"Christianity is not a religion"

[RandomGuy]

Don't look at me... I didn't say it. The source will surprise you, in this perennial debate about the "war on Christmas"

n8gO-VTaOwU

Not sure what to say. I would wonder what he would define as a religion, and why he would go that way.

[Drachen]

A lot of athiests don't really like Silverman either. I have a buddy who is not quite a militant athiest, but he is nowhere near as "harmonious" about it as I am and even he thinks that Silverman is a giant Douche.

[Spurminator]

lol War on Christmas

[RandomGuy]

A lot of athiests don't really like Silverman either. I have a buddy who is not quite a militant athiest, but he is nowhere near as "harmonious" about it as I am and even he thinks that Silverman is a giant Douche.

Silverman didn't say "Christianity is not a religion", but rather a philosophy. O'Reilly did.

I was/am more than a but puzzled, but it makes sense I guess if you want to push Christian mythology under the shield of the 1st amendment.

I personally have no real opinion of Silverman, other than to say he seems to have a set of brass balls for going on Fox's shows.

[Drachen]

Silverman didn't say "Christianity is not a religion", but rather a philosophy. O'Reilly did.

I was/am more than a but puzzled, but it makes sense I guess if you want to push Christian mythology under the shield of the 1st amendment.

I personally have no real opinion of Silverman, other than to say he seems to have a set of brass balls for going on Fox's shows.


well, there I go for assuming. I am at work and can't really watch a 5 minute video - LOL. I saw Silverman and went with it.

By the way, my buddy, while saying that silverman is a giant douche, likes the fact that he is OUR giant douche. As I said, I am more harmonious, I don't like that behavior from either side.

[RandomGuy]

well, there I go for assuming. I am at work and can't really watch a 5 minute video - LOL. I saw Silverman and went with it.

By the way, my buddy, while saying that silverman is a giant douche, likes the fact that he is OUR giant douche. As I said, I am more harmonious, I don't like that behavior from either side.

Hitchens had some big shoes to fill.

I once heard someone compare going into a debate with Hitchens on your side to going into battle with the US Marines on your side.

I kind of agree with you as well.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Silverman's arguments were fine until he started to complain about Christmas being a national holiday, which is totally ridiculous. Stuff like that does make atheists look stupid.

O'Reilly saying Christianity isn't a religion is also retarded.

[LnGrrrR]

Agreed with DoK. Christmas is 99% secular nowadays anyways. I guess we shouldnt celebrate Easter either. :p

[Jacob1983]

Atheists have a president? That's sad. I thought they didn't give a shit about religion?

[ploto]

You knew Jon Stewart had to respond:

The War on Christmas: Friendly Fire Edition

Pt. I: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-december-3-2012/the-war-on-christmas--friendly-fire-edition

Pt. II: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-december-3-2012/the-war-on-christmas--friendly-fire-edition---bill-o-reilly-s-philosophy

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Atheists have a president? That's sad. I thought they didn't give a shit about religion?
You're confusing atheists and agnostics. Atheists have never claimed to "not give a shit"

[Clipper Nation]

Silverman's arguments were fine until he started to complain about Christmas being a national holiday, which is totally ridiculous. Stuff like that does make atheists look stupid.

O'Reilly saying Christianity isn't a religion is also retarded.
Considering he got on Faux News as an "expert," it's to be expected that he'd be retarded.... not a chance in Hell that those Jeebotards would ever bring in a convincing atheist who might sway their hypnotized sheeple audience :lol

[Halberto]

Sometimes they do bring on convincing minds, such as Richard Dawkins, but it all depends on how O'Reilly approaches it. He was pretty civil for his own standards when Dawkins was on the show a few years back.

[SA210]

lol war on a pagan holiday that has nothing to do with Christ, nor is it the day he was born

[Jacob1983]

If atheists believe in nothing, why do they have groups and organizations and a president? That sounds like a religion to me.

[AussieFanKurt]

If atheists believe in nothing, why do they have groups and organizations and a president? That sounds like a religion to me.

so anything with groups, organizations and presidents are religions.. um ok

[Halberto]

so anything with groups, organizations and presidents are religions.. um ok

:lol lets hear the rebuttal

[Jacob1983]

Atheists are suppose to believe in nothing that would mean that they are apathetic. If they are apathetic and worry free about life after death, they would not have groups, organizations, and presidents because they have no reason to have them.

[ElNono]

Atheists are suppose to believe in nothing that would mean that they are apathetic. If they are apathetic and worry free about life after death, they would not have groups, organizations, and presidents because they have no reason to have them.

That makes no sense. Atheists can be concerned with many topics (ie: attempts at forced indoctrination, the latest football results, etc). That they don't believe or give credence to things like 'faith', 'god' or 'afterlife' doesn't mean that can't concern themselves with other things or that they're 'apathetic'.

[Halberto]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism

[Clipper Nation]

Atheists have a president? That's sad. I thought they didn't give a shit about religion?
It's like claiming to not give a shit about gay marriage but still going out of your way to rant about "them thar homoqueer fornications"...

