Bill Maher called an Islamophobe for acknowledging reality

[vy65]

Why's that an accurate comparison - the reformation to the KKK?

[Blake]

Why's that an accurate comparison - the reformation to the KKK?

Because Protestants claim to be Christians too

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Why's that an accurate comparison - the reformation to the KKK?
Saying I compared those two is a strawman/goal post move.

Your orginal argument posed the question how could the KKK be Christian if they were anti-Catholic, which implies that being Christian and anti-Catholic are mutually exclusive. That big group of Christians known as protestants pokes a hole in your original line of thinking, wouldn't you say?

[vy65]

Lemme rephrase: why is the KKK emblamatic or representative of christianity writ large?

Either it is - in which case how do you explain the anti-catholicism?

Or it isn't - in which case why is the KKK any more representative of christian beliefs than any other subset of the religion?

[vy65]

Saying I compared those two is a strawman/goal post move.

Your orginal argument posed the question how could the KKK be Christian if they were anti-Catholic, which implies that being Christian and anti-Catholic are mutually exclusive. That big group of Christians known as protestants pokes a hole in your original line of thinking, wouldn't you say?

Incorrect. My point was that you cannot make the KKK the standard-bearer for Christianity.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If your reasoning for holding Christians to such a high standard is because of inaccurate science throughout history then so be it. But in doing so, you're ignoring the contributions to science by "Christians" (or those who believed in a Creator) such as Newton, Copernicus (who was responsible for the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun), Bacon, Descartes, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Faraday, etc. I could go on and on, but I'm not exactly sure why any of that matters.

Also keep in mind, there are many types of "Christians." You'd be hard pressed to find a single thing I agree with the Catholic Church about.

I don't know about the history of all those guys but including Kepler on that list is hilarious. If you are using him as an example of a christian scientist I can only say that is irony at it's finest.

Also, you need to look into what Aquinas said and how that relates to church doctrine and thus how science was able to progress. Prior to Aquinas, science had to adhere to stricture completely and must be done to augment the dogma. Afterwards they just couldn't disregard it. Aquinas said that *gasp* not everything that heathens said was inherently wrong. Enter Aristotle which presented it's own issues.

That allowed a bit of latitude and saw to Kierkegaard and others being able to try applying logic to problems and you start seeing the proofs on God. Before that even suggesting that you could prove there was a God was grounds for painful death. Even then the Church resisted. Most of those guys works were rejected by Christianity.

The only reason why western civilization has been able to progress is because people likme Aquinas have eroded the absolute intellectual dominance that dogma forces.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Lemme rephrase: why is the KKK emblamatic or representative of christianity writ large?
Another strawman.


Either it is - in which case how do you explain the anti-catholicism?
Because protestants follow an anti-catholic belief system. Before responding to that with something else, first ponder why the term "protestant" might have been created and what it might imply (use the context clue "protest" for this part). That should be able to explain the anti-catholicism.


Or it isn't - in which case why is the KKK any more representative of christian beliefs than any other subset of the religion?
The KKK wasn't just a subset of Christianity. Prior to the civil rights movement it was a mainstream Christian movement supported by countless protestant Churches (the KKK regularly held meetings at Churches). The only reason Christianity doesn't preach racism anymore is because racism became socially acceptable.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Incorrect. My point was that you cannot make the KKK the standard-bearer for Christianity.

When you said "That seems like a thorny issue for equating the KKK with Christian beliefs" you were trying to use its anti-Catholic beliefs to splinter the KKK from Christianity completely. I'm not surprised you're backing off that argument now but it was obvious in your original post.

Where did I make the KKK the standard-bearer for Christianity?

[vy65]

Another strawman.


Because protestants follow an anti-catholic belief system. Before responding to that with something else, first ponder why the term "protestant" might have been created and what it might imply (use the context clue "protest" for this part). That should be able to explain the anti-catholicism.


