a call for action on behalf of the world bank is political. that is the problem for the site, the original poster, and the up-voters to consider along with the dissenters. besides, all social organization is political, that is what politics is.

and on [good and] evil:

a. our social condition reasonably constructs a concept of evil worthy of consideration, it also helps our society work, hopefully to benefit the individual

b. on the macro-scale our biological imperative most likely assists in that construction, but that does not imply the construction is always successful in the macro or micro scale (think dinosaurs). besides, what do i care about macro, micro has plenty to consider for me, i'll leave the very long-term to the gene pool to worry about

c. and we create our own truth, you have yours and i have mine. i like mine, but it's constantly adjusting as i attempt to learn

so tell me again where the problem is?

(and no, in response to your comment below, it's you who said that about politics, i just responded with the basic problem in what you're saying)

p.s. i can't respond to posts anymore, i guess i'm a troll, awesome system this. block ur ears from the bad man everyone!

p.p.s. score for the reddit suggestion! psuedo-victorian genteel ideal that it is (the suggestion that is)

and regarding point #3, i'm responding to your questions Thom, responding, you asked how the word evil can be used, i explained why i think it is a valid term for an atheist to use in context. #1 is the answer to the question about why it applies to this discussion.

these are not ideas i came up with, they are the basic problems of philosophy. obviously you don't have agree and neither can i expect that i control the market on truth. that's what intellectual honesty is. i gave you a rough outline of the framework i'm basing opinions and these includes points you can use to refute me...because i can use those point to refute me too.

i am choosing to focus on the social benefits for our time, and i make no claim that this is not a self-serving act, anyone who does is probably lying, though it would be wonderful to be proven wrong. i'm just looking for better society than what we live in now. better for others means better for you and me. it doesn't matter how many cars i have if i sm living in fear of the next attack from our enemies. or the next financial upset. or the rise of china and what it means for my children and grandchildren (well, i've only got the children right now)

on the social scale we are propagating something usefully described as evil in the context of our time in our society and affecting us. and i believe it is an extended condition largely because of our faulty debate mechanisms, susceptibility to propaganda, hypersensitivity to inconvenience...blah blah blah

So basically what you are saying is that we shouldn't post anything because everything is political?

Open-source movement is political and some would argue has some negative economic and thus political consequences to society.

With regards to good vs. evil.

Please show how your 3 points validates that World Bank is evil.

The very problem even if we could set up metrics (we can't) is exactly in the interpretation of those 3 points in relation to something like the World Bank.