[AussieFanKurt]

Atheists are suppose to believe in nothing that would mean that they are apathetic. If they are apathetic and worry free about life after death, they would not have groups, organizations, and presidents because they have no reason to have them.

how did you go from talking about having an organisation equalling being a religion to this shit... have you ever thought people like to join groups with like minded people.. for example if there was a spurs supporter group in my home town I'd join them.. does that make it religion.. its so weird that you think if something has directors or whatever it means they are religion

[Jacob1983]

A true atheist is apathetic about religion and all things related to religion. In simple words, they don't give a shit.

[AussieFanKurt]

This still doesn't really answer my question regarding why you think atheism is a religion because it has organizations, groups or whatever

[Jacob1983]

I'm saying that by the way some atheists act and carry themselves in society that one could see atheism as a religion. It's sad but true.

[Jeff Van Gundy]

Atheists are suppose to believe in nothing that would mean that they are apathetic. If they are apathetic and worry free about life after death, they would not have groups, organizations, and presidents because they have no reason to have them.
:lol are u retarded?

[Halberto]

Jacob1983 clearly has some animosity towards atheists, he just can't explain why with any logic.

[Drachen]

It's like claiming to not believe in gay marriage but still going out of your way to rant about "them thar homoqueer fornications"...

fify

[Drachen]

A true atheist is apathetic about religion and all things related to religion. In simple words, they don't give a shit.


I would argue that a true athiest has given a lot of though (perhaps even more than the religious) to the subject of god, religion, afterlife, etc. After this thought, they have come to the conclusion that no compelling evidence exists for the proof of religion.

[Drachen]

I'm saying that by the way some atheists act and carry themselves in society that one could see atheism as a religion. It's sad but true.

Douchebags are douchebags, no matter what they believe in. I have encountered athiests that have far more in common with fundamentalist muslims/christians/whatever than they do with me and I tell them so. However, organization into a group to fight for one's rights or promote one's point of view, etc does not make this group a religion. If that were the case, then there would be no corporate taxes.

[ploto]

Does it really bother atheists to see a Christmas tree up in a park or should not that tree mean nothing to them? What about all the lights on the trees on the Riverwalk?

[Drachen]

Does it really bother atheists to see a Christmas tree up in a park or should not that tree mean nothing to them? What about all the lights on the trees on the Riverwalk?

Does it really bother christians to not see a christmas tree up in the park?

The answer is likely the same for both questions. Some do, some don't give fuck.

[Blake]

Does it really bother atheists to see a Christmas tree up in a park or should not that tree mean nothing to them? What about all the lights on the trees on the Riverwalk?

Who said they are bothered by trees and lights?

[boutons_deux]

a Christmas tree isn't religious, a nativity scene is Christian.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Atheists are suppose to believe in nothing that would mean that they are apathetic. If they are apathetic and worry free about life after death, they would not have groups, organizations, and presidents because they have no reason to have them.

Believing in nothing <> being apathetic, but either way, atheists have THE BELIEF god doesn't exist.

[boutons_deux]

"atheists have THE BELIEF god doesn't exist"

there's no evidence that He does exist. so the atheist position is more rational, scientific than the God-believers.

[Drachen]

Believing in nothing <> being apathetic, but either way, atheists have THE BELIEF god doesn't exist.

Not "believing" in something isn't really belief, it is just the natural state, status quo, whatever you want to call it.

[scott]

Weird.

[mouse]

wasn't it just two weeks a lot you were saying "what war on Christmas?"

[Blake]

wasn't it just two weeks a lot you were saying "what war on Christmas?"

Probably not

[mouse]

Probably not

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205767&page=3&p=6211152#post6211152

[Blake]

I should have responded differently.

Who here is now admitting there is a war on christmas that said there wasn't one two weeks ago?

[boutons_deux]

Jon Stewart’s Epic Takedown of Fox News’ Annual ‘War on Christmas’


http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/jon_stewarts_epic_takedown_of_fox_news_annual_war_ on_christmas_20121204/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Truthdig+Truthdig%3A+Drilling +Beneath+the+Headlines

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Not "believing" in something isn't really belief, it is just the natural state, status quo, whatever you want to call it.

I'd normally agree that it's nothing more than simply not rejecting the null hypothesis, but the way god mongerers insist that the burden of proof rests on atheists to disprove god just as much as the burden of proof rests on them to prove god, I'd call it a special circumstance.

[DisAsTerBot]

damn, jacob is retarted

[Drachen]

I'd normally agree that it's nothing more than simply not rejecting the null hypothesis, but the way god mongerers insist that the burden of proof rests on atheists to disprove god just as much as the burden of proof rests on them to prove god, I'd call it a special circumstance.

It's not a special circumstance just because someone wants it to be.


damn, jacob is retarted

*retarded

[DisAsTerBot]

lol awesome

[baseline bum]

Christianity not being a religion is like when WC says he's not a Republican.

