Religion is good
Offline I hear a lot of atheists claim that religion is "dangerous" or some nonsense like that.
Whenever I ask atheists about why they're "sooo concerned" about other people's belief in god or why they bother arguing with theists, I oftentimes get a responce along the lines of how "dangerous" religions are supposed to be.
Are there any atheists on here that believe this way? That religion is somehow prone to executing violence or discrimination?
In my opinion, it's almost entirely human nature. If someone wants to commit mass genocide, he's going to do it with or without religion, religion just MAYBE at best, gives him a better veil to hide in.
But it's funny how everyone conveniently skates around the fact that religions also do alot of good. Churches hold countless functions to benefit the poor, and you can't tell me that the values taught by most religions have not been used to help others.
So besides the fact that theists may believe in an entity that you might think is "illogical" or disagrees with you bigoted points of view, why do you atheists in general hate religion? Human nature spawns ignorance, bigotry, and violence, NOT religion.
Thoughts?
- Login to post comments
Homosexuality does have a purpose for the individuals and/or the group, as with many other things man and other animals do which are not directly connected with food, shelter and reproduction.
In fact your observation that many 'queers' do contribute in many ways is part of the 'reason' for their existence. In some areas of art, for example, their contribution is out of proportion to their numbers. There definitely is evidence that they contribute to the group in more than enough ways to complement the contribution from those kept busy with child rearing.
Forced homosexual penetration is typically a way of reinforcing power status in creatures which live in groups.
Consensual sexuality in nature for pleasure, both homosexual and heterosexual, typically serves as a bonding exercise, an important thing in social animals. In reproducing couples, sex for pleasure helps to keep the male around so he can assist in rearing the offspring.
There is an increase in possibility of AIDS treansmisssion thru anal intercourse, NOT because it is dirty, but because the skin there is more easily damaged leading to bleeding. The AIDS virus has to come from the blood or othe body fluids of the infected partner, it DOES NOT come from the fecal matter, so it has nothing to do with the anus being 'dirty'.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
What a fucking idiot. It has nothing to do with the ass being "dirty. " Receiving anal sex is more likely to get someone aids than giving it. You should think lesbians are even better than heterosexuals by your logic - it's almost impossible for AIDS to transfer through lesbians having sex.
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
Neither does anything else. I'm a biologist, and this is one of the first things you learn when you study biology. Biologists will usually refer to functions but never to "purposes" because the concept of "innate purpose" isn't really meaningful. A sizeable chunk of dullards (yourself included) seem to labour under the delusion that the "purpose" of life is to reproduce (you indicated that homosexuality is "unnatural" because they do not reproduce). This is preposterous. We say that life does reproduce and that biological entities by definition contain hereditary information which can be transferred to progeny, but that does not mean that the "purpose" of these molecules holding the hereditary information is to duplicate themselves. Rather, their self-duplication is a consequence of their molecular properties (that they hold the template to guide their own synthesis). The "purpose" of life is no more to reproduce than it is to drink beer or go water skiing.
No it does not. And you will never catch any biologist worth his salt saying something like this, because it is clearly ridiculous. Sex is merely an adaptation that is the result of stochastic processes that occur within allele pools. There is no "purpose" to having sex. There are certain functions of it. Via sex, we have the functional capacity to pass hereditary information through the germ line. That's it. All that this means is that sex is an adaptation which is functionally suited toward the continuation of the germ line. The stochastic processes that created these mechanisms are completely non-conscious. Sex exists because it is stochastically advantageous, not because there is some "purpose" to it.
There is nothing particular sanctified about marriage. It is merely a legal contract that two people enter in order to gain certain rights and privelages from nation-states and various groups that would not otherwise be granted.
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
What's wrong with pleasure? There are loads of things I do for pleasure besides gay sex. Like, say, watching a sunset. I guess I should stop watching sunsets too, since watching them serves no purpose but giving me pleasure.
Yep, just means. The same way heterosexual people are just using other people as means to reproduce.
Where have you been? This is how men have treated women for millenia. It's not some kind of recent result of women taking control of their sex lives.
Rill
Excellent point. And don't theists often speak of the " profound joy of experiencing God "? If pleasure is so terrible, shouldn't they be self flagellating to counteract this nasty experience called pleasure?
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
Well, that just makes it more suspicious. He could be using one account to start conversations while opening another unverified account to respond to our comments. Of course, I can't imagine any rational reason for him to do so, but the possibility is there. Also, note that they both have a tough time swallowing valid syllogistic logic and are dreadfully lacking in their understanding of science, math, history, etc. Their posts also exhibit a similar style; there are even similarities in average paragraph length and sentence structure.
Apart from the fact that this is ignorant, misogynistic, and bigoted, it doesn't make any sense at all. Ghost, is it remotely possible that homosexuals are actually fighting for civil rights, not STDs?
Seriously, why did you implore me to refrain from discussing philosophy when your own understanding of philosophy is about on par with a preschooler's understanding of international politics?
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
ghost, you deserve a beating. i don't usually say that about anyone because violence never changes anyone's thinking, but your thinking will never change anyway, so at least the end of a blunt object might teach you to keep your bilious fucking insults to yourself.
btw, i also have a problem with jill being a homosexual. it means i would never have a chance in hell to score with her...
