Jump to content
edjr

Heaven, hell... God, satan. How stupid are people really?

Recommended Posts

On 12/22/2020 at 10:21 AM, JustinCharge said:

Religion acts as an "emergency backup government" in case the actual government fails to provide services or, in rare cases, actually collapses.  It is the external hard drive to your computer.  This is why religion is very prominent in the poor communities.  Those are places government is most likely failing to help, so religion fills the void.  That makes it impossible to destroy religion as the people on the fringe will look at their destitute situation and not buy anything you are selling with regards to atheism.  The Church is giving them emotional and financial support.  Your atheism gives them nothing.  Its a simple calculation.  The USSR couldn't destroy religion.  China can't either. 

The modern supply chain only was created in the 1970s, which meant major shortages of simple goods became extremely rare.  That went a long way towards the growth of atheism imo.  Reliance on the backup was less needed and in some cases people completely forget how important the backup is.  But a major economic crisis will cause people to "get it" once again.

Those are some interesting points, but I couldn't help but notice that those are all non-spiritual reasons to be a part of a religion, which is kind of funny.

On 12/22/2020 at 3:57 PM, JustinCharge said:

if we didn't have religion, society would be impossible.  we would tear each other apart.  some nut with a nuke would fire it.

Nah.

On 12/22/2020 at 5:07 PM, JustinCharge said:

What I don't understand is that people can say god doesn't exist, but completely accept and even assert that there is other intelligent life in the universe.  If other intelligent life exists, even if it just 2 million years ahead of us, it would be god-like compared to us.  There is really no difference between the religious concept of god and a godlike intelligent life form for the sake of our lives.

Wow. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

blah, blah, blah, copy paste from conservopedia worlds authority on religion.

The thing that is wrong with your scurry copy paste from Conservopida is that they wrongly attribute political actions and consequence to people they perceive as atheist.  That's like blaming Hitler for being Catholic.  I won't blame religion for Hitler.  I won't do that (unlike you) because it's disingenuous.  Plus, I don't have to, Catholics speak for themselves.

2018  Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. resigned from the College of Cardinals following allegations of abuse and attempted homosexual rape at a seaside villa. In August, a "systematic coverup" of sex abuse by more than 300 priests in Pennsylvania parishes was revealed.  These priests raped more than 1000 children.  Pope John Paul II was made aware of allegations against McCarrick but did not believe them, and that Benedict XVI, after receiving further complaints, also made little effort to stop McCarrick. The report absolved Pope Francis, but placed blame on both Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI for Theodore McCarrick's rise in power they both were aware of sex abuse allegation against him.  The men who supposedly have direct contact with god are pedophile ringmasters.  

Let's just take that sample size and apply some statistics shall we?  1000 raped children in Penn., that extrapolates out to about 200,000 raped children in the US.  Over a half a million (500,000) raped children across the catholic population across the globe.  You don't have to look back in history, back to some fantastical Marxist regime marching down from mount atheist with orders from the devil.  This is the 20th and 21st century, people like you going to church, donating and defending them, covered up the largest pedophile syndicate ever known to man.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horseman said:

The thing that is wrong with your scurry copy paste from Conservopida is that they wrongly attribute political actions and consequence to people they perceive as atheist.  That's like blaming Hitler for being Catholic.  I won't blame religion for Hitler.  I won't do that (unlike you) because it's disingenuous.  Plus, I don't have to, Catholics speak for themselves.

2018  Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. resigned from the College of Cardinals following allegations of abuse and attempted homosexual rape at a seaside villa. In August, a "systematic coverup" of sex abuse by more than 300 priests in Pennsylvania parishes was revealed.  These priests raped more than 1000 children.  Pope John Paul II was made aware of allegations against McCarrick but did not believe them, and that Benedict XVI, after receiving further complaints, also made little effort to stop McCarrick. The report absolved Pope Francis, but placed blame on both Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI for Theodore McCarrick's rise in power they both were aware of sex abuse allegation against him.  The men who supposedly have direct contact with god are pedophile ringmasters.  

Let's just take that sample size and apply some statistics shall we?  1000 raped children in Penn., that extrapolates out to about 200,000 raped children in the US.  Over a half a million (500,000) raped children across the catholic population across the globe.  You don't have to look back in history, back to some fantastical Marxist regime marching down from mount atheist with orders from the devil.  This is the 20th and 21st century, people like you going to church, donating and defending them, covered up the largest pedophile syndicate ever known to man.   

