It'd be easier to prove god doesn't exist, if we could prove he exists

RationalRespons...
Moderator
RationalResponseSquad's picture
Posts: 556
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
It'd be easier to prove god doesn't exist, if we could prove he exists

FROM A CHRISTIAN, YOU RESPOND:

----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: Bryan
Date: Oct 2, 2006 12:42 PM

I agree that the idea of the exitence of God is irrational. Did Jesus exist? I'm pretty sure it has been proven that he did, and was a real person. Tell me, what is so bad about the fundamental ideas, of Christianity. You cant prove that God exists. Thats why Christianity is based on FAITH.
If you could prove that God exists you would have a much eiaser time convincing people to not follow him. Irrational huh? I remember in school that one of my history teachers told us that, historicly, the more out-landish the lie, the more likely a mass of people would belive it. He then went on to teach us about Hitler, and the hollocaust.
Now that idea could (in your mind) explain why people become Christians in the first place, but it also supports my prior claim as to if there were proof your role would be easy. People are naturally irrational. It is irrational to think that someone would give their life for a stanger, but it happens everyday. It is irrational to "fight for peace" but it is a reality, and a neccesity. I guess All I am saying is that when people realize that they cannot control every aspect in their lives, rationaly it could be helpfull for them to belive that there is a guiding force to help them through their everyday lives. Some people need to belive in irrational theorys like religion to keep themselves mentaly stable.
Not everybody has the brainpower to rely on personal researsch. And if I dont physically reserch somthing, and I am relying on what some one told me the research says.... then I still am not being rational. With that statement, I could go as far as to say just because I read somthing doesnt make it so. Statements like these support and disprove both ideas. But Why would you want to abolish an idea that is inherently good? If what you are saying is true, then man invented God. Man invente Satan. Man invented Heaven, And Hell. It could be argued that the Bible is just a book of guidlines on how to live your life. And it seems to me that if you were to follow those guidelines, you could live a life that most would deem as good.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


AntiFaith
AntiFaith's picture
Posts: 197
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
Quote:But Why would you want

Quote:
But Why would you want to abolish an idea that is inherently good? If what you are saying is true, then man invented God. Man invente Satan. Man invented Heaven, And Hell. It could be argued that the Bible is just a book of guidlines on how to live your life. And it seems to me that if you were to follow those guidelines, you could live a life that most would deem as good.

I can only answer this part..

Quote:
But Why would you want to abolish an idea that is inherently good?

If you have not read the bible yourself, the whole bible, then this statement of yours is an assumption based on what people say. It does not matter if you do not have time to read the bible, because you do not know what you are talking about if you have not read it anyways.

Quote:
Man invente Satan. Man invented Heaven, And Hell. It could be argued that the Bible is just a book of guidlines on how to live your life.

If you have not read it, then you do not know what you are talking about and so you should have no beliefs about it until you read it yourself. Also, good guidelines for living require actual thought some where, where as the bible requires Faith. No questioning what the book says is good. Heaven, Hell and faith is all about getting people to obey rather than thinking and searching for what is good.

Quote:
And it seems to me that if you were to follow those guidelines, you could live a life that most would deem as good.

Have you read the bible? The majority can oppress the minority sometimes and so it does not matter what most deem as good if there is no real thought as to what is good. Christianity is all about obeying God, not thinking about what is good. The bible already has the answers that we must obey on Faith. Blind obediance is not thinking or real searching for the good or for virtue.


MarthaSplatterhead (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
I suggest people read the

I suggest people read the posts that already answers these questions. Go to the freethinking forum and click around there or general conversation and definetly hit HamuROOKis irrational precepts. Maybe you will see something you are interested in specifically. I hope you take something positive from this site and not think the people here are attacking you personally (like a few xtians do). So far I can tell you people on here do not agree on everything, just that religion is indeed irrational. Irrational all the way from faith healers to jesus camps to "God bless you."