The KKK wasn't just a subset of Christianity. Prior to the civil rights movement it was a mainstream Christian movement supported by countless protestant Churches (the KKK regularly held meetings at Churches). The only reason Christianity doesn't preach racism anymore is because racism became socially acceptable.

Huh? The KKK is a Christian organization. I agreed with that - but then went on to say that it's not representative of the faith because it's anti-catholic. Not only this, but the fact that the KKK was motivated more by nativism than a dogmatic dispute (like the one motivating the reformation) makes it a very bad example.

You're saying the KKK is a christian group. I agreed. All I said was that it is not representative/emblamatic/descriptive of Christianity in general. I don't see why you're making a big fuss about this. Would you equate the KKK with mainstream christian beliefs?

[vy65]

Another strawman.


Because protestants follow an anti-catholic belief system. Before responding to that with something else, first ponder why the term "protestant" might have been created and what it might imply (use the context clue "protest" for this part). That should be able to explain the anti-catholicism.


The KKK wasn't just a subset of Christianity. Prior to the civil rights movement it was a mainstream Christian movement supported by countless protestant Churches (the KKK regularly held meetings at Churches). The only reason Christianity doesn't preach racism anymore is because racism became socially acceptable.

Huh? The KKK is a Christian organization. I agreed with that - but then went on to say that it's not representative of the faith because it's anti-catholic. Not only this, but the fact that the KKK was motivated more by nativism than a dogmatic dispute (like the one motivating the reformation) makes it a very bad example.

You're saying the KKK is a christian group. I agreed. All I said was that it is not representative/emblamatic/descriptive of Christianity in general. I don't see why you're making a big fuss about this. Would you equate the KKK with mainstream christian beliefs?

[vy65]

When you said "That seems like a thorny issue for equating the KKK with Christian beliefs" you were trying to use its anti-Catholic beliefs to splinter the KKK from Christianity completely. I'm not surprised you're backing off that argument now but it was obvious in your original post.

Where did I make the KKK the standard-bearer for Christianity?

Again no:

You're making my point. Yes, the KKK was a certain type of Christian organization. But you cannot equivocate the KKK to Christianity writ large. What do you make of the fact that the KKK was anti-Catholic? That seems like a thorny issue for equating the KKK with Christian beliefs.

How do you get from this to "splintering the KKK off from Christianity completely?"

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Since the KKK thing is going in circles, I'll respond to this since it's a fair point.


It's a tool used to encourage ignorance. And ignorance usually leads to all kinds of ill shit. I get and agree with that.
Why are you trying to defend something that encourages ignorance?


But, you seem to admit that some good can come from a christian belief system.
You could also say some good can come from a neo-conservative belief system. The possibility of good being created doesn't automatically justify something as an asset to mankind.


Which leads to the following point: the fact that some good can come out of a belief system responsible for a lot of bad leads me to believe the issue isn't so much with the belief system itself, but how people use it.
That might matter if the way people are wired is something we can control. Humans as a whole are an inherently narcissistic, greedy, and stupid group. That's not gonna change anytime soon, so a belief system that encourages narcissism and enables greed will always be used by humans in mostly bad ways.

[vy65]

Since the KKK thing is going in circles, I'll respond to this since it's a fair point.


Why are you trying to defend something that encourages ignorance?

I wouldn't say defend. The obvious point is that it's neither all good nor all bad. The real point I wanted to get across was that the belief system itself has less to do with the evil shit than the people using it to accomplish their own ends/goals/agendas etc... Which also is an obvious point I guess.



You could also say some good can come from a neo-conservative belief system. The possibility of good being created doesn't automatically justify something as an asset to mankind.

Agree 200%



That might matter if the way people are wired is something we can control. Humans as a whole are an inherently narcissistic, greedy, and stupid group. That's not gonna change anytime soon, so a belief system that encourages narcissism and enables greed will always be used by humans in mostly bad ways.

Debatable whether christianity encourages narcissism or greed. I'm an atheist, so I'm not one to comment - but it seems to me there's the whole "meek shall inherit the earth/camel through a needle's eye" thing going on.