:lol:

Irreligion and domestic violence

A higher rate of domestic violence exists among cohabiting couples as compared with married couples[14] Atheists have lower marriage rates than theists (see: Atheism and marriage and Atheist marriages).

A September 9, 2012 article at Atlantic Wire wrote about the noted atheist John Lennon:

But people have mostly forgotten that Lennon was also physically abusive towards women. "I used to be cruel to my woman," he said, citing the lyrics to "Getting Better" in a Playboy interview near the end of his life. "Physically—any woman. I was a hitter. I couldn't express myself and I hit. I fought men and I hit women." In his biography The Lives of John Lennon, Albert Goldman also maintains that Lennon was guilty of spousal abuse.[15]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, marriage rates in response to a half a million raped children.  No one is going to hire you to keep score.  

Genuine question. Are you able to think for yourself or do you just regurgitate that single conspiracy website?  Please do some fact checking. 

Quote

Media Bias for Conservopedia: Questionable.  A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence. Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. 

First you're brainwashed by Cathoicism, now an extremist website. You should be placed on bomber suicide watch, imo. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Horseman said:

LOL, marriage rates in response to a half a million raped children.  No one is going to hire you to keep score.  

Genuine question. Are you able to think for yourself or do you just regurgitate that single conspiracy website?  Please do some fact checking. 

First you're brainwashed by Cathoicism, now an extremist website. You should be placed on bomber suicide watch, imo. 

Brainwashed now? That's all you have left in the tank? I rarely even go to church you retard. I have my beliefs. Sue me. I didn't attack anyone for having their beliefs that are different from mine. You have. And with you only knowing what's in your pea sized ignorant brain. I'm now calling out you for being stupid, not because of you belief in atheism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Brainwashed now? That's all you have left in the tank? I rarely even go to church you retard. I have my beliefs. Sue me. I didn't attack anyone for having their beliefs that are different from mine. You have. And with you only knowing what's in your pea sized ignorant brain. I'm now calling out you for being stupid, not because of you belief in atheism.

For example try the Pew Research Center for divorce rates.  

Catholics are low, at 19% .  That's awesome compared to Prodistants at 51%.  But, you might be surprised to learn that atheists are the lowest at just 2%  

That's real information, from a real and credible research center. Not a conspiracy website.  HTH. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Horseman said:

For example try the Pew Research Center for divorce rates.  

Catholics are low, at 19% .  That's awesome compared to Prodistants at 51%.  But, you might be surprised to learn that atheists are the lowest at just 2%  

That's real information, from a real and credible research center. Not a conspiracy website.  HTH. 

Here's a thought, why don't you discredit this?

Atheists, particularly the secular left, have used violence and oppression to promote atheism.

Historically, atheism has generally been an integral part of communist ideology (see: Atheism and communism). According to the University of Cambridge, historically, the "most notable spread of atheism was achieved through the success of the 1917 Russian Revolution, which brought the Marxist-Leninists to power."[1] Under atheistic communism tens of millions of people were killed and many people were tortured (see: Atheism and mass murder and Atheistic communism and torture).

The irreligious also have higher rates of domestic violence (see: Irreligion and domestic violence).

In addition, there is the issue of excess alcohol usage and violence and irreligious societies have significant problems with alcoholism (see: Atheism and alcoholism).[2]

Furthermore, there the historical incident of the mass rape during the occupation of Germany committed by the Soviet army.

Additionally, there are the issues of atheism and forced labor and atheism and slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Here's a thought, why don't you discredit this?

Atheists, particularly the secular left, have used violence and oppression to promote atheism.

Historically, atheism has generally been an integral part of communist ideology (see: Atheism and communism). According to the University of Cambridge, historically, the "most notable spread of atheism was achieved through the success of the 1917 Russian Revolution, which brought the Marxist-Leninists to power."[1] Under atheistic communism tens of millions of people were killed and many people were tortured (see: Atheism and mass murder and Atheistic communism and torture).

The irreligious also have higher rates of domestic violence (see: Irreligion and domestic violence).

In addition, there is the issue of excess alcohol usage and violence and irreligious societies have significant problems with alcoholism (see: Atheism and alcoholism).[2]

Furthermore, there the historical incident of the mass rape during the occupation of Germany committed by the Soviet army.

Additionally, there are the issues of atheism and forced labor and atheism and slavery.