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
MarthaSplatterhead wrote:I

MarthaSplatterhead wrote:
I suggest people read the posts that already answers these questions. Go to the freethinking forum and click around there or general conversation and definetly hit HamuROOKis irrational precepts. Maybe you will see something you are interested in specifically. I hope you take something positive from this site and not think the people here are attacking you personally (like a few xtians do).

This is a common tactic of people, to write us personally when all of their questions can be answered by the community here. My feeling is they're too lazy to get the answers with the minimal amount of work required or are too worried that their views wont hold up to rational public scrutiny. Just a theory.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Bryan wrote:I agree that the

Bryan wrote:
I agree that the idea of the exitence of God is irrational. Did Jesus exist? I'm pretty sure it has been proven that he did, and was a real person.

Well some debate that, however I haven't seen a whole lot of either side so I reserve judgement on that. However a lot of the historical evidence is basically people citing a bunch of other people. Now this wouldn't be that bad, but I hear that those people they have traced the earliest back to people who didn't live during his time. Also unlike other characters if you take him out it doesn't effect the time line of things a whole lot. If he did have an effect, in a historical sense, it was only from others being effected by christianity. So even if he was a myth it doesn't completely mess up history. The movie "The God Who Wasn't There" talks about this, although I haven't seen it.
Quote:
Tell me, what is so bad about the fundamental ideas, of Christianity. You cant prove that God exists. Thats why Christianity is based on FAITH.

Well if a person looks at all the ideas that the preachers stopped talking about a person can pick out a lot of bad things. One thing I find striking is Deuteronomy 13. Also you just said christianity is based on belief for no reason, that what faith is.
Quote:
If you could prove that God exists you would have a much eiaser time convincing people to not follow him. Irrational huh? I remember in school that one of my history teachers told us that, historicly, the more out-landish the lie, the more likely a mass of people would belive it. He then went on to teach us about Hitler, and the hollocaust.

I doubt that is completely accurate, but it would be true that more people would latch on to a good story.
Quote:
Now that idea could (in your mind) explain why people become Christians in the first place, but it also supports my prior claim as to if there were proof your role would be easy. People are naturally irrational. It is irrational to think that someone would give their life for a stanger, but it happens everyday. It is irrational to "fight for peace" but it is a reality, and a neccesity. I guess All I am saying is that when people realize that they cannot control every aspect in their lives, rationaly it could be helpfull for them to belive that there is a guiding force to help them through their everyday lives. Some people need to belive in irrational theorys like religion to keep themselves mentaly stable.

I think humans should be able to put aside those feel good stories once they have the ability to live without them. Like children put away their ideas of santa when they grow up. This would just be humans growing up as a species.
Quote:
Not everybody has the brainpower to rely on personal researsch. And if I dont physically reserch somthing, and I am relying on what some one told me the research says.... then I still am not being rational.

With that statement, I could go as far as to say just because I read somthing doesnt make it so. Statements like these support and disprove both ideas.


Well yes there is a bit of that, but those people tested and in science class we would do little test to prove the theories again. Well it was more to understand them better, but the test did prove them. The religions don't test anything and don't offer anyway to test as the scientist could.
Quote:
But Why would you want to abolish an idea that is inherently good?

Been irrational is good? I don't think this is exactly what you mean so I think I'll address the real point else where.
Quote:
If what you are saying is true, then man invented God. Man invente Satan. Man invented Heaven, And Hell. It could be argued that the Bible is just a book of guidlines on how to live your life. And it seems to me that if you were to follow those guidelines, you could live a life that most would deem as good.

This touches on a idea called Pascal's Wager. It basically says it is more rational to believe because only good can happen. However the religion takes up your time and money. Then the religion prevents you from doing certain things or interacting with certain people. Also there are aspects that could harm you or others. Think of all the harm and exclusion religion has caused in the past. You may reply by saying religion also causes good, but if those people were good they wouldn't need religion to do good.