[Drachen]

Christianity not being a religion is like when WC says he's not a Republican.

He is not! He is a libertarian who wants the empower the government to cut your junk!

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

It's not a special circumstance just because someone wants it to be.


If a disbelief in god is unlike a null hypothesis in the sense it's something I need to prove, then it's also something that I "believe" in. I'm just using their logic.

[Drachen]

If a disbelief in god is unlike a null hypothesis in the sense it's something I need to prove, then it's also something that I "believe" in. I'm just using their logic.

I get what you are saying, and I get that you believe as I believe and are just trying to play devil's advocate, but my point is that no matter how much they believe that their logic should be used, logic dictates that it is a null hypothesis.

[RandomGuy]

Believing in nothing <> being apathetic, but either way, atheists have THE BELIEF god doesn't exist.

That is a common misperception.

Better:

Atheism is simply the default logical position.

X is not true, until X is proven true.

"God exists" is not true, until God is proven to exist.

One would need a lot more evidence to really make the claim "God does not exist" with real certainty.

While we may never quite get there, from everything we know about the universe, nothing we have found so far indicates that some sort of God would be required to explain it.

If there were such a being, and it wanted itself to be known to us, I'm pretty sure it could do better than the silly storybooks of human religions.

[RandomGuy]

.. (double post)

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Thanks for the lecture about default position/null hypotheses

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I get what you are saying, and I get that you believe as I believe and are just trying to play devil's advocate, but my point is that no matter how much they believe that their logic should be used, logic dictates that it is a null hypothesis.

My point is that they apply backwards logic when it benefits them but apply actual logic in other situations. Basically, they're a hypocritical, intellectually dishonest group of people.

[RandomGuy]

My point is that they apply backwards logic when it benefits them but apply actual logic in other situations. Basically, they're a hypocritical, intellectually dishonest group of people.

What backwards logic?

If you are going to try and say that atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist, you are simply distorting what atheists think, and how they think it.

This is called a strawman logical fallacy, by the way, i.e. when you ignore a persons actual assertions, then substitute your own opinion in place of their assertion, and fight that distortion.

Not sure if you are doing it on purpose, or out of ignorance at this point.

As an atheist I will certainly not claim that there is no God. I lack the evidence to support that.

[RandomGuy]

If a disbelief in god is unlike a null hypothesis in the sense it's something I need to prove, then it's also something that I "believe" in. I'm just using their logic.

Again, not quite exactly true.

Many atheists have varying opinions about whether a God exists and to what degree. That is a matter of personal opinion, like anything. The uniting factor though is the general consensus that the evidence is just not there.

I myself am in the vaguely agnostic camp. While I suppose it is possible, I haven't seen anything that indicates such a being.

I am certain, however, that God/whatever is not the God of the Christian bible, or any other religion that I am aware of at the moment. "you better be right" is the usual rejoinder to that, but the same could be said about every religion on the planet, and if that were the case, then 80%-99% of humanity is fucked anyway.

It takes zero belief at all not to think something is real when you have no evidence to support its existance.

God, Bigfoot, alien abductions, tooth fairies, magic prophets and so forth all fall into the category of having the burden of proof. Atheism does not.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

My god your reading comprehension skills are terrible. You should read the full context of the conversation next time.

[ploto]

Who said they are bothered by trees and lights?

The guy in the original video apparently is bothered by Christmas trees. If we put up a tree in December with lights and red balls and candy canes, isn't that pretty much going to be considered a Christmas tree, even though it really is not about Christmas?

The lights, likewise, are put up for Christmas, They are not put up in December by accident.

[TeyshaBlue]

The guy in the original video apparently is bothered by Christmas trees. If we put up a tree in December with lights and red balls and candy canes, isn't that pretty much going to be considered a Christmas tree, even though it really is not about Christmas?

The lights, likewise, are put up for Christmas, They are not put up in December by accident.

The guy in the video is disturbed by many things. Contextualization is not his friend.

[Blake]

The guy in the original video apparently is bothered by Christmas trees. If we put up a tree in December with lights and red balls and candy canes, isn't that pretty much going to be considered a Christmas tree, even though it really is not about Christmas?

The lights, likewise, are put up for Christmas, They are not put up in December by accident.

the guy in the video isn't bothered by the trees. He's bothered by the word Christmas being used by the government.

[ploto]

the guy in the video isn't bothered by the trees. He's bothered by the word Christmas being used by the government.

He specifically says that he has a problem with Christmas trees. Are you claiming that if the city puts up a bunch of trees in December with lights and balls and a star on top but does not call them Christmas trees, that he is fine with that?

[ploto]

Does it really bother christians to not see a christmas tree up in the park?


I really do not care what religious symbols are allowed to be put up in a park. If we allow the KKK to have rallies in the park, then can not some people put up a Christmas or Hanukkah display in that same park?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

He specifically says that he has a problem with Christmas trees. Are you claiming that if the city puts up a bunch of trees in December with lights and balls and a star on top but does not call them Christmas trees, that he is fine with that?

