Believers have us dead to rights, lets give up now.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15738
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Believers have us dead to rights, lets give up now.

 Lets just admit it atheists, this is how we all moved to our position.

Someone told me to barbecue kittens and sacrifice virgins, and that was all it took. Someone merely telling me something. I didn't even bother to question them. It simply felt right.

Allah exists Muslims, you got us.
Vishnu exists Hindus, you got us.
Yahweh exists Jews, you got us.
Magic babies and zombiegods exist Christians, you got us.
Magic underwear works Mormons, you got us.

The jig is up atheists, all those claims are true, because people have reasons and tradition and popularity. How dare we question ancient myth.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
While you apparently have excess time.

 http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/34598?page=1#comment-411450 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15738
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving

Beyond Saving wrote:

 http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/34598?page=1#comment-411450 

Um so? 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
lol

lol

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15738
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 http://www.rationalresponde

 http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/34598?page=1#comment-411450

 

Bumps it to  post #55 

And again. So the fuck what?

 

Are you guys still stupidly trying to paint me as wanting some sort of atheist utopia for merely and rightfully puting religion where it belongs? 

ALL religions are merely childish anthropomorphic reflections of our evolutionary group survival. And they will aways be posion because of that ignorance. The best humanity can do is put it on a leash like the west AREADY does so we do not become theocracies.

Stating that religion is superflous and there is no good reason other than a case of warm fuzzies to belong to one. And stating the fact that there is no evidence for any god in human histrory is not wrong or even an attemept at any sort of facism or hate for that matter.

You guys are as bad as theists confusing human rights with ability to demonstrate the credibility of a claim. And every single one of you have been around long before this current beef criticising and blaspheming religion yourselves.

Being that none of you buy any of the claims on that list like me, I find it laughable that you are doing this. Still mad at "Bob gate". 

There is no god and never was, you know that so why do any of you have a problem with challenging humanity to think without god goggles on? No one is arguing human rights here. They have the right to claim a invisible pink unicorn exists and I have the right to call that claim bullshit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
^ STILL doesn't get it.

^ STILL doesn't get it.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Vishnu exists

Brian37 wrote:
Vishnu exists Hindus, you got us.



hindu: "no, he doesn't."


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Are you guys

Brian37 wrote:
Are you guys still stupidly trying to paint me as wanting some sort of atheist utopia for merely and rightfully puting religion where it belongs?



"still"? when did anybody ever start doing that? still waiting for a shred of evidence. or you can just stop lying.


you can also stop ignoring the fact that none of us ever stopped blaspheming. jesus was a tranny, krishna is a blue-skinned effeminate faggot, and muhammad's wives were all prostitutes who sucked off pigs, etc.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

 http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/34598?page=1#comment-411450 

Um so? 

 


so...you're a fucking coward. a deliberately dishonest coward. i.e. a liar.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1951
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Oh, The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune

 Re:: Oh, The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune

  Turn that **frown (See:: Image) upside down (sweetness and light) . .

   Unforseen pain in my heart and texts at my finger tips,  . . why ever not . . .

Prahlada of Vishnu Purana Chapter XIX

 

  Brian sit at-the of feet Prahlada, And learn from the exhaustless store of the tree of true wisdom. ''Vishnu is in thee, father, and in me, and in all every where else; and hence how can I speak of friend or foe, as distinct from myself, tell me?  Thou art knowledge and ignorance . . poison and ambrosia .. the very means by which everything is accomphished''

   Prahlada tells, ''The Gods, men, animals, birds, reptiles, all are but forms of one eternal Vishńu, existing as it were detached from himself. By him who knows this, all the existing world, fixed or movable, is to be regarded as identical with himself, as proceeding alike from Vishńu, assuming a universal form''

   The questions   just  form  themselves, huh ?

    O! The joy You know, When any of the people are making highly sarcastic comments sometimes are unsure of the truth themselves. That sure sounds like you are unsure of the 'truth' there Mr. Brian ???

 

  --  --  --



 



     Cheeky scamp and imp . .

             **
              

 

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5u2Y6tr9w0 {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5u2Y6tr9w0}



 

 

 



   New Testament manuscript(s)::

 




 

  the Gospel according to Luke

 27 “But I say to you who hear: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless and curse not those who curse you''

   the Gospel according to John

  63 “Most assuredly, I say to you, It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life''

 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15738
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Brian37

iwbiek wrote:
Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

 http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/34598?page=1#comment-411450 

Um so? 

 

so...you're a fucking coward. a deliberately dishonest coward. i.e. a liar.
.

 

"Coward" that is fucking laughable. Typical male testosterone. No one wants to physically fight you dipshit. You are simply still angry that Bob didn't agree with you.

 

Now again, since I am sooooooooo fucking stupid.....maybe you since you love to read "teach", like books you have a childish kneejerk reaction to, please tell everyone here what it is I am not getting again?

 

Marx? Good intent with some things, but has a blanket soultion to the economy like Beyond does.

Or is it calling religion poison? Yep keep it up, you are like the car companies who ignored Nadar about how poorly cars were built and how unsafe they were.