As I see it religion is only around for people who don't want to face reality or to control the masses. The first is just a comment about weak people the second is comment on religion as a tool for tyranny.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
irrationality

Is there room in rationality for Chaos?


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
The title of this thread.

The title of this thread, is not what I said.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:Is there room in

Boots wrote:
Is there room in rationality for Chaos?

Yes.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:The title of

Boots wrote:
The title of this thread, is not what I said.

Close enough. You weren't quoted in the title. Our titles are generally created with some humorous intent.

Here's what you said, "If you could prove that God exists you would have a much eiaser time convincing people to not follow him."

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Wow that was Quick! So if

Wow that was Quick!
So if there is room for chaos in rationality, then there is room for ideas that cant be proven.
Chaos:
1. a state of utter confusion or disorder; a total lack of organization or order.
2. any confused, disorderly mass: a chaos of meaningless phrases.
3. the infinity of space or formless matter supposed to have preceded the existence of the ordered universe.
4. (initial capital letter) the personification of this in any of several ancient Greek myths.
5. Obsolete. a chasm or abyss.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:Wow that was

Boots wrote:
Wow that was Quick!
So if there is room for chaos in rationality, then there is room for ideas that cant be proven.

There's also room for your non sequitur.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Don't forget equivocation,

Don't forget equivocation, too.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
You got me.... It didnt make

You got me.... It didnt make sense... But i dont belive that anyone can live their entire adult life thinking rationaly, and be completley happy. Irrational thinking is fun, and can be paired with creative and rational thinking to accoplish greater achievements than rational thinking alone could.
As far as the whole God issue, Youve got science, who can argue with that? But people that believe that there is a higher power have faith. And because we have certian freedoms we can believe what we like, rational or not.
I do not see your veiws as wrong, but wrong for me. I do not think any lesser of you for your beliefs, I do not think you are unintelegent, quite the oppisite. I should hope for the same respect from the people of this forum, who I hope to have many more interesting discussions with in the future.
Thanks for having me, an irrational thinker,
Boots


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
You also have the freedom to

You also have the freedom to believe that 2 + 2 = 7, or that "cat" is spelled "k-a-t" or that pouring ice cream into computers makes them work better. You can have as much "faith" as you want in these beliefs, but they are still not true.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
I do believe that that is

I do believe that that is what I said.


Kemono
Posts: 137
Joined: 2006-08-13
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Thanks for having me,

Quote:
Thanks for having me, an irrational thinker,
Boots

Great to have you, Boots.

Judging by your OP, you are probably wondering why many of us are actively promoting freethought rather than keeping our views to ourselves. I assure you it is not because we are a bunch of snobbish prigs but because it is getting increasingly hard for mankind to survive its religious differences. I rather like the world and I am in no hurry to see it end.

Sam Harris has made the case against religious faith in far more elegant and entertaining terms than I can. I recommend reading his book "The End of Faith", but for a short introduction into his case see this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3YOIImOoYM


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
If someone really did

If someone really did believe any of the things I put, wouldn't it have a negative affect on their life? And wouldn't you feel like convincing them of the truth?

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
on second thought, I really

on second thought, I really dont belong here. Your main goal is to abolish the idea that there is a God. I knew when I accepted the fact that I belive, that it was an irrational decision.
I dont feel the need to be rational 24-7. And I dont feel the need to try to persuade other people to generaly think a certian way. I do occasionaly like to try and explain the way I think, or what I am thinking. But it has occured to me, that it is highly likely that there are more people that are members of this group that are not truly "free thinkers", than any of them would like to admit. Just as many people are followers of and participate with, and give money to other organizations.
I do not belive that your cause is noble. Of course I would'nt. There is a lot of energy being used to propel this cause, when there are more serious problems that could be addressed.
I think that most people dont care what you believe theologicly speaking, and rarely, if ever, have my christian beliefs adversely affected my interaction with society. If I am asked, I will tell. If it comes up in conversation I will give my point of view. I am open minded enough to realize that people will believe what they want. There is nothing wrong with that.. Scientificaly maybe... Moraly definitly not. If someone belives that setting puppies on fire is good, they are entitled to their beliefs, as they are entitled to the consequences of those beliefs.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:on second

Boots wrote:
on second thought, I really dont belong here. Your main goal is to abolish the idea that there is a God.