If they're not called Christmas trees, he probably is fine with it.

lol demonizing atheists
lol friends with Angel_luv
lol looks like her batshit stupid rubbed off on you

[BradLohaus]

Atheism will always exist long term as an anti-whatever, negative position. The west is living in an atheism bubble. "But it's been trending up for years!" It won't last. It's cultural suicide, by the definition of the former word. The cultural vacuum gets filled. Always.

[Jacob1983]

I'm sticking to my opinion. Believing that something does not exist is still a belief to me. If you simply did not care, you wouldn't have a hissy fit or a bitchfest over the Nativity Scene.

[baseline bum]

How does Target keep passing you over for advancement?

[Halberto]

Atheism will always exist long term as an anti-whatever, negative position. The west is living in an atheism bubble. "But it's been trending up for years!" It won't last. It's cultural suicide, by the definition of the former word. The cultural vacuum gets filled. Always.


What an ignorant statement in multiple ways.

"The west is living in an atheism bubble." Japan and China have some of the largest number of athiests per capita in the world. Europe is also experiencing a boom in atheism. The US.... not so much. Christians are used to having things their way, and it shows as soon as someone wants to make things fair for everyone.

"The cultural vacuum gets filled. Always." Modern science pretty much throws a wrench in this. A person's perception of the world would change drastically if they were introduced to the technology we have today.

[DMC]

Silverman's arguments were fine until he started to complain about Christmas being a national holiday, which is totally ridiculous. Stuff like that does make atheists look stupid.

O'Reilly saying Christianity isn't a religion is also retarded.

Why? Why not have Ramadan as a national holiday? Argument from age of the practice doesn't make it a sound argument.

The only national holidays (federally recognized) should be those pertaining to non religious events. Christmas is a fairy tale either way, solstice or Christmas. Either way it's a group of ignorant people pretending for a day to care about a Jewish hippie so they can get cool stuff.

[DMC]

I'm sticking to my opinion. Believing that something does not exist is still a belief to me. If you simply did not care, you wouldn't have a hissy fit or a bitchfest over the Nativity Scene.

Right, and bald is a hairstyle.

[DMC]

I really do not care what religious symbols are allowed to be put up in a park. If we allow the KKK to have rallies in the park, then can not some people put up a Christmas or Hanukkah display in that same park?

Sure, as long as they stay there with it.

Can Muslims put up a depiction of the towers coming down?

[DMC]

the guy in the video isn't bothered by the trees. He's bothered by the word Christmas being used by the government.

No, he's bothered by the fact that the holiday is about Christmas, not about it's original purpose, and that's fine as a majority practice but it violates the constitution to have it federally recognized. Bill is just playing games of equivocation, changing terms to try to squeeze Christianity in as a "philosophy" instead of a religion. Shouldn't then these philosophies be taxed since they do not fall under the umbrella of religious organizations?

[BradLohaus]

"The west is living in an atheism bubble." Japan and China have some of the largest number of athiests per capita in the world. Europe is also experiencing a boom in atheism. Asia isn't the west, and Asian religions are still religions. State atheism in the Soviet countries and China crushed/are crushing religion; in the grand scope of history that just happened. And if Christianity doesn't rise again in a few generations in Europe then Islam will be happy to fill that void. Give these things time; they take generations to playout.


The US.... not so much. Christians are used to having things their way, and it shows as soon as someone wants to make things fair for everyone.
Fairness/equality/diversity/and so on... the attempted secular substitute for religion.


"The cultural vacuum gets filled. Always." Modern science pretty much throws a wrench in this. A person's perception of the world would change drastically if they were introduced to the technology we have today.

You could have said that thousands of years ago.

[baseline bum]

You could have said that thousands of years ago.

That's what is really sad; Islam completely destroyed the most technologically advanced society on Earth, and the area has regressed into the dark ages and never recovered. All started by a cleric who prosletyzed about math being evil the same way the Christian Taliban goes after evolution and the big bang theory.

[Halberto]

Asia isn't the west.

When you refer to an atheism "bubble", I get the impression you're saying it's concentrated in Western culture.


Fairness/equality/diversity/and so on... the attempted secular substitute for religion.

:lol


You could have said that thousands of years ago.

Really? Electricity, radio waves, nuclear power, space travel, bioengineering ...etc. has been around for thousands of years?

[BradLohaus]

That's what is really sad; Islam completely destroyed the most technologically advanced society on Earth, and the area has regressed into the dark ages and never recovered. All started by a cleric who prosletyzed about math being evil the same way the Christian Taliban goes after evolution and the big bang theory.

Most advanced ever? Either way one culture destroyed another and is still around today: vacuum created and filled. Christian Taliban in America vs. Muslim conquest ~1500 years ago might be a stretch.