I already did. Maybe you missed it in your scurry to cut and paste from that conspiracy theory website?

 

Quote

Media Bias for Conservopedia: Questionable.  A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence. Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis

If you want anyone to take you seriously you need to state facts backed up with credible sources.  That's how debate works. Then again, if you tried that you probably wouldnt find the facts are what you wish them to be.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horseman said:

I already did. Maybe you missed it in your scurry to cut and paste from that conspiracy theory website?

 

If you want anyone to take you seriously you need to state facts backed up with credible sources.  That's how debate works. Then again, if you tried that you probably wouldnt find the facts are what you wish them to be.  

Russia and China agree with you. That should be enough to keep you upright for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horseman said:

If you want anyone to take you seriously you need to state facts backed up with credible sources.  That's how debate works. Then again, if you tried that you probably wouldnt find the facts are what you wish them to be.  

I would venture to say that the only person who takes him seriously is him. And facts are malleable, you just pick and choose the ones you like and build your narrative delusion accordingly. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fnord said:

I would venture to say that the only person who takes him seriously is him. And facts are malleable, you just pick and choose the ones you like and build your narrative delusion accordingly. 

Who takes you seriously? Should we go look at all the responses to your posts on this site? 

And why don't you dispute what I post here instead of just name calling? The other dude just says, "it's not true" with nothing to back it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Russia and China agree with you. That should be enough to keep you upright for a while.

I bet the vast majority of people would agree with me. Need an example? 

When you start a conservative themed thread on a conservative message board yet you still find yourself as the only person making the asinine assurtion -  you have to stop and ask yourself if you might be wrong.   Conservatives (which I am one) in here aren't jumping to your rescue in that thread.  Other religious people have even left you alone on your island. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Horseman said:

I bet the vast majority of people would agree with me. Need an example? 

When you start a conservative themed thread on a conservative message board yet you still find yourself as the only person making the asinine assurtion -  you have to stop and ask yourself if you might be wrong.   Conservatives (which I am one) in here aren't jumping to your rescue in that thread.  Other religious people have even left you alone on your island. 

Rescue me from what? Knowing what the word atheism means? Took you days to get a grasp on that.

And you keep forgetting that I don't care if others don't believe what I believe.

I just wanted to find out how atheists would react when put on the defensive. And you have confirmed my thinking you and some other atheists are nutcases. 

Thank you for your participation. Study complete. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Rescue me from what? Knowing what the word atheism means? Took you days to get a grasp on that.

And you keep forgetting that I don't care if others don't believe what I believe.

I just wanted to find out how atheists would react when put on the defensive. And you have confirmed my thinking you and some other atheists are nutcases. 

 

LOL. It didnt turn out like you hoped, did it.  It's been fun Utilitits, but alas, I need better discussion and debate. No offence.  

 

If anyone else wants to debate the morality/history of religion, evolution or atheism let me know. It's one of my favorite subjects.  Sincere question and facts with credible sources appreciated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Horseman said:

 

LOL. It didnt turn out like you hoped, did it.  It's been fun Utilitits, but alas, I need better discussion and debate. No offence.  

 

If anyone else wants to debate the morality/history of religion, evolution or atheism let me know. It's one of my favorite subjects.  Sincere question and facts with credible sources appreciated.  

Sorry you lost so bad, but, you can still work on it. Keep a goin. I would definitely suggest you learn logic and philosophy a lot better. Resources are out there to help you dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Atheists or the "non-religious" who look down upon and/or deride the "religious" are a detriment to our civilized society.

Christians or the "religious" who do the same towards non-believers are equally guilty. "Live and let live" is not merely cliche', but the bedrock of a peaceable and enduring nation.

Anyone who is a up-to-date on current scientific leanings understand that many former and prominent proponents of Darwinian evolutionary science are jumping ship, in favor of some type of I.D.,  in part due to continued archaeological discoveries in the fossil record.....particularly the well-documented Cambrian explosion, where life-forms appeared with no obvious nor observable precursors. Certainly too quickly for a random process of mutation and survival of the fittest to explain. To an ever-growing list of people, both scientists and non-scientists, the only sensible and viable alternative explanation is the involvement of an intelligent designer (read: God, to those who believe).