"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
You spend 9 months trying to get out, the rest of your life trying to get back in.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
"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
I see you,ve managed to keep your homosexual instincts in check. Bravo, it must be so difficult for you to abstain.
Dumbass, mostly everyone here knows about that sin thing; they also know it's incredibly stupid!
You feel bad for her? Riiiiight she's gonna burn in hell, along with all of us while you....
live happily ever after...
[Mod Edit: Fixed quote]
Eden had a 25% murder rate and incest was rampant.
I think I’m starting to get paranoid.
I can’t find a single post from desertwolf9 after Ghost started posting. Now right after Ghost seems to have stopped we get chuckg6261982. All three of the writing styles are really similar. Plus they all seem to have similar attitudes. I wonder if soon chuckg6261982 will disappear and someone else will start up on the same topics.
If that is the case the admins can tell and ban him since that's a serious rule violation. That could earn him the asshat avatar, too.
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
Actually, homosexuality has been well-documented in other social animals, and the evolutionary advantage to the group pretty clearly identified: Nannies. The non-breeding members of a pride, pack, or troupe frequently assist with many of the caregiver duties, which helps to ensure the survival of the young. It is, in fact, less self-interested than heterosexuality.
So you're saying that God doesn't want men to be... as God made them? There are no medical or hygenic reasons for the practice. Just because you accept as 'normal' a practice you've been conditioned to accept doesn't make it anything more than a holdover from tribal protectiveness.
I'm upset that religion makes people so messed up about sex that in our culture, it's more acceptable for children to see graphic acts of violence committed against other people on television than for them to see a woman's nipple. I'm upset that religion is used as a bludgeon that makes sexually active young adults uncomfortable talking to their parents about responsible protection from STDs, and more willing to risk dying than to admit to their parents that they actually have the same normal sexual urges as everyone else. If people were less hung up about it, then it might be easier for those parents to talk to their children, and help them get a handle on those urges, give them sound, productive advice and counsel, rather than pretending a 16 year old boy isn't dealing with massive hormonal changes that he has no way to be prepared to experience, and just saying 'he's a good boy, he'll be fine'.
Being less hung up on sex and repressed about it actually gives parents more tools to influence their kids toward abstinence, and failing that, toward responsibility.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid
It is worth noting that the 20th century, the century of so-called secular rationalism, was the bloodiest in human history, and left as its legacy imperialism, fascism, communism, and two world wars.
Stalin killed millions of people and so did Mao; perhaps it's because they did not fear retribution in the afterlife? They justified all these acts in the name of communism (atheism being a central tenant of communism). So yeah, atheism is what atheism does, right?
The useful lesson is not that we shouldn't oppose religious radicals, but that irreligion is no guard against radicalism. Hence, all of your atheist arguments about how religion is "dangerous" fall apart completely given these facts.
Edit: By the way, I appreciate the Muslim banner ads that you guys run on this website. It is good to know at the very least that you guys respect Islam, since it is indeed the most peaceful religion (unlike Christianity) and has the best record of non violence in human history.
You are a fucking moron. Atheism is not Soviet style communism. At all. And the RRS site doesn't get to pick what google ads show up. Fucktard.
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
Eh, the major wars of the 20th century can be looked at as extended fallout from the Napoleonic Wars and the resulting unification of major European nation-states like Italy and Germany, which hadn't been unified before Napoleon's campaigns of imperialism impressed upon the local power structure (in Germany) or popular organizers (in Italy) that they were better off not being at the mercy of powerful nearby empires (France, Russia, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Turks, etc).
Once unified, nationalism brought these powers more and more into conflict, which was deflected by skilled diplomacy until after the removal of Bizmarck in Germany. Then the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand provided a flashpoint for a large number of conflicting tensions to erupt. Treat obligations kicked in, millions died, and empires shattered. But one of the biggest reasons things got as terrible as they did was a spectacular lack of rational thought: Each side was certain that they could win a war of attrition, and at the beginning of hostilities, that they were effectively going to be fighting in a similar manner to earlier wars. Unfortunately, the advance of technology provided an incredible increase in the killing efficiency of armies, and for some inexplicable reason, neither the Triple Alliance nor the Triple Entente believed the other side would be as willing to sustain losses as they would be.
That's decidedly not 'rational'. Not rational by any measure.
World War II, to a large degree, was set into motion by the vindictive and punitive measures taken against Germany, more or less because they a)did too well early on, and b)refused to surrender fast enough after the French and English were reinforced by the Americans. Without that, you're looking at a Far Eastern War, basically a 2nd Russo/Sino-Japanese War. And if you think the Japanese (or the Germans, for that matter!) were endorsing a rationalist, atheist agenda, you're high. Hirohito was, after all, actively held by his people to be a living god.
The rest of the century? Same thing, really. All fallout from those repercussions of Napoleon. Korea, Vietnam, without the Russian involvement in WWI, there's likely no Bolshevik takeover, and so no power bloc of Soviet Russia and Mao's China to cause those ideological conflicts. (Yes, the Czar would likely have still fallen, but it's likely that Kerensky's White faction wouldn't have been run out of power, since they were largely driven out for trying to stay in the war, after being promised grain shipments from America in exchange for keeping the Eastern Front open.)