[BradLohaus]

When you refer to an atheism "bubble", I get the impression you're saying it's concentrated in Western culture.

In the Christian (or Islamic) concept, yes. Not in Asia nearly as much, but those religions don't prosthelytize outside their regions really, so they've been static.




:lol It's true. Gotta believe in something that you can't prove is true.




Really? Electricity, radio waves, nuclear power, space travel, bioengineering ...etc. has been around for thousands of years?

Point is that tech advancement, which is hugely cyclical over generations, isn't going to change people's long term minds in regards to theism/atheism. Short term it or crushing state control can, however.

[baseline bum]

Most advanced ever? Either way one culture destroyed another and is still around today: vacuum created and filled. Christian Taliban in America vs. Muslim conquest ~1500 years ago might be a stretch.

I'm talking about the fundamentalist muslims destroying their own culture and turning Baghdad into a shithole.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm sticking to my opinion. Believing that something does not exist is still a belief to me. If you simply did not care, you wouldn't have a hissy fit or a bitchfest over the Nativity Scene.

I don't care. That said, does that mean you have a belief that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist?

[baseline bum]

I don't care. That said, does that mean you have a belief that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist?

So did Black Jesus save you from Clovis? Don't tell me your cracker ass ain't been praying.

[mouse]

Where was all this Religous bashing when your daddy Bush was president?

[LnGrrrR]

And DMC, you're right but America wants Christmas off. *shrug*

[LnGrrrR]

So did Black Jesus save you from Clovis? Don't tell me your cracker ass ain't been praying.

Waitin day by day... The "latest" I should have to wait is by next week, assuming personnel folks are competent. A huge if, tbh

[Jacob1983]

Atheists get more pissy and uppity when people criticize and/or bash atheism than Bible thumpers do when people bash Christianity. That's sad.

[BradLohaus]

I'm talking about the fundamentalist muslims destroying their own culture and turning Baghdad into a shithole.

I thought the Mongols destroyed Baghdad at its peak? Was it outside Muslims before that? But still, being more advanced in tech won't beat the demographics when the tipping point is reached.

Which is just like what Europe will face in the coming decades, except that the outside demogrpahics are inside the gates and growing. That sounds like hyperbole now but give it 50 years, or a century... which isn't much long term. My original point again: atheism is just a cultural vacuum.

[LnGrrrR]

Atheists get more pissy and uppity when people criticize and/or bash atheism than Bible thumpers do when people bash Christianity. That's sad.

Evidence?

[Wild Cobra]

Atheists get more pissy and uppity when people criticize and/or bash atheism than Bible thumpers do when people bash Christianity. That's sad.
There is a small group of Christians I hate, and a small group of atheists I hate. I hate the Christians who just cannot let others be in their beliefs, having to annoy others. I hate twice as much, the atheists who try to ruin other people's pleasures surrounding Christian faith. Specifically, the Christmas holiday.

[The Reckoning]

more like a cult tbh. christmas is awesome for christians and pagans alike.

[The Reckoning]

I thought the Mongols destroyed Baghdad at its peak? Was it outside Muslims before that? But still, being more advanced in tech won't beat the demographics when the tipping point is reached.

Which is just like what Europe will face in the coming decades, except that the outside demogrpahics are inside the gates and growing. That sounds like hyperbole now but give it 50 years, or a century... which isn't much long term. My original point again: atheism is just a cultural vacuum.


the later mongolian khanites were muslim

[Halberto]

I thought the Mongols destroyed Baghdad at its peak? Was it outside Muslims before that? But still, being more advanced in tech won't beat the demographics when the tipping point.

You seem to have missed my point about technology. The technology mankind is nearing god-like. We can manipulate life through genetics, we can destroy cities with a single bomb and live in outer space. Iron forging and steam engines had profound impacts on mankind, but they are hardly as god-like as the things I mentioned. We now live in a world where supreme beings seem illogical and unnecessary.

[Wild Cobra]

You seem to have missed my point about technology. The technology mankind is nearing god-like. We can manipulate life through genetics, we can destroy cities with a single bomb and live in outer space. Iron forging and steam engines had profound impacts on mankind, but they are hardly as god-like as the things I mentioned. We now live in a world where supreme beings seem illogical and unnecessary.
I see you have delusions of grandeur. We are a long way off of having God-like powers.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Atheists get more pissy and uppity when people criticize and/or bash atheism than Bible thumpers do when people bash Christianity. That's sad.
Your posts in this thread are a shining example of how angry bible thumpers get at the presence of atheism.

In before, ":madrun I'm not a bible thumper and I have no problem with you faggot loving atheists :madrun"


Atheists have never done anything like advocate to take away people's right to marriage or tell rape victims what they can/can't do with their body.

[Wild Cobra]

Atheists have never done anything like advocate to take away people's right to marriage or tell rape victims what they can/can't do with their body.
True. They just try to destroy other people's pleasures. Only a few, but how can the others stay silent against thost who try to destroy others pleasures of Christmas, or religious symbols?

