
Interestingly enough, I know of two who have some serious scruples: Perry Willis of Downsize DC and The Zero Aggression Project:
https://zeroaggressionproject.org/uncategorized/can-you-legislate-morality/
Oddly enough, Penn Jillette of Penn and Teller, has Ten Suggestions that, though they disrespect the God factor, (See #1 Suggestion in God, No,) do respect other ideals, such as honoring your parents and family, and avoiding making a promise you can't or don't intend on keeping. He also points out if Christians truly believe Jesus is the only way, they should be sharing the Gospel, and takes no offense when they do.
I’m a libertarian who agrees with voluntary heterosexual monogamy. I’m not aware of libertarians who disagree with it.
Scruples (principles) are good things. It’s the unscrupulous (unprincipled) people you have to look out for. For clarity I’m going to avoid that term. By your tone you seem to have a problem with Willis or what he wrote in the linked essay. What’s the problem?
His conclusion is reasonable:
For example, I think it’s ok to try to talk people out of homosexuality, but inappropriate to throw them in jail for being homo. Jesus didn’t throw anyone in jail. He told them to go and sin no more. If marriage is a form of private contract, then two adults should be able to contract what they want short of violating others. Laws against homos adopting other people’s children can be appropriate, though, because a non-consenting third party is affected. The “slippery slope” down from gay marriage has turned out to be less fallacious than initially claimed as we can see with the increase of grooming. But that brings up a different issue of coercion: government schools. If children’s mandatory attendance and families’ education budgets had not been coercively captured by the state, then there wouldn’t have been such a setting for the grooming.
He is absolutely right here, and it lines up with how Jesus treated the woman caught in adultery, often the biggest stone- throwers are also the biggest hypocrites. I normally don't post links to sites, then complement the authors, when I have a bone to pick with them...I personally think he has a higher standard of morals than any Neo-cons (especially war-mongers), Christian or not.
I fully agree on the rest of your point as well.
They don’t sound very atheist. Reminds me of another group.
It sounds as though you could be talking about the Commies in our government at this very moment. You may want to associate with people that believe in God, if you have the opportunity.
There is a 3rd branch of people, whom I converse with. Who deal in the Anunnkai, life is about 'experience' there is no good or evil, just 'experience'. The Ancient Aliens, "oldest" texts all point to the same thing. All the main Gods the World believes in now were created by them to deceive. Jesus was human, survived the crucifixtion and was ported off to India. They consider themselves the most brilliant and elightened of them all. They have no dog in this worldly fight because they are mentally and spiritually 'above' all this. They mostly believe Q is a baddie psyop because all the controllers are connected.
As Christians, we are not to dabble in tarot card readers, Psychic readers, or really anything that deals with spirits.
In a contextual sense the Urantia Book is not concentric to theology-biblical-bible-religion, it is a book, but where a generally accepted paradigm meaning for bible is concerned this does not describe the contextual basis of the Urantia Book, however the text and length can appear to be so. Originating around 1924 onward, one could say the "new age" viewpoint, in part, derived or align with concepts from the Urantia Book but is not "new age" in a literal sense, as it appears how your comments are trying to attribute a basis of genre.
I do not have a searchable version to test this but near certainty that there is not a single reference to the Annunaki in the Urantia Book.
As far as Satanic, that is your own personal belief and well entitled to it. Stating such concepts as satanic and omitting this as opinion based is disingenuous by nature.
"Ancient astronaut theorists say yes!"