But your basic point is also one I agree with - people are narcissistic, greedy and stupid. Joel Osteen is a smart motherfucker because he's figured out a way to use a 2000 book to tap into that narcissism, greed and stupidity and make a lot of money from it. That doesn't mean that all Christianity is bad (which is all my point ever was); just that it's deployment is often used for evil shit.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Huh? The KKK is a Christian organization. I agreed with that - but then went on to say that it's not representative of the faith because it's anti-catholic.
And anti-catholicism is a fundamental protestant belief.


Not only this, but the fact that the KKK was motivated more by nativism than a dogmatic dispute (like the one motivating the reformation) makes it a very bad example.
I'd argue both were indirectly motivated by financial oppression.


Would you equate the KKK with mainstream christian beliefs?
Not anymore. When the KKK was riding high in the 50s and 60s, yes. The Church as a whole endorsed segregation prior to the civil rights movement.

[ChumpDumper]

Also keep in mind, there are many types of "Christians." Many kinds of Muslims too.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I wouldn't say defend. The obvious point is that it's neither all good nor all bad. The real point I wanted to get across was that the belief system itself has less to do with the evil shit than the people using it to accomplish their own ends/goals/agendas etc... Which also is an obvious point I guess.
Yeah exactly. I'd say the belief in free market, supply-side economics with deregulated trade and cheap goods itself isn't evil but it's used by plutocrats in order to trick people into believing that somehow letting the rich keep and hoard more wealth will benefit society. The belief itself is just over-simplified backwards logic that stupid people innocently believe, but it's used to promote plutocratic government.


Debatable whether christianity encourages narcissism or greed. I'm an atheist, so I'm not one to comment - but it seems to me there's the whole "meek shall inherit the earth/camel through a needle's eye" thing going on.
I said it encourages narcissism and ENABLES greed. I guess it's debateable whether or not it directly encourages narcissism but it undoubtedly leads to narcissism. It might be more accurate to say it encourages illogical thinking which leads to narcissism.

[Blake]

Incorrect. My point was that you cannot make the KKK the standard-bearer for Christianity.

Why not?

And if not the KKK, then who?

[vy65]

Why not?

And if not the KKK, then who?

Because they practiced violence against other Christians.

I dunno who - or even if there could/should be one.

[vy65]

And by practiced I mean made it part of the groups raison d'etre

[jag]

I don't know about the history of all those guys but including Kepler on that list is hilarious. If you are using him as an example of a christian scientist I can only say that is irony at it's finest.

I'm pretty sure he was a Lutheran. He was a mathematics professor at a seminary school and was highly motivated throughout his career by his religious beliefs. Maybe I missed something there, but a few sources I looked at said his first inclination was to become a minister.


Also, you need to look into what Aquinas said and how that relates to church doctrine and thus how science was able to progress. Prior to Aquinas, science had to adhere to stricture completely and must be done to augment the dogma. Afterwards they just couldn't disregard it. Aquinas said that *gasp* not everything that heathens said was inherently wrong. Enter Aristotle which presented it's own issues.

That allowed a bit of latitude and saw to Kierkegaard and others being able to try applying logic to problems and you start seeing the proofs on God. Before that even suggesting that you could prove there was a God was grounds for painful death. Even then the Church resisted. Most of those guys works were rejected by Christianity.

The only reason why western civilization has been able to progress is because people likme Aquinas have eroded the absolute intellectual dominance that dogma forces.

You're right in that practically all of those guys' works were rejected by the catholic church and many were accused of heresy. You'll never find me defending the catholic church. DoK made a throwaway statement about Christians perpetuating ridiculous and erroneous scientific views throughout history. I gave a simplistic response stating that many of the biggest breakthroughs in science were made by men of faith. I was basically saying he was right, but that it goes both ways. Overall, I think it's a moot point.

[Blake]

Because they practiced violence against other Christians.

I dunno who - or even if there could/should be one.