Isn't remaining silent on the topic almost the same as being part of the problem?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Trying to take Christmas out of government isn't even comparable to persecuting gays for decades and taking away their right to marriage.

There's plenty more we can get into, like KKK, which was a Christian organization :lol

[Wild Cobra]

Trying to take Christmas out of government isn't even comparable to persecuting gays for decades and taking away their right to marriage.

There's plenty more we can get into, like KKK, which was a Christian organization :lol
OK Mr. Dumbass.

Is anyone trying to use the might of the federal government to imposes KKK views, or persecute gays?

When an organization pulls string at the Federal level to limit other people's freedoms...

Do you seriously approve?

As for KKK claiming to be Christians... Bullshit. Evil will always use some cause to rally over. It is not a Christian view.

Are you seriously that ignorant?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

OK Mr. Dumbass.

Is anyone trying to use the might of the federal government to imposes KKK views, or persecute gays?

When an organization pulls string at the Federal level to limit other people's freedoms...

Do you seriously approve?

I don't think atheists are trying to limit anyone's freedoms. No one is saying Christians can't celebrate Christmas.

To answer your other question, yes, countless Christians have been pushing for a federal ban on gay marriage for decades. Do you want me to start listing examples of Christian who persecute gays via the federal government?

[Wild Cobra]

To answer your other question, yes, countless Christians have been pushing for a federal ban on gay marriage for decades. Do you want me to start listing examples of Christian who persecute gays via the federal government?
That isn't persecution now, is it?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

As for KKK claiming to be Christians... Bullshit. Evil will always use some cause to rally over. It is not a Christian view.

Are you seriously that ignorant?

:lol revise history all you want, but back in the KKK's heyday, they were endorsed by every white Church in the dirty South.

50 years ago I'd be willing to bet you'd hate blacks the same way you hate gays now, you're a Christian and it's how Christian hate has progressed over the years. Once Christians were no longer allowed to persecute blacks, they found a new group to target. They're a hateful group of people :lol

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

That isn't persecution now, is it?

A federal ban that makes it so gays don't have the same rights as straight people.

:lmao I guess this is like when the KKK said blacks having to use black bathrooms isn't persecution

[Wild Cobra]

That's the problem with too many people. They live in the past, with is a self limiting problem to keep them from living in the present.

Seems to me you suffer from that disability.

I'm sorry for you.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

:lmao knowing real American history and not revising it to paint Christians as great loving people = "living in the past" :lmao:lmao

[Wild Cobra]

I thought we were talking about present day. If you wish to continue to live in the past, then that's your problem.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I thought we were talking about present day. If you wish to continue to live in the past, then that's your problem.

There's still present day persecution of gays, with millions of Christians advocating for the federal government to strip them of a right straight people have. Sorry you don't think a federal ban on gay marriage isn't persecution.

[Wild Cobra]

There's still present day persecution of gays, with millions of Christians advocating for the federal government to strip them of a right straight people have. Sorry you don't think a federal ban on gay marriage isn't persecution.
Nobody gets stripped of rights. What rights have you been stripped of for being gay?

[DMX7]

I'm sticking to my opinion. Believing that something does not exist is still a belief to me. If you simply did not care, you wouldn't have a hissy fit or a bitchfest over the Nativity Scene.

Atheism is not apathy and disbelief is not a religion -- you're trying too hard.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Nobody gets stripped of right. What rights have you been stripped of for being gay?
:lol typical, "Call someone gay for wanting to give gay people rights," elementary school level comeback.

So a federal ban on gay marriage doesn't strip gay people of the right to get married? Whatever your argument is here, I can already tell it's really fuckin stupid.

[Wild Cobra]

:lol typical, "Call someone gay for wanting to give gay people rights," elementary school level comeback.

So a federal ban on gay marriage doesn't strip gay people of the right to get married? Whatever your argument is here, I can already tell it's really fuckin stupid.
OK, if I called it wrong, so what?

What "rights" have gays been stripped of in modern society? I'm not aware of a single one.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

What "rights" have gays been stripped of in modern society? I'm not aware of a single one.

The right to marriage.

[Wild Cobra]

The right to marriage.
Really?

I didn't know that marriage was a right. You have to get a government license to get a government recognized married. That makes it a privilege.

Now if you want a real marriage, you get it from a church.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

:lmao so marriage isn't a right? That's your argument here? :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Wild Cobra]

:lmao so marriage isn't a right? That's your argument here? :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

Where is it in the constitution please? I don't recall reading it.

Since when does the government license rights? I have never heard of that before.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Your only helping my argument. You're a Christian who's trying to justify the Christian belief that marriage rights can be discriminated against based on sexual preference.

:lol being a hateful pro-persecution Christian

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

"Driving is a privilege, not a right! If the government decided tomorrow to stop issuing any black person a driver's license, it wouldn't be persecution!" :lmao:lmao:lmao

[Latarian Milton]

:lol typical, "Call someone gay for wanting to give gay people rights," elementary school level comeback.