No, it's to implore people to think rationally. God belief goes down the drain as a byproduct of that.

Quote:
I knew when I accepted the fact that I belive, that it was an irrational decision. I dont feel the need to be rational 24-7.

On such an important belief, potentially one of the biggest beliefs of your life I think you should strive to be rational. Is it ok to be irrational once in a while? Sure!

Quote:
And I dont feel the need to try to persuade other people to generaly think a certian way. I do occasionaly like to try and explain the way I think, or what I am thinking. But it has occured to me, that it is highly likely that there are more people that are members of this group that are not truly "free thinkers", than any of them would like to admit. Just as many people are followers of and participate with, and give money to other organizations.

Giving money to an organization is not what stops one from being a freethinker. Having religious beliefs is what stops one from "freethinking."

Quote:
I do not belive that your cause is noble. Of course I would'nt. There is a lot of energy being used to propel this cause, when there are more serious problems that could be addressed.

Like what? How many of them either don't have roots in religion, or aren't currently being mishandled by religious people right now?

Quote:
If someone belives that setting puppies on fire is good, they are entitled to their beliefs, as they are entitled to the consequences of those beliefs.

Should the puppies have to suffer because of that persons beliefs? Should we have to suffer because of the beliefs of Christians?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I would disagree that it's

I would disagree that it's OK to be "irrational." I've read a number of times the differences between rational (knowing through evidence), nonrational (preferences, love, beauty, etc) and irrational (belief without of contrary to evidence.) Rational is of course desirable, and the nonrational is fine, but the irrational should be avoided as much as possible.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:I would

MattShizzle wrote:
I would disagree that it's OK to be "irrational." I've read a number of times the differences between rational (knowing through evidence), nonrational (preferences, love, beauty, etc) and irrational (belief without of contrary to evidence.) Rational is of course desirable, and the nonrational is fine, but the irrational should be avoided as much as possible.

Well if you're going to define the terms like that, then I would agree as well, avoid irrational behavior at all costs. However when we talk about this amongst the core members we tend to come up with what you are calling "nonrational" (love, preferences, etc) as "irrational." It's an interesting distinction you've made, I'll talk with the crew about it.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient

Sapient wrote:
MarthaSplatterhead wrote:
I suggest people read the posts that already answers these questions. Go to the freethinking forum and click around there or general conversation and definetly hit HamuROOKis irrational precepts. Maybe you will see something you are interested in specifically. I hope you take something positive from this site and not think the people here are attacking you personally (like a few xtians do).

This is a common tactic of people, to write us personally when all of their questions can be answered by the community here. My feeling is they're too lazy to get the answers with the minimal amount of work required or are too worried that their views wont hold up to rational public scrutiny. Just a theory.


Does this theroy support my neglecting to research your archives for information? I am confused the way I am reading it it could go either way, but the feeling I get is that you think I should have gone back and read what other people have said about tjhe issues we are discussing, before chiming in.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I just reread "Natural

I just reread "Natural Atheism", and it included defining those 3 terms.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Having

Sapient wrote:
Having religious beliefs is what stops one from "freethinking."

*Saying that having religious beliefs stops freethought is like saying having a history major stops you from learning any thing else. Its ridiculous.*

Quote:
I do not belive that your cause is noble. Of course I would'nt. There is a lot of energy being used to propel this cause, when there are more serious problems that could be addressed.

Like what? How many of them either don't have roots in religion, or aren't currently being mishandled by religious people right now?