All of this comes back to Napoleon, which, of course, can in turn be traced back to the internicean conflicts between the French, British, Spanish, and Holy Roman Empires in the three centuries preceeding the French Revolution. Another interesting little quirk of the Napoleonic Wars (which, for the record, include the War of 1812, which started partially due to British impressment of American sailors... because the British Navy needed manpower to fight the French): Britain, Russia's ally against Napoleon, put Washington D.C. to the torch when they invaded in 1812. Napoleon's invasion of Russia in the same year resulted in the burning of Moscow.
So to say those conflicts (including the current ones, which partially result from the British Partitioning of the middle-east after the breakup of the Ottoman Empire) are rooted in 'secular rationalism'... that's just ignorant.
No, it's because they had the capability to do so. If prior authoritarian rulers had possessed machinery of death as efficient as that developed during the 20th century, and population densities as high, you'd see those numbers all through history. As an example, we have the Battle of Teutoberg Forest, in 9 A.D. 3 Roman Legions died in 3 days of fighting. 20,000 Roman losses, and an unknown (but lesser) number of Germanic losses. Without factoring in a single Germanic death, that's over 6,500 deaths each day. By comparison, the bloodiest period of modern warfare, the Battle of the Somme in World War I was 1,100,000 deaths from July 1 to Nov 18, 142 days. That's about 7,500 deaths per day. And that's not even considering how those numbers compare to the population available at the time. In 9 AD, there were approximately 170,000,000 people. In 1916, 1,860,000,000 people. So:
Teutoberg: .000038% of the world's population died each day.
The Somme: .000004% of the world's population died each day.
"But wait!" You'll say, "I wasn't talking about war there, I was talking about slaughter of civilians!" Look up Tamerlane sometime. Now consider what Tamerlane, or Genghis Khan, or Saladin, or the Crusaders would have had for body counts if they'd had access to chemical weapons and machine guns. (And, of course, a population large enough to allow those kinds of numbers).
Per diem, per capita, the 20th Century's been a relatively low period for body count.
As far as atheism being a central tenet of communism... that's not really true. It's more that communism uses atheism, just like terrorism can use religious fundamentalism, as a tool to achieve its ends. In the case of communism, that end isn't actually 'don't believe in God', it's 'devote yourself entirely to being obedient to the State'. Communism doesn't try to remove God from the equation because they want their people rational... it's because again, divine authority, in order to retain the loyalty of the masses, must be unquestioned, and that makes it competition. So as a result, The Dictator seeks to eliminate competition. Not because he feels the competition is wrong, but because the competition is not him. And that's it.
Except that nobody's saying that atheism is a guard against radicalism. What we're saying is that authoritarian belief systems lend themselves to abuse.
C'mon now. That's just silly. They also run Christian banner ads. Let's face it, the site doesn't happen for free, and they can only run the ads that buy space.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid
As for the Muslim ads: Learn something about how Google Ads works before mentioning that again. It will help keep you from looking more like an ignorant twit.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
The fact that the two trends occurred at the same time does not prove that they are related. If it did, then we need more pirates to stop global warming.
On the one hand, you have worship of the supernatural. On the other hand, you have state worship, like fascism (Matt's little project
). Both philosophies involve sacrificing liberty and individuality to adhere to an infallible entity. I despise both.
Ridiculous, many Nazis were Christians, and how the hell is atheism a central tenet of communism?
Virtually everyone on this site is strongly opposed to Islam. The ads come through google and are put up based on the key words and phrases in a page; the mods have only partial control of what go through. There are many Christian related advertisements as well.
This little snide remark is probably the most retarded comment I've seen on this website.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Surely even someone as dull witted as you could grasp how banner ads work. We do not control them. They appear based on key words.
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
While it is rational not to believe in an afterlife it is not a requirement of atheism. Atheism is in it's broadest sense is simply a lack of belief in a deity. All other claims to the supernatural are not included in the definition of atheism. Well if we are going to speculate, perhaps people with a belief in the afterlife kill, because their victims will have an afterlife and this life is expendable? Stalin and Mao were also males are we going to speculate on that too?
Care to prove this? Can you give me a definition of communism? Look up Christian communism.
These things you present are assertions not facts.
... If you actually read the responses, you probably already understand your flawed reasoning here.
Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.
thank you, thank you for the qualification, dear lady--probably the first one i've seen on this site. my heart is even more firmly in your palm.
i actually might object to "leninism," but at least you didn't just toss around "communism"--or even worse, "socialism"--as a monolithic whipping-boy.
"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
No, you're thinking of Marxism. "Communism" is quite loose and there are numerous mergings of communist ideas with religious ones (such as liberation theology). The fact that you thought you could equate the two and no one would notice indicates you are either stupid enough that you don't know the difference or stupid enough to think we would not notice the deception, or both. The historical context of Marx's writing must be considered here. He never lived to see the revolutions in Russia, and then in China and across South-East asia and Latin America. I can say, however, that it would have completely suprised him. He was much more focused on nations like Britain, Germany and France, the industrialized nations with a large urban working class. He would not have expected the revolutions he predicted to occur in regions with large peasant populations and agrarian economies (China, Vietnam, etc.). Marx's take on religion, usually translated into English as the "opium of the people" (not "masses", Volke is people) is not without its merits. It has particular importance when considering the context of the Bolshevik revolution. Historically, in Russia, the serfs were tied to the land. They were ruled over by a Tsarist regime that maintained the status quo through the malignant concept of divine right. The state had three prongs, each crucial to the empire's security. The Orthodox Church, the Army, and the Tsar. The former is particular important, as it was usually the primary mouthpiece of information that the government wanted disseminated through the empire. Marx suggested that the religious institution served to suppress the possibility of revolutionary disquiet against the ruling class by putting forth these ideas of divine right, heaven/hell etc. (like sugar candy mountain in George Orwell's Animal Farm, which was a metaphor for precisely that idea). In the context of Marx's work, he was largely right. In Europe (where his focus lay) for most of its post-Roman history, the church has been an arm of the state, and performed precisely that task. Religious institutions were arms of the state, and as arms of the state were sanctioned to guard the security of the state by quelling disquiet (this was especially true in Russia. The Tsarist government could not survive without the Orthodox Church), and this was its primary way of doing it. So, it was completely obvious to Marx that the whole malignant institution had to wither away.