There are always two-sides to every story. As a Christian, I have always been intrigued and fascinated by the opinions of non-believers, even when challenging. Unfortunately, many Christians just want to plug their ears and yell "la,la,la,la". This isn't helpful. Similarly, many non-believers seem to delight in trying to shame and disparage Christians, often letting the pejoratives fly, much like in the title of this thread. This isn't helpful either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, stonewall said:

Atheists or the "non-religious" who look down upon and/or deride the "religious" are a detriment to our civilized society.

Christians or the "religious" who do the same towards non-believers are equally guilty. "Live and let live" is not merely cliche', but the bedrock of a peaceable and enduring nation.

Anyone who is a up-to-date on current scientific leanings understand that many former and prominent proponents of Darwinian evolutionary science are jumping ship, in favor of some type of I.D.,  in part due to continued archaeological discoveries in the fossil record.....particularly the well-documented Cambrian explosion, where life-forms appeared with no obvious nor observable precursors. Certainly too quickly for a random process of mutation and survival of the fittest to explain. To an ever-growing list of people, both scientists and non-scientists, the only sensible and viable alternative explanation is the involvement of an intelligent designer (read: God, to those who believe).

There are always two-sides to every story. As a Christian, I have always been intrigued and fascinated by the opinions of non-believers, even when challenging. Unfortunately, many Christians just want to plug their ears and yell "la,la,la,la". This isn't helpful. Similarly, many non-believers seem to delight in trying to shame and disparage Christians, often letting the pejoratives fly, much like in the title of this thread. This isn't helpful either.

Hey man, I really enjoyed your scoop and play wr on the main board. Wish I had started reading it earlier! Hope you keep doing it, you had some real good ones. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Hey man, I really enjoyed your scoop and play wr on the main board. Wish I had started reading it earlier! Hope you keep doing it, you had some real good ones. 

Thank you, sir.

Lord-willing, I will continue with it next year, although it may evolve a bit.

:rolleyes:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, stonewall said:

Atheists or the "non-religious" who look down upon and/or deride the "religious" are a detriment to our civilized society.

Christians or the "religious" who do the same towards non-believers are equally guilty. "Live and let live" is not merely cliche', but the bedrock of a peaceable and enduring nation.

Anyone who is a up-to-date on current scientific leanings understand that many former and prominent proponents of Darwinian evolutionary science are jumping ship, in favor of some type of I.D.,  in part due to continued archaeological discoveries in the fossil record.....particularly the well-documented Cambrian explosion, where life-forms appeared with no obvious nor observable precursors. Certainly too quickly for a random process of mutation and survival of the fittest to explain. To an ever-growing list of people, both scientists and non-scientists, the only sensible and viable alternative explanation is the involvement of an intelligent designer (read: God, to those who believe).

There are always two-sides to every story. As a Christian, I have always been intrigued and fascinated by the opinions of non-believers, even when challenging. Unfortunately, many Christians just want to plug their ears and yell "la,la,la,la". This isn't helpful. Similarly, many non-believers seem to delight in trying to shame and disparage Christians, often letting the pejoratives fly, much like in the title of this thread. This isn't helpful either.

Excellent post.

I have no problem with the concept of intelligent design. Frankly it makes a lot of sense to me. But the mighty creator that demands fealty and is jealous and vengeful but also the embodiment of love does not square with me. I have a lot of problems with organized religion, but I'm not going to tell someone they're wrong or stupid for believing it. Everyone needs something to believe in. So many people have improved their lives through their spirituality- that can't be a bad thing.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fnord said:

So many people have improved their lives through their spirituality- that can't be a bad thing.

Nor is it often mentioned, during discussions like this, how many poor, homeless, hungry, naked, abused and generally miserable people have been assisted, and in many cases had their lives saved, by those blasted religious folks......usually just hear about the Crusades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many adult men hid behind the catholic church and the invisible man in the sky and pretended religion was real, so they could molest and abuse young boys. Sad :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, stonewall said:

 

12 hours ago, stonewall said:

Atheists or the "non-religious" who look down upon and/or deride the "religious" are a detriment to our civilized society.

Christians or the "religious" who do the same towards non-believers are equally guilty. "Live and let live" is not merely cliche', but the bedrock of a peaceable and enduring nation.

Anyone who is a up-to-date on current scientific leanings understand that many former and prominent proponents of Darwinian evolutionary science are jumping ship, in favor of some type of I.D.,  in part due to continued archaeological discoveries in the fossil record.....particularly the well-documented Cambrian explosion, where life-forms appeared with no obvious nor observable precursors. Certainly too quickly for a random process of mutation and survival of the fittest to explain. To an ever-growing list of people, both scientists and non-scientists, the only sensible and viable alternative explanation is the involvement of an intelligent designer (read: God, to those who believe).