If you have problems with the way certian charitys or causes are being handled, why dont you start you own. Personaly I cannot say that I am a very charitable person, but when I do give money or my time to a cause, it is one that I can be sure is being opperated in a manner condusive to helping the cause, not lining the pockets of a politician, or preacher. You are right, there are crooks using the guise of public sevants, or servant of god. But there are causes and charitys that are true to there mission statement.

Quote:
If someone belives that setting puppies on fire is good, they are entitled to their beliefs, as they are entitled to the consequences of those beliefs.

Should the puppies have to suffer because of that persons beliefs? Should we have to suffer because of the beliefs of Christians?

Of course the puppie shouldnt have to suffer, thus the consequences the the Puppy burner would have to face. The moral code that christianty uses is that of most humanity. So when someone does "wrong" soceity provides concequenses. People are free to develop their own moral standards. They do this based on personal experience.
How are We suffering because of the belief of Christians?


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sorry I messed up the quote

Sorry I messed up the quote thing. I am not ver computer literate.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
This is Sapient actual

This is Sapient actual diolouge

Sapient wrote:
Boots wrote:
on second thought, I really dont belong here. Your main goal is to abolish the idea that there is a God.

No, it's to implore people to think rationally. God belief goes down the drain as a byproduct of that.

Quote:
I knew when I accepted the fact that I belive, that it was an irrational decision. I dont feel the need to be rational 24-7.

On such an important belief, potentially one of the biggest beliefs of your life I think you should strive to be rational. Is it ok to be irrational once in a while? Sure!

Quote:
And I dont feel the need to try to persuade other people to generaly think a certian way. I do occasionaly like to try and explain the way I think, or what I am thinking. But it has occured to me, that it is highly likely that there are more people that are members of this group that are not truly "free thinkers", than any of them would like to admit. Just as many people are followers of and participate with, and give money to other organizations.

Giving money to an organization is not what stops one from being a freethinker. Having religious beliefs is what stops one from "freethinking."

Quote:
I do not belive that your cause is noble. Of course I would'nt. There is a lot of energy being used to propel this cause, when there are more serious problems that could be addressed.

Like what? How many of them either don't have roots in religion, or aren't currently being mishandled by religious people right now?

Quote:
If someone belives that setting puppies on fire is good, they are entitled to their beliefs, as they are entitled to the consequences of those beliefs.

Should the puppies have to suffer because of that persons beliefs? Should we have to suffer because of the beliefs of Christians?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote: Of course the

Boots wrote:

Of course the puppie shouldnt have to suffer, thus the consequences the the Puppy burner would have to face.

So you agree that we shouldn't have to suffer because of the beliefs of others, and that's why were here.

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting anti-abortion legislation?

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting legislation that restricts the rights of homosexuals?

Quote:
The moral code that christianty uses is that of most humanity.

I agree and that moral code would be: hypocrisy

Quote:
So when someone does "wrong" soceity provides concequenses.

And here we are providing the consequences, a wake up call to those who "wrong" society by teaching them false unprovable and irrational claims.

Quote:
People are free to develop their own moral standards. They do this based on personal experience.

Agreed!

Quote:
How are We suffering because of the belief of Christians?

The short answer.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:Boots wrote:on

Sapient wrote:
Boots wrote:
on second thought, I really dont belong here. Your main goal is to abolish the idea that there is a God.

No, it's to implore people to think rationally. God belief goes down the drain as a byproduct of that.

If this is not your main goal, why is you site, you bullitens, everything you produce, postered with "there is no God" banter?