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
just caught this comment today.
dude, are you married or have you ever had sex with a girl? the vagina is not naturally a terribly clean place either. of course, a woman can clean it, just like any person can clean their rectum.
or i suppose you thought that strawberry dousche smell was natural...
"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
Rubbish, all of it. Lets take a look here...
Don't get me started on what kind of filth and nuttiness you get when there is no religion, aside from all the crimes due to hate of religions and ethnic cleansing done by those who embraced atheism as a dogma and a way of life ( even if it originally is the lack of religious beliefs ... it slowly became a belief itself )
Joseph Stalin Soviet Union 1929-1953 ---> 42,672,000 killed
Mao Tse-tung China 1923-1976 ----> 37,828,000 killed
Chiang Kai-shek China 1921-1948 ---> 10,214,000 killed
Vladimir Lenin Soviet Union 1917-1924 ----> 4,017,000 killed
Tojo Hideki Japan 1941-1945 ------> 3,990,000 killed
Pol Pot Cambodia 1968-1987 ----> 2,397,000 killed
Josip Tito Yugoslavia 1941-1987 -----> 1,172,000 killed
You also get loads of bullshit and disgusting things that could have spread much more if it wasn't for religions .. things like:
.. the list goes on...
And seriously guys, don't use the stupid excuse that you always use "that the a religion has a set of beliefs, which by its adherents are thrown around as a justification for their actions and atheism doesn't", elite atheists are no different from any other extremists, they embrace an anti-religion ideals and abide by them, and their actions stems from what they believe ( which doesn't have to be a faith, as any set of ideas can be a subject of belief )
Now let's see your false ignorant accusations one by one ..while keeping it short:
Preventing same-sex secular marriages. ----> same-sex marriage doesn't exist cause it doesn't fullfill the definition of marriage, if gays want to live together so be it, it ain't marriage no matter how much they try to twist it around .. but that's a whole different topic.
Excusing and sometimes promoting slavery. --> funny one really, specially coming from a person who lives in a country (US) were human trade ( in women and children ) is quite active ... ever heard about containers which get shipped from overseas ( namely poor countries ) with hundreds of people inside who then get sold for prostitution and other filthy things? .. not to mention what your people did to the Africans you brought from Africa in slave ships, then enslaved tortured and killed them .... racism and slavery went hand in hand in your country and even till today ( even after Obama got elected ) it still goes the same way for many people were you live.
So spare me the nonsense really, Islam fought slavery more than any other religion or system did, the problem that slavery was deeply rooted in the desert society before islam, so in order to fight it there had to be a system the gradually kills slavery - aside from stating in various occasions that all humans are equal regardless of their skin color or country of origin - simply for many of the sins or mistakes a muslim does the way to repent was setting a slave free ... considering that humans sin all the time it was a matter of time .... slavery as it was back then is gone due to that system.
Subjugation of women. ----> again more hypocrisy ... how many American wives get beaten to death by their husbands or even boyfriends, how many get used as prostitutes and whores, how many get used as cheap sex toys, how many get sold in the black market of human trade ... huh ... no answer i guess. Religion is against all of that crap.
Genital mutilation of girls and boys.--> first it is called circumcision, and it is done in many places around the world regardless of the existence or absence of a religion there, it is again tradition not religion ... and while islam orders males to be circumcised for good reasons ( http://www.circinfo.net/benefits_outweigh_the_risks.html )
* It is easier to keep a circumcised penis clean. You don’t have to pull back the foreskin, which can’t be forced back until a male child is older. Good hygiene is a must for both the circumcised and uncircumcised.
* Circumcision helps prevent urinary tract infections in both males and their female partners. Urinary tract infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later.
* Urinary tract infections account for a large percentage of “unexplained” fevers in uncircumcised males. It is a documented fact that uncircumcised males are 10 times more likely to come down with a urinary track infection than circumcised males.
* Studies in recent years have shown that the percentage of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases are lower in circumcised males. This is due to the fact that the foreskin causes an environment conducive to germs if germs are introduced.
* A circumcised male is virtually risk-free for penile cancer.
But it never explicitly ordered the same for girls, it was only allowed and with certain conditions, but due to the lack of knowledge and stupidity of the way people performing circumcision on girls it is better prohibited than allowed which is the result the current moderate Muslim scholars came up to ... so stop twisting the meanings of the words to fit your close minded and retarded views.
Refusal and repression of scientific discovery and new technology. ---> more and more ignorant bullshit, specially when muslim scholars and scientists have paved the way for the age on enlightenment later in Europe, if it wasn't for their preservation and advancement of what the Greeks left Europe would have never seen any enlightenment at all .... go read and get enlightened yourself you ignorant moron.