There are always two-sides to every story. As a Christian, I have always been intrigued and fascinated by the opinions of non-believers, even when challenging. Unfortunately, many Christians just want to plug their ears and yell "la,la,la,la". This isn't helpful. Similarly, many non-believers seem to delight in trying to shame and disparage Christians, often letting the pejoratives fly, much like in the title of this thread. This isn't helpful either.

Link(s)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, stonewall said:

Nor is it often mentioned, during discussions like this, how many poor, homeless, hungry, naked, abused and generally miserable people have been assisted, and in many cases had their lives saved, by those blasted religious folks......usually just hear about the Crusades.

The question isn't whether religion can help people.  Of course they do, crime families and mob bosses help their communities all the time, usually because they have the means to do so and it benefits them. The real question is do we need religion to help people despite all it's negatives?  

Let's take a look at the top 5 humanitarian organizations in the world:

World Food Program

CARE

Oxfam International

Red Cross

Action Against Hunger

You know what they all have in common?  They are all secular run by governments, organized societies and corporations.  Not religions.  People give religion way too much credit for charity, just look at how many adjectives you used to try and convince yourself of the poor people they have helped.  In reality they are a small drop in the bucket.  The WFP funding in 2019 was a record 8 billion.  That number almost doubles the total revenue of the Catholic church who only contribute about 150 million each year.  And these organizations do it without building lavish buildings and temples dedicated to their god.  Without filling their coffers with gold and hording valuable artwork in their archives.  

We don't need to go back to the crusades to see the harm religion has on people, the wars started in the name of religion are still ongoing today.  I prefer to use more recent events, like September 11, 2001.  Or the hundreds of thousands of children raped by the Catholic church in the past few decades.  If you do the math on that using the 150 million dollars of charity the Catholic Church does each year...that's about $3 a year per child they molested.  No, it doesn't appear to me that charity makes up for it and we certainly don't need religion to be charitable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Horseman said:

The question isn't whether religion can help people.  Of course they do, crime families and mob bosses help their communities all the time, usually because they have the means to do so and it benefits them. The real question is do we need religion to help people despite all it's negatives?  

Let's take a look at the top 5 humanitarian organizations in the world:

World Food Program

CARE

Oxfam International

Red Cross

Action Against Hunger

You know what they all have in common?  They are all secular run by governments, organized societies and corporations.  Not religions.  People give religion way too much credit for charity, just look at how many adjectives you used to try and convince yourself of the poor people they have helped.  In reality they are a small drop in the bucket.  The WFP funding in 2019 was a record 8 billion.  That number almost doubles the total revenue of the Catholic church who only contribute about 150 million each year.  And these organizations do it without building lavish buildings and temples dedicated to their god.  Without filling their coffers with gold and hording valuable artwork in their archives.  

We don't need to go back to the crusades to see the harm religion has on people, the wars started in the name of religion are still ongoing today.  I prefer to use more recent events, like September 11, 2001.  Or the hundreds of thousands of children raped by the Catholic church in the past few decades.  If you do the math on that using the 150 million dollars of charity the Catholic Church does each year...that's about $3 a year per child they molested.  No, it doesn't appear to me that charity makes up for it and we certainly don't need religion to be charitable.

Communism has been so good for the people it's amazing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2020 at 4:07 PM, tubby_mcgee said:

 


That was my point with the stop sign reference.

How did it get there?  Well, duh...a guy put it there.  But...the metal? The materials? The machine to produce the materials, and so on and so on.  Oh, a factory made them? How about the factory? And before that and before that and before that? 

I don't have any answer.

To say God is NOT the answer or The Big Bang is  NOT the answer, etc... enlighten the rest of us as to what the answer is.

You can't. 

Therefore, quit acting like you know. 

The stop sign is manmade out of steel.  Steel is an alloy of carbon and iron. 

Carbon and iron are chemical elements made up of protons, electrons and neutrons.  The amount and distribution of these elements result from the collisions of these particles within stars. That is called fusion, or nuclear burning.   Iron specifically is made in very large stars called red super-giants (it takes a lot more energy to make iron than it does carbon).  When a star supernovas the iron (and other elements) are blasted out into space.  Planets are formed when particles and elements that were blasted into space attract and collide together as they orbit around larger masses, usually other stars.  That is how carbon and iron ended up on planet earth.