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
I listened to part 1 and 2

I listened to part 1 and 2 of the link you provided, but i fail to see how any one is suffering from christian beliefs. In the interview the preacher said that the bible does not contradict it self....I dont know how true that is as I have not studied the bible in its entirety, or any of it extensively. But in christianity, there are many religions of which certian beliefs are contrary. Some more liberal than others. Some more accepting of certian social changes. Some Christan churches dont belive that Gays are "Damned". Some Christian Churches are not completly anti abortion. Every Christian church that I have attended always realized that we are human, and will make mistakes. We will continue to make mistakes even if Christianity is abolished. There will still be corruption if all religion is abolished. Its as simple as people make choices, and people face the consequences. If you think that after you die you are gone... you are misled. As we interact pieces of us become a part of the other. Not on any great scale, but what you are doing is a part of you. If you have children or any family, this hapens on a much greater scale. So youmay not face the consequences of a decision you make in your lifetime, but someone does.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Quote:The

Sapient wrote:

Quote:
The moral code that christianty uses is that of most humanity.

I agree and that moral code would be: hypocrisy

So your saying that society says it good to say one thing and do another?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:Sapient

Boots wrote:
Sapient wrote:
Boots wrote:
on second thought, I really dont belong here. Your main goal is to abolish the idea that there is a God.

No, it's to implore people to think rationally. God belief goes down the drain as a byproduct of that.

If this is not your main goal, why is you site, you bullitens, everything you produce, postered with "there is no God" banter?

I'm not sure why you asked this question. It's not a question you'd expect, as you asked a question that I just answered.

God belief is not rational, we implore people to think rationally. It's rather simple.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:Sapient

Boots wrote:
Sapient wrote:

Quote:
The moral code that christianty uses is that of most humanity.

I agree and that moral code would be: hypocrisy

So your saying that society says it good to say one thing and do another?

I'm saying that the majority of the world is comprised of hypocrites.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: What are the

Sapient wrote:

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting anti-abortion legislation?

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting legislation that restricts the rights of homosexuals?

What are the negative consequences you would face for supporting either of those causes?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:Sapient

Boots wrote:
Sapient wrote:

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting anti-abortion legislation?

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting legislation that restricts the rights of homosexuals?

What are the negative consequences you would face for supporting either of those causes?

That was my question for you.

You're not following this conversation at all. Go back re-read.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
AntiFaith wrote:

AntiFaith wrote:

If you have not read it, then you do not know what you are talking about and so you should have no beliefs about it until you read it yourself.

You left this part out when you quoted me, maybe you didnt see it.

Boots wrote:

And if I dont physically reserch somthing, and I am relying on what some one told me the research says.... then I still am not being rational. With that statement, I could go as far as to say just because I read somthing doesnt make it so. Statements like these support and disprove both ideas.

AntiFaith wrote:

Also, good guidelines for living require actual thought some where,

Doesnt reading require thought...real actual thought.
AntiFaith wrote:

Christianity is all about obeying God, not thinking about what is good.

No wonder you have it out for Christianity. You perception of what "Christianity is all about" is severly over exagerated. yes Christians believe that they should obey God. But I believe it's more about living a good life. And I also believe that each individual Christian is entitled to decide for them selves what Christianity is all about. you are entitled to your views, and if you were a Christian at any point, it is unfortunate that you went to the churches you did, and came out of it with such a narrow definition of what it is to be a Christian.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:Boots

Sapient wrote:
Boots wrote:
Sapient wrote:

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting anti-abortion legislation?

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting legislation that restricts the rights of homosexuals?

What are the negative consequences you would face for supporting either of those causes?

That was my question for you.

You're not following this conversation at all. Go back re-read.

Sorry, I understood the questions, I just typed faster than I thought. What I meant was what are the negative consequences you would face Opposing these causes.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:Sapient

Boots wrote:
Sapient wrote:
Boots wrote:
Sapient wrote:

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting anti-abortion legislation?

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting legislation that restricts the rights of homosexuals?

What are the negative consequences you would face for supporting either of those causes?

That was my question for you.

You're not following this conversation at all. Go back re-read.


What I meant was what are the negative consequences you would face Opposing these causes.