No one is lying to you dipshit. You think I am getting it wrong, that does not make me a liar. You are simply pissed that I didn't simply roll over and say "he is a teacher, I must blindly accept what he is saying".

 

Holy books are not science textbooks and never will be. They are merely books of superstitions reflecting the groups that buy into them. Religion is an athropromorpic reflection of our group survival, our ignorance of that reality is preventing humanity from seeing our common existence.

Economics are not anything more than the attempt to stablize a society, the only difference between the views is arging over how to get to that stability. My view is since our species is diverse you cannot slap simple solutions on a diverse species. The objective is stability for more people. I am neither for a "no rules" as a goal, or Cuba nanny state. I do view workers as being more imporant than the rich because the rich make the money off that labor and stand on that  labor and will always outnumber the rich. I will never say, nor will you ever hear me say I want to get rid of the private sector, merely for pointing out the pay gap is fucking killing us.

But keep it up if you wish. You are not hurting my feelings in the least.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Typical male

Brian37 wrote:
Typical male testosterone. No one wants to physically fight you dipshit. You are simply still angry that Bob didn't agree with you.



do you honestly think one can only be a coward physically? you're an intellectual coward, and an ethical one as well. i don't know if you fear physical confrontation or not--and i don't care. i'm concerned with your pitiable fear of admitting you're wrong about even the most insignificant things.


you seem to be a hell of a lot more fixated on bob than i am, because you keep bringing him up. what makes you think i give a shit whether he agrees with me or not? and what was it i wanted him to agree with me on precisely? the only thing i ever said about him was that it was more tolerable to talk about buddhism with him than with you...and it is. i don't expect him to agree with me on anything, and i don't care if he does or not. unlike you, i don't hold him in some kind of intellectual awe. i don't consider his approval some kind of credential, though it's obvious you do. otherwise, why would you think i would be sore about it? i've never courted anyone's approval in my entire life, except perhaps my wife's. if people take my side in an argument here, it's not because i go running to them and asking them to, i promise you that.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:You think I am

Brian37 wrote:
You think I am getting it wrong, that does not make me a liar. You are simply pissed that I didn't simply roll over and say "he is a teacher, I must blindly accept what he is saying



no, what makes you a liar is what you've just done (not for the first time). you're a coward because you won't simply say "i was wrong when i said marx called capitalism the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and i was wrong when i said you called hitchens a maoist." you're a liar because you know that's why i'm calling you a coward, but you keep trying to make it about something else because your character is far too weak to just admit you were wrong. you know damn well i don't expect anyone to blindly accept anything. it's simply about you not having the guts to say, "i got my facts wrong." that's it. that's ALL it is. and you KNOW that.


you're also a coward because you're either going to ignore this post completely, or else yet again try to make it about something else.


let me reiterate so that everything is CRYSTAL CLEAR. i'm calling you a coward because you have consistently avoided saying, "i was wrong about marx calling capitalism 'the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.' i was wrong about marx thinking capitalism is a system of government. i was wrong about iwbiek calling hitchens a maoist." that's the ONLY REASON.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15738
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Brian37

iwbiek wrote:
Brian37 wrote:
You think I am getting it wrong, that does not make me a liar. You are simply pissed that I didn't simply roll over and say "he is a teacher, I must blindly accept what he is saying

no, what makes you a liar is what you've just done (not for the first time). you're a coward because you won't simply say "i was wrong when i said marx called capitalism the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and i was wrong when i said you called hitchens a maoist." you're a liar because you know that's why i'm calling you a coward, but you keep trying to make it about something else because your character is far too weak to just admit you were wrong. you know damn well i don't expect anyone to blindly accept anything. it's simply about you not having the guts to say, "i got my facts wrong." that's it. that's ALL it is. and you KNOW that.
you're also a coward because you're either going to ignore this post completely, or else yet again try to make it about something else.
let me reiterate so that everything is CRYSTAL CLEAR. i'm calling you a coward because you have consistently avoided saying, "i was wrong about marx calling capitalism 'the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.' i was wrong about marx thinking capitalism is a system of government. i was wrong about iwbiek calling hitchens a maoist." that's the ONLY REASON.

No i never said that you said those things I claimed that Marx siad that, and if you go back to that post I am pretty sure I was pointing out to you that HE said that. Now if my source is wrong that is a different story and you can argue that.

Now as far as accusing you of calling Hitchens a Maoist, you certainly have treated him and me for that matter as bullies who might as well be dictators because of him calling religion poison and me agreeing with him.  I said you cant make the argument that he is a bully because that is the way you were treating him for his use of the word "Poison". I was pointing out to YOU that he valued freedom and equated God to a "celestial North Korea". And he also wrote a book about Thomas Jefferson". No one who loves fascism would say those things or write a book about Jefferson.

The only argument you might have is that I am missreading or misquoting you, but to call me an intentional liar is bullshit and laughable.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Quote:No i never said that

Quote:

No i never said that you said those things I claimed that Marx siad that, and if you go back to that post I am pretty sure I was pointing out to you that HE said that. Now if my source is wrong that is a different story and you can argue that.