All the stars pumping full of chemical elements, with dead star stuff that has formed into planets orbiting around them originated from the same point in the known universe.  That point is call the Big Bang.  We know this because we can observe stars and galaxies through telescopes.  We know the location, speed and direction of travel of everything we can see.  The direction of travel of everything we see is outward from a single location, the Big Bang.  The entire observable universe is expanding outward from that point.

How the stop sign was made and where it came from is indisputable as everything I described above is directly observable and/or backed up by mathematics.   If you choose to interject god or intelligent design it must start at the big bang, at the beginning of time, 13.8 billion years ago.  All of these are fair questions:  What caused the big bang?  What existed before the big bang? Is there a force or being beyond our understanding that initiated the big bang?  Is there anything beyond our universe/is ours the only universe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Utilit99 said:

Rescue me from what? Knowing what the word atheism means? Took you days to get a grasp on that.

And you keep forgetting that I don't care if others don't believe what I believe.

I just wanted to find out how atheists would react when put on the defensive. And you have confirmed my thinking you and some other atheists are nutcases. 

Thank you for your participation. Study complete. :thumbsup:

So now you ARE ok with attacking and judging people, calling them “nutcases” based on their religious beliefs as well as their political beliefs. Got it, thanks for clarifying 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nospk said:

So now you ARE ok with attacking and judging people, calling them “nutcases” based on their religious beliefs as well as their political beliefs. Got it, thanks for clarifying 

Yep, some atheists are nutcases. Confirmed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, edjr said:

How many adult men hid behind the catholic church and the invisible man in the sky and pretended religion was real, so they could molest and abuse young boys. Sad :(

ratio about the same as any organization where there's access to kids. catholic church is biggest organization on planet. nothing to do with religion. public schools, boy scouts, etc

 

i guess im stupid though. i believe in God. i believe in forces of good and evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2020 at 6:58 PM, GobbleDog said:

"well, who made God?"

 

I never get into religious arguments because all I can say to myself is I have no clue.  If someone today could prove or disprove the existence of God I would not be shocked either way.  But your comment was always the thing I could never resolve in my mind growing up in a religious family.   People would point to the balance of the Earth and universe and life itself say that is so complex that it can not be something that just happened.  It had to be created by a higher power.  My answer is always then what could create something so powerful that it could create the universe?  

If the Universe is so complex that could not exist without being created then how could something that created all that exist without be created?  And if it could exist without being created then why couldn't the Universe just exist without being created? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, porkbutt said:

ratio about the same as any organization where there's access to kids. catholic church is biggest organization on planet. nothing to do with religion. public schools, boy scouts, etc

 

i guess im stupid though. i believe in God. i believe in forces of good and evil.

I guess what he is saying is that since John Wayne Gacy was a liberal democrat, that all liberal democrats kill and bury 30+ kids in their basements and backyards. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, porkbutt said:

ratio about the same as any organization where there's access to kids. catholic church is biggest organization on planet. nothing to do with religion. public schools, boy scouts, etc

 

i guess im stupid though. i believe in God. i believe in forces of good and evil.

Not true.  There hasn't been the systematic cover-up to the extent the Catholic church has in any organization, not even close.  It is literally a pedophile ring with coverups all the way to the pope.  Several popes.

Those other organizations you listed didn't require the children's supervisors to be celibate either.  I mean they should have seen it coming.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Horseman said:

The question isn't whether religion can help people.  Of course they do, crime families and mob bosses help their communities all the time

Red herring....right out of the gate, no less.

1 hour ago, Horseman said:

People give religion way too much credit for charity

I would counter that they don't give it nearly enough. You conveniently leave out the "behind-the-scenes" contributributions made by the hundreds of thousands of individual small Christian congregations scattered throughout nearly every town in the US, not to mention the millions of individual people who, in the name of Christ, quietly (and often anonymously) provide aid to those in need. Those who are instructed to not "let their right hand know what the left hand is doing", but to simply do good for goodness sake. Not Pharisees, whom Jesus abhorred for their hypocrisy and self-aggrandizing, but those who humbly abide by the second part of The Greatest Commandment to "love thy neighbor as thyself".