So a federal ban on gay marriage doesn't strip gay people of the right to get married? Whatever your argument is here, I can already tell it's really fuckin stupid.

high school level imho

[Wild Cobra]

Your only helping my argument. You're a Christian who's trying to justify the Christian belief that marriage rights can be discriminated against based on sexual preference.

:lol being a hateful pro-persecution Christian
I see you haven't read any of my posts pertaining to religion.

"Driving is a privilege, not a right! If the government decided tomorrow to stop issuing any black person a driver's license, it wouldn't be persecution!" :lmao:lmao:lmao
Seriously ignorant again I see.

The government must be equal between people. It isn't the government that advocates any of this, but the people. There are people that see gay marriage as an assault on their marriage. There are poeple who believe any two or more people should be able to marriage. the problem is....


Drum-roll please...

All you idiots look to the government for answers!

Marriage should not be a government function!

Seriously. Why should there be a different anything recognized by government because people choose to be married or not?

Why do so many people want such authoritarianism?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

There are people that see gay marriage as an assault on their marriage.

AKA narcissistic Christians who want the government to persecute gays. These same people 50 years ago were saying that blacks using the same bathroom as them was an assault on their rights.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

It's hilarious how much your argument changed in the last 20 minutes. You want from saying, "NO ONE ADVOCATES TO TAKE AWAY GAY RIGHTS!" now you've changed your tune to, "THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO LISTEN TO PEOPLE WHO ADVOCATE AGAINST GAY RIGHTS!" :lmao:lmao:lmao

Thanks for admitting Christians advocate against gay rights

[Wild Cobra]

AKA narcissistic Christians who want the government to persecute gays. These same people 50 years ago were saying that blacks using the same bathroom as them was an assault on their rights.
So why allow them such power through the government?

Say no to government permitted marriage.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Say no to government permitted marriage.

Seeing that you file your taxes with the government so the only way you can file your taxes jointly with your partner is through government permitted marriage, that's a pretty stupid idea.

[Wild Cobra]

Seeing that you file your taxes with the government so the only way you can file your taxes jointly with your partner is through government permitted marriage, that's a pretty stupid idea.
Why not mandate separate tax returns for separate income earners?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Why not mandate separate tax returns for separate income earners?

If straight couples don't need to file separate tax returns, then why should gay couples?

If you're saying abolish the ability to file jointly for all people, that's a completely separate argument irrelevant to this one.

[Wild Cobra]

If straight couples don't need to file separate tax returns, then why should gay couples?

If you're saying abolish the ability to file jointly for all people, that's a completely separate argument irrelevant to this one.
But it is fair. Isn't it? We really should remove the marriage penalty anyway.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

But it is fair. Isn't it? We really should remove the marriage penalty anyway.

Again it's a whole separate issue but yeah it's fair. Not sure how that's relevant to the fact filing your tax return jointly is a right Christians think straight couples should have but not gay couples :lol

[Wild Cobra]

Christians have their own way of thinking. So do other religions, or gays, or straits, etc.

Would you agree that making things equal between gays and straits would be to remove government "privilege" for all?

Do you understand what I mean by a marriage penalty?

[Latarian Milton]

marriage is a business and it's biased against men. advocates who oppose gay marriage are also a shining example of the pussification of this nation imho

[Wild Cobra]

marriage is a business and it's biased against men. advocates who oppose gay marriage are also a shining example of the pussification of this nation imho
Go away kid.

[Latarian Milton]

its blatant discrimination to treat gays & straights differently in marriage issues but it's basically not a conflict between the majority (straights) and minority (gays), it's just another example of gender hatred imho. feminists won't want a man to choose his partner freely for his marriage despite gender. even a straight man would choose another man over a woman to form a household, in which case marriage is just a business between these two men

[Latarian Milton]

bitches are afraid to lose control of their men and marriage is the rein for them to use. in today's society men more often get married for financial purposes rather than anything else, and if they could choose i bet most of them would choose another man to get married to because men are more way more trustable n honest than them bitches. you never want to do business with a person who doesn't have a dick between her legs tbh

[Wild Cobra]

You have such a childish view.

Go away troll.

[O.J. Simpson]

You have such a childish view.

Go away troll.

If slavery were around today, how many people might own slaves just to give some slaves a better life than they would have under a different master? Not all slave owners were bad, or bigots. Would you agree?

[Wild Cobra]

I see another troll has arrived. How special. Just for me?

[RandomGuy]

You seem to have missed my point about technology. The technology mankind is nearing god-like. We can manipulate life through genetics, we can destroy cities with a single bomb and live in outer space. Iron forging and steam engines had profound impacts on mankind, but they are hardly as god-like as the things I mentioned. We now live in a world where supreme beings seem illogical and unnecessary.

--S8yIAhDB8

[RandomGuy]

But it is fair. Isn't it? We really should remove the marriage penalty anyway.