If you were actually following along you wouldn't have answered a question with a question. I don't have the time to backtrack. I could answer, but the ball wasn't in my court, my question was derived from arguments YOU made.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:Boots

Sapient wrote:
Boots wrote:

Of course the puppie shouldnt have to suffer, thus the consequences the the Puppy burner would have to face.

So you agree that we shouldn't have to suffer because of the beliefs of others, and that's why were here.

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting anti-abortion legislation?

What are the negative consequences that a religious person will face for supporting legislation that restricts the rights of homosexuals?

See you showed that people who hold beliefs that infringe on the rights of others (the belief to burn puppies) would have repercussions. My question to you is/was, what are the repercussions for people who restrict peoples right to an abortion or people who restrict the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness to a gay person? WHAT ARE THE REPERCUSSIONS?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
You are getting tired of

You are getting tired of me.
Examples of how supporting thes causes could provide repercussions:

You vote Anti-abortion, you get raped, someone you know gets raped, your daughter gets raped, and they cannot leagaly get an abortion. You live with guilt, and possibly an illigitemate grandchild/child/neice/nephew/friend of the family that remindsyou everyday of your decision.

The same sort of scenario could happen to a person who supports anti-gay legislation.

Laws are laws. laws are not morals.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:You are getting

Boots wrote:
You are getting tired of me.

I am not "tired" of you, I just don't want to have to reitterate a point several times and then appear rude or short with you. I simply don't have the time to go over and over the same point.

Quote:

Examples of how supporting thes causes could provide repercussions:

You vote Anti-abortion, you get raped, someone you know gets raped, your daughter gets raped, and they cannot leagaly get an abortion. You live with guilt, and possibly an illigitemate grandchild/child/neice/nephew/friend of the family that remindsyou everyday of your decision.

Ok, now instead of someone having to suffer those consequences, would you advocate programs or people who sought to educate people on those consequences so they didn't have to go through them?

Quote:
Laws are laws. laws are not morals.

Ah, but the problem with our government right now is that so many want to legislate based on their version of morality. Their version of morality is archaic, unreasonable, and defies the Constitution.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:

Sapient wrote:

Ok, now instead of someone having to suffer those consequences, would you advocate programs or people who sought to educate people on those consequences so they didn't have to go through them?


I'm not sure how to take this question. If you mean education about abortion and being gay, Sure I would support education about those things. Of course I am not anti gay, or anti abortion. I think that the people who are... when and if it comes back to them, that they , or their family should suffer the consequenses of their actions. They had every oppotunity to make a different decision.

Quote:
Laws are laws. laws are not morals.

Sapient wrote:

Ah, but the problem with our government right now is that so many want to legislate based on their version of morality. Their version of morality is archaic, unreasonable, and defies the Constitution.

So Christianity as a whole is to blame?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote: If you mean

Boots wrote:

If you mean education about abortion and being gay, Sure I would support education about those things. Of course I am not anti gay, or anti abortion. I think that the people who are... when and if it comes back to them, that they , or their family should suffer the consequenses of their actions. They had every oppotunity to make a different decision.

Yes, what I was asking is do you see the benefit in educating people on how to avoid consequences and future suffering. In this case you seem to agree, we should educate those who seek to remove someones constitutional rights, by showing them how they are removing their own rights. So my question is, if you agree that it's ok to educate people to avoid suffering, do you agree it's ok for us to educate people on how theism can cause suffering so they can avoid being theist?

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Laws are laws. laws are not morals.

Ah, but the problem with our government right now is that so many want to legislate based on their version of morality. Their version of morality is archaic, unreasonable, and defies the Constitution.

So run for office...make a difference

I don't have the proper finances, and I'm an outspoken atheist, I stand little chance. I prefer to affect change in the best way I can, which is right here.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


MarthaSplatterhead (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote: So Christianity

Boots wrote:

So Christianity as a whole is to blame?