For example, I was on scene to assist the day after the devastating tornado in Moore, OK back in 2013. To my surprise, the aid being provided to the hoards of helpless and homeless people was through an organization that I had never heard of. I was asked to unload semi trailers full of critical survival supplies and give away to anyone who asked...no questions asked. Truck after truck after truck continued to arrive throughout the day, all unmarked. After inquiring, I was informed that these supplies were being provided by a group called church of Christ disaster relief, of which I had never heard of. As it turned out, they provided this type of service to all disaster sites throughout the US each year, mostly through the private donations of members. The drivers were volunteers. After my first-hand observation of the critical role they played that day to many desperate families, I have been a contributor every since. They do it because they have the heart of Christ. This is just one example of many. To dismiss its importance and significance is wrong-headed and, in my experience, most often agenda-driven.

1 hour ago, Horseman said:

we certainly don't need religion to be charitable

A point of agreement.....in fact, you may have noticed that I used the words "religious" and non-religious" in parentheses in my initial post. 

Christians don't hold the patent on charity, obviously. Anyone can and should be charitable. However, one who is not charitable is also not a Christian. For those that are both, their contributions, often behind-the-scenes, throughout the world and throughout the centuries, should not be understated....and will not be by any fair-minded individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stonewall said:

Red herring....right out of the gate, no less.

I would counter that they don't give it nearly enough. You conveniently leave out the "behind-the-scenes" contributributions made by the hundreds of thousands of individual small Christian congregations scattered throughout nearly every town in the US, not to mention the millions of individual people who, in the name of Christ, quietly (and often anonymously) provide aid to those in need. Those who are instructed to not "let their right hand know what the left hand is doing", but to simply do good for goodness sake. Not Pharisees, whom Jesus abhorred for their hypocrisy and self-aggrandizing, but those who humbly abide by the second part of The Greatest Commandment to "love thy neighbor as thyself".

For example, I was on scene to assist the day after the devastating tornado in Moore, OK back in 2013. To my surprise, the aid being provided to the hoards of helpless and homeless people was through an organization that I had never heard of. I was asked to unload semi trailers full of critical survival supplies and give away to anyone who asked...no questions asked. Truck after truck after truck continued to arrive throughout the day, all unmarked. After inquiring, I was informed that these supplies were being provided by a group called church of Christ disaster relief, of which I had never heard of. As it turned out, they provided this type of service to all disaster sites throughout the US each year, mostly through the private donations of members. The drivers were volunteers. After my first-hand observation of the critical role they played that day to many desperate families, I have been a contributor every since. They do it because they have the heart of Christ. This is just one example of many. To dismiss its importance and significance is wrong-headed and, in my experience, most often agenda-driven.

A point of agreement.....in fact, you may have noticed that I used the words "religious" and non-religious" in parentheses in my initial post. 

Christians don't hold the patent on charity, obviously. Anyone can and should be charitable. However, one who is not charitable is also not a Christian. For those that are both, their contributions, often behind-the-scenes, throughout the world and throughout the centuries, should not be understated....and will not be by any fair-minded individual.

That's not a red herring, it's an analogy that I backed up with real-life examples.

If you want to count "behind-the-senses" then I will add in all the people who volunteer for all the secular organizations I listed, organizations already magnitudes larger than the biggest Christian humanitarian effort, before I go seek out all the other people in the world who help other people that are not Christian.  (You could have banked yourself a lot of numbers had you said religious instead of Christian, a common mistake Christians make because they're so stuck on their one true god).  The numbers aren't even close.

But, I think we agree it's not a contest of numbers.  It's boils down to two things, #2 of which you didn't address (and I don't blame you):

1 - You don't need religion to be charitable.

2 - The most charitable organizations in the world do not suffer the side effects of religion.  (In fact, if you want to continue the discussion - they purposely are not religious to their benefit.)

I also think you underestimate the people whom you've had experiences with.  By saying "they do it because they have the heart of Christ" you seem to imply they wouldn't have done it had they not been Christian.  Do you really think if it wasn't for that story they have been told that they would have left those harmed by the tornado to suffer?  I don't.  And quite frankly, speaking as a human being not a Christian, that's an arrogant position to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, porkbutt said:

ratio about the same as any organization where there's access to kids. catholic church is biggest organization on planet. nothing to do with religion. public schools, boy scouts, etc

 

i guess im stupid though. i believe in God. i believe in forces of good and evil.

Some people are good and some people are evil. You think there is some type of "magical force" that makes them this way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, edjr said:

Some people are good and some people are evil. You think there is some type of "magical force" that makes them this way?