* Science in the Islamic world has played an important role in the history of science. There have also been some notable Muslim scientists in the present day. The following is an incomplete list of notable Muslim scientists.
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
Sexual repression. ----> good work on the words twisting, so now mildness and moderation becomes repression ... but let me tell you, you are the ones who are having a case of sever sexual chaos, anarchy and deficiency.
Execution/torture of heretics. ---> how many times do i need to explain this, no religion allows for murder of those who are not of the same relgiion unless they turn against it and fight it, in that case they become enemies and can be fought like any other enemies how endanger one's safety and peace.
The fact that some extremists use the orders to fight those who defy, fight and stand against religion to kill any one they want ( like the inquisition did what it did ) was because of political, economical reasons and above all stupidity and ignorance.
Self loathing. ----> self-loathing is really there because of the terrible things humans do, if you have no sense of remorse or regret there will be no limits to the disgusting and sickening things you would do ... as evident from all the bullshit people from your country, particularly the atheists, and many others uploads on the internet.
Mass suicides for the "end times". ---> where are you getting this bullshit from, no religion ( whatever it is .. Islam, Christianity, Judaism ... etc etc ) allows suicide, you are really hopeless.
Pedophilia among religious leadership, in varying forms. ---> first you are misusing and twisting the term pedophilia in such a pedo-phobic way, namely cause pedophiles are quite plenty in the US were you live and they even have organized and famous groups ... way to go accusing people randomly of pedophilia when you have plenty of it where you live .... not mention you show no proof that Christianity, Islam or Judaism is in any way responsible for it.
That's some pity logic, according to you secular philosophy and religion are equal, yet you want to ditch religion and keep philosophy which shows how much you just hate religions regardless of anything, if they are equal - according to your logic - then why not keep both or ditch both ( i guess you will be happy to embrace anarchy then )
You atheists... your opinion is already set in hard stone from the very beginning, you didn't plan to listen or even reason to begin with, which shows how much of an extremist you people are, no different from the religious extremists you hate so much, you all are deaf and single minded.
My money says none of you will be able to effectively and systematically refute this post.
The Stalinist regimes weren't about atheism, they just included it you idiot!
Funny you mention the moslems preserving the earlier Greek and Roman science. If it wasn't for the intolerant and ignorant early Christians, it wouldn't have been lost in the first place. We're talking mainly about modern science - ie the war on science - such as creationism/ID, anti-stem cell research, etc. Not to mention what was done in the 17th century - especially to Bruno. As was pointed out, WWII Japan was NOT atheistic (they worshipped the emperor as a god) , neither was Nationalist China.
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
As BcMD explained, these atrocities all occurred in the 20th century, where larger population and more advanced technology allowed for greater death tolls.
Please explain how religion is the only bulwark against these practices. Was there a documented upswing in these practices during the "atheist" regimes you just cited? You will perhaps point to Dr. Mengele in regard to "human experimentation", but prisoners of war and subjugated peoples have often been used for experimentation, well before the 20th century which you turn to for your clai
As you well know, religion has a long-standing precedent for justifying torture (e.g. the Inquisition). As far as rape committed under religious auspices, we have the recent examples of christian Serbs and Croats, and the muslim Janjaweed in Sudan. In Pakistan's civil war, Islam seemed to serve no deterrent to the rape of 250,000 women.
The aforementioned cases in Bosnia and Sudan invalidate this claim, as well as the Hutu-Tutsi savagery in Rwanda, where catholic leaders have now been charged in aiding with the killings.
You seem also to ignore in the present time the innocents killed by acts of islamic terror --, and the innocent Iraqi, killed in a war started by a President who "consulted a higher father".
I certainly don't argue this - religion is a primary reason for the restriction of prostitution. However, I fail to see how prostitution in and of itself is wrong. If you care to argue this, please explain how the Netherlands would be a better place without legalized prostitution.
If you insist on defining marriage as a union between members of opposite sexes, then of course, by your definition "same-sex marriage" can't exist. The complaint raised has to do with why homosexuals who "live together" are denied the same benefits available to heterosexuals who "live together", regardless if you can bring yourself to call it marriage or not. If you can provide a reason why a homosexual union should not be held in the same esteem as a heterosexual one -- without citing religion -- please do so.
Offhand, I don't know "how many" for the examples you provided. I do know that American women are guaranteed reproductive rights (religion is against that). I do know that American women have legal recourse if abused by husbands or boyfriends.
How many women in Saudi Arabia get to drive? How many girls in Taliban Afghanistan were allowed to attend school beyond the first grade? Under sharia law, what is the punishment for a woman having a child out of wedlock? Under sharia law, how many witnesses does a woman require to prove she has been raped -- and what is her punishment if she can't prove it?
Yes, the islamic world carried the torch of western civilization ... from the 8-12th centuries. Let us note that their contributions were made through doing science, not flipping through the Qu'ran or making salaat.
As far as the wikipedia link you provided (excellent research, habibi!) You'll note the majority of the names listed are from the 13th century or before.
What significant contributions to science and technology have come out of the islamic world in modern times? Please enlighten us.
There are no theists on operating tables.
None of the dictators he listed killed people for their faith - they killed to solidify their power.