Already done.

[RandomGuy]

I'm sticking to my opinion. Believing that something does not exist is still a belief to me. If you simply did not care, you wouldn't have a hissy fit or a bitchfest over the Nativity Scene.

I guess by the definition "Believing that something does not exist" is a belief.

But that isn't what atheism actually is for the most part.

If you define atheism as the "belief that God does not exist" you are factually mistaken. That isn't opinion. If you wish to be factually mistaken, that is your prerogative, and it certainly wouldn't be the first time.

I don't care so much if one has a nativity scene, as long as the muslims get a display, scientologists get a display and anybody else who wants to put something up there does.

IF you want a nativity scene in front of your house or church, that is fine, and I would be happy with that.

[baseline bum]

What would WC do if his beloved wingnut candidates actually got elected and made his trips to the whorehouse for potstickers illegal?

[Wild Cobra]

Already done.
There were two penalties I know of. Only one was removed.

[Jacob1983]

Humans including Christians would have more respect for atheists if they wouldn't bitch and cry over stupid shit. If a Nativity scene offends you, you need to be bitch slapped or shunned by society(your choice). I don't get offended or cry when I see a menorah or the star and crescent. Just sayin'.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I think I speak for most atheists when I say we don't give two shits what a bible thumping dumbass who got a degree in psychology and works in a retail store thinks about us.

[Drachen]

There were two penalties I know of. Only one was removed.

This is how its going to be forever and ever, and you will just have to get used to it. If you get married you are going to have a wife. I'm sorry, but they just aren't going to change that.

[Jacob1983]

When I have bible thumped on here? Please explain that one to me. And since I don't make a lot of money a year(apparently on this board, it's cool to make fun of poor people), why don't I get a percentage of your paycheck? Isn't that what Obama lovers are all about? Paying their fair share?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

When I have bible thumped on here? Please explain that one to me. And since I don't make a lot of money a year(apparently on this board, it's cool to make fun of poor people), why don't I get a percentage of your paycheck? Isn't that what Obama lovers are all about? Paying their fair share?

It's obvious you're a bible thumper. The angry tone of your posts when you talk about gay marriage, abortion, and atheists is just one example, but if you're trying to hide it, you're doing a horrible job.

And yes, making fun of dumbasses who chose worthless majors is a hobby of mine.

[LnGrrrR]

This is how its going to be forever and ever, and you will just have to get used to it. If you get married you are going to have a wife. I'm sorry, but they just aren't going to change that.

:lmao :tu

[Jacob1983]

I've attended church twice in the last 24 months. I haven't read a Bible in probably 2 years. I curse and question God on a daily basis. I'm not seeing the bible thumping but you are entitled to your ignorant inaccurate opinion.

Again, I will call out any Obama supporters and lovers that bash me for having a shitty job. I will call them out on supporting a guy that wants rich people to pay their fair share yet they will not do pay their fair share and help someone that is less fortunate than them. You obviously have a better job than me and under Obama, I am entitled to a small percentage of your money. Pay up, bitch.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

There's ways to pay my fair share and still scoff you for your shitty job :lol

[Jacob1983]

I want my hand out. And you call yourself an Obama supporter?

[Latarian Milton]

do yall plutocrats despise them shitty job doers, DoK?

[Wild Cobra]

Humans including Christians would have more respect for atheists if they wouldn't bitch and cry over stupid shit. If a Nativity scene offends you, you need to be bitch slapped or shunned by society(your choice). I don't get offended or cry when I see a menorah or the star and crescent. Just sayin'.
I think that's what pisses me off the worse. People choose to cause others trouble over trivial things. It's very telling of their lack of ethics in my opinion.

[Wild Cobra]

This is how its going to be forever and ever, and you will just have to get used to it. If you get married you are going to have a wife. I'm sorry, but they just aren't going to change that.
LOL...

OK, I stand corrected. The wife then is a third penalty. There is still an unfairness about taxes, where as a married couple will pay more taxes than two single adults.

[ElNono]

I think that's what pisses me off the worse. People choose to cause others trouble over trivial things. It's very telling of their lack of ethics in my opinion.

Reminds me of last-minute voter ID laws...

[Wild Cobra]

Reminds me of last-minute voter ID laws...
Hey, I will defend the necessity to require voter ID laws, but not suddenly. Any thing like that needs a reasonable timeline to be implemented under. I think ideally, we should make solid plans for such a system, but take as many as ten years to implement it.

[ElNono]

Hey, I will defend the necessity to require voter ID laws, but not suddenly. Any thing like that needs a reasonable timeline to be implemented under.

It's a solution looking for a problem... in other words, "cause others trouble over trivial things"... you should be pissed.

[Wild Cobra]

It's a solution looking for a problem... in other words, "cause others trouble over trivial things"... you should be pissed.
Can we agree to disagree? I prefer not to repeat the same arguments again. We know each others position. Can't you accept that I agree the "last-minute voter ID laws" are wrong?