People that interpret the bible to justify their political agenda is where the blame partially lies. But don't forget the Pope, who will not condone the use of condoms, esp. in places like Africa where Aids is out of hand. Extreme groups like the "God Hates Fags" people or the KKK pick and choose verses from the bible to promote their causes. "Focus on the Family" would like to see Bert and Ernie removed from Sesame Street because of their "implied" gayness. They also have a problem with Tinky Winky because he has a triangle on top of his head and carries a purse which is actually his magic bag.

Now let's take the tamer Christian out there, I'll use my parents-in- law. They go to church every Sunday and Wed. night. They pray before every meal. They donate to charity. They vote for the Repulican every time. They don't question issues that go along with what the Republicans as a whole want. They KNOW what is best. Dr. Phil is their man. I know that all Christians aren't Republican. My own xtian dad can't stand the Bushes administrations but he too did irrational things like quote bible verses at me while knocking me around.

So yeah Christianity, along with every other religion, is to blame. Imagine a world without religion. People not taking for granted the life they have on this planet right now. Actually living instead of believing that they are going somewhere better after this. Believing that I am going to fry in hell because I don't believe. (Which I think is pretty messed up that my xtian family and friends really think this of me).


Insidium Profundis
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-10-04
User is offlineOffline
There are many detriments

There are many detriments that result directly from Christian dogma: the ban on stem-cell research (which is perhaps the most promising area of pharmaceutical research that exists); the abstinence-only sex education that is both ineffective and impractical; the irrational demonization of homosexuals which has caused the sickening homosexual counterculture; the high rate of HIV infections due to the aforementioned abstinence-only preaching and condemnation of condoms.

Furthermore, the form of religious moderatism which you practice, which is fine per se, makes religion immune to criticism. It is like a passive defense system.

An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.


neon
neon's picture
Posts: 151
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Er, Bryan (OP): The Bible is

Er, Bryan (OP):

The Bible is good?

Have you read the part where it says you can own a slave, and you can beat him, but not to death, 'for the slave is his money'-- meaning if the master kills a slave he won't be able to make him work and earn any money exploiting him?

tongued


Boots
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-10-03
User is offlineOffline
neon wrote:Er, Bryan

neon wrote:
Er, Bryan (OP):

The Bible is good?

Have you read the part where it says you can own a slave, and you can beat him, but not to death, 'for the slave is his money'-- meaning if the master kills a slave he won't be able to make him work and earn any money exploiting him?

tongued


could you tell me what verse in what book?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Boots wrote:neon wrote:Er,

Boots wrote:
neon wrote:
Er, Bryan (OP):

The Bible is good?

Have you read the part where it says you can own a slave, and you can beat him, but not to death, 'for the slave is his money'-- meaning if the master kills a slave he won't be able to make him work and earn any money exploiting him?

tongued


could you tell me what verse in what book?

Exodus
21:20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.

21:21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

In other words, you can beat your slave as long as they can continue working, because that's your property. Keep in mind, the slave is one of gods children that he loves. Shocked

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Faithless1981
Posts: 30
Joined: 2006-10-25
User is offlineOffline
In response

Personally, I would never hold the bible up to something that people should aspire for moral living. It promotes love yes, and goodness, in some parts, and in others, hate, racism, sexism, murder, etc. I disagree with your statement that people are inherantly irrational. I think people are very smart, we are pattern seeking creatures, and when people didn't know why something happened, we would make stuff up to fill in the gaps, "god of the gaps" if you will. Religion is not something we just decided to pick on. We see the dangers of thinking irrationally, and religion is a symptom of that kind of reasoning. It's true, a lot of religious people out there aren't a danger to anyone, but simple things like, telling a child about the terrors of hell and sin, and telling them that their friends with different beliefs are going to eternally burn in hell......that isn't kindness or good. Religion was used as a place holder for something unknown, but if we want to grow as a species, we must let go of these comforting myths and approach the world with curiousity and our own moral compasses.