I leave faith-based killing to the fundy Christians, Jews and Muslims. They're so much better at it.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
What exactly is the definition of marriage? And, who defined it? More importantly, what's the purpose of marriage?
If the purpose of marriage is to procreate, then what about my wife and I, who are not having children? Are we somehow abusing the sanctity of marriage, because we refuse to procreate?
If you're fine with my wife and I being married and not having children, then what exactly is the functional difference between me being married to my wife, or being married to iwbiek? (If he'd have me, that is.)
Hey, that's great and all, but let's look at some more modern repression of knowledge in the name of Belief.
First, there's those eggheads of the Discovery Institute in their ivory towers. Now, those are some really clever cats. They posit things like "irreducible complexity" as proof that evolution can't work, and even provide examples of what they mean. Then, when those examples are shown to have evolved, they move the goalposts, and say, "Well, then, how about this?" while pointing at another structure that is later shown to have evolved.
They then stack boards of education and state-level education groups with their own religously-deluded ilk, there to push their anti-knowledge agenda on poor unsuspecting kids.
Then there's gleefully ignorant people like Ray Comfort:
This is the sort of education you can expect our children to have if the creationists manage to control our education system.
Really? That's funny. Of all the people I've known, it's the highly-religious that are the most mixed-up concerning sex. Sure, they don't have a lot of sex. Sure, they choose to have sex with only one person, until that person goes out and has an affair with her secretary. That's a choice I respect.
But when "mildness and moderation" leads to things like teaching abstinence-only sex education, then you are just wrong. Abstinence-only sex education leads to higher levels of teen pregnancies, greater incidences of STDs, and so on. This indicates that humans like to have sex.
If you believe there's something wrong with that, I'd like you to elaborate.
Uhm... where are all these disgusting and sickening things being uploaded? Do you have a URL?
Please?
Hell-Oooo. Have you not heard of Heaven's Gate?
Mass. Religious. Suicide.
And how about The People's Temple (Jim Jones)? You don't think that was just Kool-Aid man playing a nasty prank, do you?
I'm not sure where the "anarchy" argument fits in to any of this, but I can tell you why I'd get rid of religion if I could: religion means taking things on faith. This is fine, as far as it goes, but faith too often takes precedence over rationality and reason. The Discovery Institute and its agenda of destroying materialism by undermining science is a perfect example. Another perfect example: the bigotry against homosexuals that keeps gays and lesbians from having the same rights as the rest of us (that is, the right to marry the person they love).
It is irrational to refuse same-sex marriage. It is irrational to undermine scientific education for the sake of a religious agenda. It is irrational to believe that your beliefs are correct, and others are wrong, unless you have empirical evidence to support your beliefs.
That's why I would do away with religion. It provides nothing we can't provide for ourselves, and does moderate to great harm, as well. There are good things, as well, but certainly nothing that couldn't be done (and often is done) by secular agents, as well.
I believe we've pretty much grown up, and no longer need fairy tales.
"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers
You are a crazed paranoid who believes whatever they hear from their pastor.
'Containers' with 'hundreds of people inside' getting shipped... where? When? With what sort of regularity? There have intermittently been instances of illegal refugees packing themselves into cargo holds of smaller vessels and attempting flight to the West - but of even one contemporary example of what you've described I'm completely unaware. Yes, there is a slave trade in many countries in the 3rd world, but it is a dying trade that affects very select regions of the world, mostly where it is actively promoted by an orthodoxy.
Your credibility has now plummeted well below zero. You may as well have just accused atheism of assisting the government in covering-up alien abductions and UFO crashes.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
Please show how this group killed others to promote atheism? They killed for power and control and eliminated those that could oppose them. Sound familiar? It should all religions have done the same. You should study how the Jews killed those of other races in the OT because their god told them to. They are in fact the first documented case of genocide because of race and religion. You should study how Christianity was repressive and its great Church fathers such as Ambrose and Augustine advocated using force to make people believe. These two saints of the Church are later used as basis to kill in the name of Jesus during the Crusades and Inquisition.
The emperor was considered a living god to the people of Japan, this belongs in the religious column. I think your number killed is far too low, it should be closer to 30 million when you count all of the Chinese killed from the beginning in 1931. Japan lost almost 3 million alone, while China's deaths including civilian and military approach 20 million.
You'll have to explain how religion affects the number of perverts who practice bestiality.
Incest - shown in the OT to be allowed as in Adam & Eve's children. Story of Noah and Lot also include incest. Marriages to nieces shown throughout the OT. Religion did not do enough to ban. Science has shown why incest is bad, religion never did.
Several countries allow same sex marriages: Canada, Belgium, Spain, South Africa, Netherlands, Norway and 2 US states, Connecticut and Massachusetts.
Since they allow it, it exists.
Countries allowing same sex unions: Brazil, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Luxembourg, Mexico, New Zea land, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and United Kingdom. There are at least 5 US states as well.
Marriage is a contract between 2 people. Churches add religious mumbo jumbo to the equation. Clearly religious groups can set their own rules for members of their group, but they can't do so for non-members. There is no reason a religious group can't agree to not do certain things that society allows. If Christians want to ban use of Diet Pepsi for their members they can. Those that want to drink Diet Pepsi can join a different religious group. Got it!
Sorry sonny, the Christians that moved to the US from Europe are those that brought slavery here. Probably your relatives. They weren't mine as mine were getting drafted and killed in the German Black Sea Colonies by the Tsar until my grandparents escaped in 1898.