Good and evil are forces in this world. Who are you quoting when you quote magical force?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Utilit can you share some of the evidence of God existing in this thread?

You said to come here for that discussion but it seems to be mostly you copying and pasting the same stuff about atheists as in the other thread.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tornado (natural disaster) is always an interesting one.  People like to give god credit when humanity steps in to help people who have been affected by natural disasters while ignoring the fact that God could have stopped the tornado altogether.  The same god who used natural disasters on a whim to destroy thousand of people at a time in the bible.  The god people say "did this for a reason" every time a natural disaster occurs.  The idea that god should receive gratitude for life while not being held accountable for disasters is a transparently disingenuous double standard by Christians. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Horseman said:

2 - The most charitable organizations in the world do not suffer the side effects of religion.

I will be charitable, and assume that you are intelligent enough to realize that is a blatantly untrue statement. All organizations in the world, since they are manned and staffed by humans, "religious" or otherwise, suffer similar maladies...and always will, unfortunately.

18 minutes ago, Horseman said:

I also think you underestimate the people whom you've had experiences with.  By saying "they do it because they have the heart of Christ" you seem to imply they wouldn't have done it had they not been Christian.

Not necessarily. I am fortunate, as it pertains to this conversation, to have vast personal experiences/relationships with both during the course of my lifetime, mostly due to my career path. Of course, I have known those in the secular world, without any spiritual interests or leanings, that were laudably charitable....seemingly innately. Genuinely good people. Perhaps that describes you. Perhaps not. I have also know those who claimed to embrace Christianity, that were sickeningly stingy and uncaring. We're dealing with humans, after all. However, when viewed in its totality, from the wide prism of many decades, those who truly sought to be pleasing to their God were vastly more inclined to be charitable toward their fellow man....and it's not even close. Of course, you are free to dissent, but it will not alter what I have personally observed and experienced, which in the end, carries the most water for any individual.

43 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Do you really think if it wasn't for that story they have been told that they would have left those harmed by the tornado to suffer?

All would have received help eventually. After all, we live in a great country, don't we? However, I do know that those in dire need wouldn't have received ample help that day. I witnessed it. If an individual is unwilling or unable to give proper credit and distinction to those directly responsible (Christians, in this case), whether derived from a position of prejudice or not, or if they are hesitant to admit that they are often a force of good in the world.....then I have found it most difficult, if not impossible, to engage in an even-handed or productive dialog. 

55 minutes ago, Horseman said:

And quite frankly, speaking as a human being not a Christian, that's a arrogant position to take.

Honest positions are never arrogant, although the people that present them sometimes are.....and, interestingly, the only times in my life that I have been accused of arrogance was through the discourse of written medium communications, similar to this. Never once in person.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, stonewall said:

I will be charitable, and assume that you are intelligent enough to realize that is a blatantly untrue statement. All organizations in the world, since they are manned and staffed by humans, "religious" or otherwise, suffer similar maladies...and always will, unfortunately.

Not necessarily. I am fortunate, as it pertains to this conversation, to have vast personal experiences/relationships with both during the course of my lifetime, mostly due to my career path. Of course, I have known those in the secular world, without any spiritual interests or leanings, that were laudably charitable....seemingly innately. Genuinely good people. Perhaps that describes you. Perhaps not. I have also know those who claimed to embrace Christianity, that were sickeningly stingy and uncaring. We're dealing with humans, after all. However, when viewed in its totality, from the wide prism of many decades, those who truly sought to be pleasing to their God were vastly more inclined to be charitable toward their fellow man....and it's not even close. Of course, you are free to dissent, but it will not alter what I have personally observed and experienced, which in the end, carries the most water for any individual.

All would have received help eventually. After all, we live in a great country, don't we? However, I do know that those in dire need wouldn't have received ample help that day. I witnessed it. If an individual is unwilling or unable to give proper credit and distinction to those directly responsible (Christians, in this case), whether derived from a position of prejudice or not, or if they are hesitant to admit that they are often a force of good in the world.....then I have found it most difficult, if not impossible, to engage in an even-handed or productive dialog. 

Honest positions are never arrogant, although the people that present them sometimes are.....and, interestingly, the only times in my life that I have been accused of arrogance was through the discourse of written medium communications, similar to this. Never once in person.

 

By any chance do you know Donald Driver?  :ninja:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Mookz said:

By any chance do you know Donald Driver?  :ninja:

Any relation to Luke Donald Mini Driver?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×