Yes, and as was pointed out to you multiple times by several people, including myself (hardly a huge Marx fan), Marx neither sad nor believed anything of the sort. Nor did Marx offer a "blanket solution" as you suggested above. This whole thing started with you spouting ignorant bullshit about what Marx believed as a means to smear iwbiek because of his choice of avatars and vocal support of marxism (and if I remember correctly in a thread completely unrelated to economics). After your bullshit being called bullshit, you abandoned the thread rather than either supporting it with a source or admitting "oops, I guess I was wrong, maybe I should actually read some Marx". Which led to iwbiek calling you out on it across a few threads and me bringing it up since you were apparently so bored that you felt a need to cut and paste a generic rant.  

 

Quote:

Now as far as accusing you of calling Hitchens a Maoist, you certainly have treated him and me for that matter as bullies who might as well be dictators because of him calling religion poison and me agreeing with him.  I said you cant make the argument that he is a bully because that is the way you were treating him for his use of the word "Poison". I was pointing out to YOU that he valued freedom and equated God to a "celestial North Korea". And he also wrote a book about Thomas Jefferson". No one who loves fascism would say those things or write a book about Jefferson.

As far as I can tell, iwbiek has never said a word about Hitchens. He has called YOU an idiot, not Hitch. And a Maoist wouldn't love facism...

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:No i never

Brian37 wrote:
No i never said that you said those things



WHAT!? are you totally illiterate? OF COURSE you never said i said those things. I NEVER SAID YOU DID. in all seriousness, do you have like a learning disability or something?


Brian37 wrote:

I claimed that Marx siad that, and if you go back to that post I am pretty sure I was pointing out to you that HE said that. Now if my source is wrong that is a different story and you can argue that.

I HAVE ARGUED IT. IN GREAT DETAIL.


http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/34598#comment-411417


(GO BACK AND READ IT CAREFULLY.)


not only did i argue it, i clearly WON THE ARGUMENT to anyone with reading comprehension skills. i showed you STEP BY STEP why those quotes, which you pulled right out of wikipedia, are SPURIOUS. i also explained to you, IN DETAIL, how even YOU should have realized they were spurious. and OF COURSE you won't admit it. you AGAIN try to make it about something else. i honestly think you have some sort of psychological condition which causes your perception of reality to become distorted anytime you come close to having to backtrack in an argument.


Brian37 wrote:

I said you cant make the argument that he is a bully because that is the way you were treating him for his use of the word "Poison".



i didn't make the argument he's a "bully" any more than i made the argument he's a "maoist." i haven't said enough about hitchens on this site to make up even a small paragraph, so how could i have argued ANYTHING about him? YOU keep making this about hitchens, just like YOU keep making it about bob. it's about YOU: just apologize for misquoting me already, like i apologized for misquoting you (http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/34633#comment-412002).

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
just in case you're either

just in case you're either too lazy or too afraid to go look at the post where i argue SUCCESSFULLY that you misquoted MARX (not ME, MARX), i'll quote the relevant portions here:


Quote:
let's learn a lesson in how to be a critical reader, shall we? wikipedia says, "he called capitalism 'the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.'" notice two things: one, only "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie" is in quotes. there is no quote that says "capitalism is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie." so already you have a second-hand interpretation, AT BEST. two, THERE IS NO SOURCE CITED. does this seriously not send up a red flag for you?


so we're left with the question, where did marx say that? where? beats me, and i've read a good chunk of his works. the nearest footnote to this "quote" (about four lines down) is a citation from the critique of the gotha program. where in this work does marx use the term "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie"? NOWHERE. now, i've read the critique, but just to be sure i hopped over to the marxist internet archive where they have it in electronic form and did a search for "dictatorship." the term "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie" is nowhere. NO-FUCKING-WHERE.


as far as i can tell (which is MUCH FARTHER THAN YOU), marx NEVER used the term "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie," referring to capitalism or anything else. LENIN, however, DID refer to "bourgeois democracy" as a "dictatorship" on numerous occasions. not "capitalism," though.



and don't try to pin it all on your source and say, "well, so my source got it wrong." part of intellectual integrity is checking, as far as you possibly can, the reliability of your sources. not only did i demonstrate you misquoted MARX (not ME, MARX), but i also demonstrated you obviously didn't try to check your source at all, because it said what you WANTED it to say.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
christ, i'm starting to feel

christ, i'm starting to feel like a grown man beating up a mentally handicapped child...


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
              

   

 

                   I wouldn't normally enjoy watching someone beat up a mentally handicapped child but this exchange is just so entertaining I can't help myself.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
I was debating on shooting

I was debating on shooting myself because I couldn't get the OP out of mind. You know, one of those things where once you see it, the memory of it burns your mind for a really, really long time.

As I backed out of the thread hoping to forget it even existed I wondered who the OP was really for? What was its purpose? I mean, rarely do we see theists these days, they come and go as quickly as the seasons. So I ruled out that it was actually for them. 

My only conclusion is that it was posted to start an ruckus. To stir the pot. Nothing was constructive about the OP.