Actually over here we suspect many of our blonds are being kidnapped and sent to harems or white slavery camps in Asia and the Mideast.
Since the OT, the NT, Jesus, the Koran all seemed to allow it I'd say it was deeply rooted. It goes back to the Sumerians in Mesopotamia.
Do you never even watch Aljazerra? CNN-IBN? You seem to think wearing tents and keeping women as 2nd class as in Islam is a good thing?
Please provide relevant data as to the number of American women killed by husbands annually. Also do so for prostitutes & whores, cheap sex toys, and # of US women sold into the slave trade.
Seems they think so though. Even in history the Jews were accused of practicing cliterodectomy on their women. See Strabo.
I'm aware of what the Muslims did in science. Very true. Somewhere along the line they however lost their edge and many clerics instead condemn technology and knowledge. Similar things have occurred in Catholicism and many modern fundies as well.
As I earlier stated, religious groups can set whatever bullshit rules they want for their members. When the rules become completely stupid or against the desires of the majority of the members they will change or members will leave the group en masse. So go ahead ban sex except on the 4th Monday of July for all I care.
Maybe in ancient times but killing heretics is plain and simple murder today. If the heretics are setting bombs as in Iraq and blowing others up than perhaps fighting back might be a good idea. Problem is which ones are the heretics in Iraq?
Which is what we say about pervert Catholic priests, Crusaders that killed Muslims in the name of Jesus, TV evangelists that get old people to send them cash so they can drive hummers and buy Rolex's, et al.
As before, if you don't agree with something like porno don't go look at it. Don't go to whore houses or strip bars, stay away. No one forces you to look at anything.
Personally I thought the Roman Catholic Church was responsible to the Vatican that is located in Rome.
Do you have data for the number of child molesters per capita by country?
The real problem is the priests misuse trust and authority. This is also true of boy scout leaders, teachers and childcare workers that do the same things. The really sad thing when it is a priest is they are supposedly following Jesus that made specific statements about the little ones. They get judged far more harshly because of this then the 24 year old teacher banging her 14 year old student. Though both are degenerates.
If we weren't listening to you we wouldn't bother to comment.
You don't even know what our opinions really are, you generalize far too much.
What is it you think we have some sort of atheist manifesto on stone tablets? You have us confused with the Jews.
What we are saying to you is think, use your mind, consider everything in analyzing ideas, don't accept the word of someone without proof. Investigate, research and learn.
If you want to put restrictions on your own life go right ahead. If you think you can do so to me as well you are mistaken.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
He sounds more like a mullah-in-training to me.
(not that it makes much difference...allthough he obviously seems to think so)
Excellent comparison
....I totally agree.
bestiality
"A man can have sex with sheep, cows and camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next door village should be fine." ___Khomeini's "Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990
incest
Abraham replied, "I said to myself, 'There is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.' 12 Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife.___Genesis 20:11, Abraham being a major component of Islamic religion.
cannibalism
I've never heard an atheist justify cannibalism either.
torture
"When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."___ Quran Ch 9:5
AND
"The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah's chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him."___Tarikh-ur-Rasul wal Maluk by Tabari, revered Islamic historian.
rape
Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. ___ Quran Ch 2:224
AND
"And all married women are forbidden unto you save those captives whom your right hand possess. It is a decree of Allah for you."___ Quran Ch 4:24
experimentation on humans
Muhammad was too ignorant to understand experimentation, and the technology of the time did not allow for it at any rate. Nevertheless, there is no atheist doctrine that condones or even suggests human experimentation. In fact, there is no such thing as an atheist doctrine at all. Atheists share one thing and one thing only, a disbelief in god or gods.
killing of innocents during wars
In a 12th century book by Abu-Hamed al-Ghazali (1058-1127 CE) called "Al-Mustasfa" (The Place of Purification). He used the term " tattarrus ' to refer to the practice of "using ordinary Muslims as human shields by Islamic combatants against infidel fighters." Later, in the 13th century, theologian Ibn Tayimiah further developed a tattarrus doctrine to justify the killing of non-combatant Muslims during battles with Mongol invaders.
racism
While the original Abrahamic religion that Islam splintered from does condone racism, Muhammad makes it pretty clear in his last sermon that he does not condone it. Commendable of him, I do admit. However, you have yet to demonstrate any atheist doctrine that condones racism either. In fact, despite your empty assertions, you have yet to establish the existence of any atheist doctrine whatsoever.
prostitution
An Islamic tribunal's ruling that allows Sunni Muslim men to marry without having to live with or financially support their wives has enraged Gulf women's rights activists who say Islamic marriage is unfair enough already.___(AFP, April 26, 2006) Dubai, UAE
slavery
"...who restrain their carnal desires except with their wives and slave girls, for these are lawful to them..."___Quran 23:5-6
AND
"Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty;..."___Quran 33:50
AND
"Not so the worshippers, who are steadfast in prayer, who set aside a due portion of their wealth for the beggar and for the deprived, who truly believe in the Day of Reckoning and dread the punishment of their Lord (for none is secure from the punishment of their Lord); who restrain their carnal desire (save with their wives and their slave girls, for these are lawful to them: he that lusts after other than these is a transgressor..."___Quran 70:22-30
AND
And arrange marriages for widows from among you, and for your male slaves and female slaves who are fit for marriage.___Quran 24:33
etc etc
Oh, oh, oh! Would pedophilia be one of those etceteras?
And if you are in doubt as to the prescribed period for such of your women as have despaired of monthly courses , then know that the prescribed period for them is three months, and also for such as do not have their monthly courses yet. And as for those who are with child, their period shall be until they are delivered of their burden. And whoso fears Allah, He will provide facilities for him in his affair.___Quran 65:5
AND
*Narrated 'Aisha that the Prophet ( Muhammad ) married her when she was six years old and that he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. ___ Sahih Bukahri Vol 7, book 62, num 64
AND
"A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man's four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl's sister."___Khomeini's "Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume
*And lest you think that Muhammad was a randy young stud of comparable age to Aisha, the child molesting Muhammad was a ripe old 54 when he took the 9 year old's virginity.
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
That explains why he brought up cannibalism. He must know of the 1st Crusade eating the people of Ma'arrat al Numan.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
Complete and utter bullshit, as a recent study carried out by the Journal of Religion and Society discovered -
"In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies"
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html
As others have demonstrated most of this is supported in your so called holy texts. Thankfully, humans are evolving greater morals and realizing these evil acts in the bible and/or Koran most be opposed.
A lot of this is debatable and completely irrelevant anyway. Let the adult decide if he wishes to be circumcised or not. Mutilating a child is sick, it wouldn't be allowed if it wasn't for religion.
Thanks for the history lessons but its hardly relevant today or for the last 500 years. Most Islamic countries are still living in the dark ages due to their religion.
Nope. I like many atheists was once a theist. It took me many years of research, and to truly question every thing that I was told to arrive at my current rational world view. Looking back I know now that I, like most of the people on this planet (including yourself) was brainwashed by my parents and/or the society I grew up in to believe in a fairy tales.
Well once again you were wrong. Everything you have wrote has been refuted in this thread and dozens of times before in this forum. Are you really so naive to think any of your arguments are new?
Well, he does have his
issued blinders on...
"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
Yes, that was the point that you atheists have missed. The rise of secular rationalism failed to make people any more rational or any less prone to radicalism. As such, atheism is no cure for radicalism.
Oh really? Has one secular rationalist country started a war lately? Have there been any terrorist attacks carried out by atheists or agnostics? I guarantee you will never see a headline stating "Atheists slaughter agnostics. "
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
LOL
You were the one who told me to register.
For the record, you are only half right. I'm not desertwolf, but I am the other guy.
I just want to mention that the only reason I am here is because I enjoy playing the game. To me, these debates are just that; games. I just do it for fun and at the same time, I get to spout off a lot of the philosophy stuff that I learned in college (I majored in philosophy) and it keeps them fresh in my mind.
I don't even go to church nor do I even pray every day. I'm just here to play. Part of the game is being provocative, which I why I say things to piss people off. On the internet, you have to fight fire with fire. There are no rules here. We can't see each other, therefore we abandon any rules of decorum and we freely say what we feel to the other person without fear of retaliation.
When I watch these debates on Youtube, I'm not looking for someone to definitively prove something. I'm hoping to watch a good old fashioned boxing match of minds. It's just entertainment to me.
If you really want to prove something, you would be better served doing it with action. Words on the internet really will not change anybody's belief. Just treat it for what it is; a little game.
Did you just say that rationalism doesn't deter radicalism?
I thought you did.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
So it's not the asshat avatar you need it's the troll.
You majored in Philosophy?
Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.
Majored in Philosophy, huh?
That would explain a lot of the stupid arguments you employ....
If you don't balance the word games of philosophy with a study of the real world, ie some scientific discipline, your ideas can be really messed up.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
Wait, are you the guy that thought
edit:
Well, you're getting beat up pretty bad.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
He was hoping for a boxing match - he walked into the wrong end of an MMA fight.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
A)Why would you suppose atheism, which has no unifying property and makes no attempt to control peoples' behavior, would be a cure for radicalism? We've never claimed it was a cure for radicalism. Cleanliness isn't a cure for infection, it's just a means to attempt to not provide infection with a fertile breeding ground.
B)Actually, your initial question was: "So besides the fact that theists may believe in an entity that you might think is "illogical" or disagrees with you bigoted points of view, why do you atheists in general hate religion?"
And for that, I offer the same statement that was made early on by, well, me!
"ANY authoritarian system is bad. Any authoritarian system lends itself to abuse and will eventually cause tragedies if it continues long enough. Religion is dangerous because it is the one authoritarian system that elevates the 'authority' to the point of being beyond human understanding and reasoning, and beyond questioning or challenge. No matter how repressive a dictator gets, he remains human, and the oppressed know that there are ways to challenge his power. Religion, by comparison, asserts that the Ruler cannot be questioned, cannot be challenged... and that all suffering and oppression now will lead to far greater reward in the future."
Lemme repeat the important part there:
ANY authoritarian system is bad.
Religion is, by nature, an authoritarian system.
Thus, religion is bad, mmkay? Mmmkay? S'just bad.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid
After reading this thread I think I have finally stumbled across the truth. Most of the worst things done in history were done by people who didn't believe in Zeus. Not believing in Zeus and the morel tenants of his religion must cause people to do bad things. I must therefore convert to the worship of Zeus and all the Greek gods in order to make the world a better place