Roman Catholics waged war on Muslims

Southern Baptists whipped their slaves

If you can't say who should be, then you really can't automatically leave off the KKK

[Jacob1983]

Maher is a piece of shit but he's right. There is no way that there would ever be a Broadway musical called "The Book of Islam". People are scared of offending Muslims and Islam but it's okay to offend Jews, Christians, and Mormons.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Gaycob hates Bill Maher because he's just like the people in this video

Kb62fpsyhC4

"It hasn't but it could!" :lmao

[DarrinS]

Gaycob hates Bill Maher because he's just like the people in this video

Kb62fpsyhC4

"It hasn't but it could!" :lmao


Yeah, Alexandra Pelosi likes to interview poor, uneducated people and show them on Bill's show. Here's another

Z5tqH7UrzOw

[z0sa]

“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

- Marcus Aurelius

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Yeah, Alexandra Pelosi likes to interview poor, uneducated people and show them on Bill's show. Here's another

Z5tqH7UrzOw
:lol I've seen that one too

:lmao Obamabucks

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm pretty sure he was a Lutheran. He was a mathematics professor at a seminary school and was highly motivated throughout his career by his religious beliefs. Maybe I missed something there, but a few sources I looked at said his first inclination was to become a minister.

You're right in that practically all of those guys' works were rejected by the catholic church and many were accused of heresy. You'll never find me defending the catholic church. DoK made a throwaway statement about Christians perpetuating ridiculous and erroneous scientific views throughout history. I gave a simplistic response stating that many of the biggest breakthroughs in science were made by men of faith. I was basically saying he was right, but that it goes both ways. Overall, I think it's a moot point.

What venue could a man not of the faith go to and promote those ideas during that time? Recorded history outside of the church was nonexistent. I know you like to paint that as the the catholic church but the alternative eastern orthodoxies were worse. Church founders like Nestor went a long way towards making the dark ages so dark. That was kind of the point.

And lets keep in mind that much of the shittiness went on before and during the time period of the council of nice. You know the Nicean Creed and all that. The First Pick and Choose Creed.

The church wiped out any methodology that differed from their own with impunity. They set up all the schools. It's only been in the last 100 years that secular schools existed in significant numbers. Now the only dogma factories are places like Orel Roberts. The church had the western world for over a millennium.

So now you can try and divorce yourself from that legacy because you are a protestant but we get a whole lot of anti-intellectualism from your bretheren. The Catholics at least learned its lesson but the people on this continent want to see if they can pull it off.

[exstatic]

What I don't get is why right wingers who agree with me about Islam supported a war that removed what was a secular dictator in Iraq, and also supported a president who allied America with the biggest Islamic theocracy in the world.

Not to mention that they hated Maher's guts until 5 minutes ago. :lol

[rjv]

actually, now that i think about it, maher's stance does make sense in that it really backs up obama's position.

http://www.zcommunications.org/obama-s-rush-to-judgment-was-the-boston-bombing-really-a-terrorist-act-by-ali-abunimah

[RandomGuy]

the question is from does where right and wrong originate? I say God and all things he created.



No it doesn't. It comes from us.

You can't claim God is moral, because the God in the Bible.. is far from it.

I will call Bullshit on this. Prove that statement.

[RandomGuy]

Are you intentionally ignoring the New Testament, which pre-dates the United States? Just read the words of Jesus and tell me how he's not a source of morals? Tell me where Martin Luther King Jr. was wrong?

Tell me exactly where Jesus said to ignore God's old testament edicts in the new testament. You don't get to weasel out of that the old testament albatross that easily. I'm not ignoring anything.


Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.


15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

When Jesus was talking about this, it was not in the context of telling people to disobey it, he was admonishing others for not living up to God's law.

Further, what does pre-dating the US have anything to do with this?

[RandomGuy]

It's a tool used to encourage ignorance. And ignorance usually leads to all kinds of ill shit. I get and agree with that.

But, you seem to admit that some good can come from a christian belief system.

Which leads to the following point: the fact that some good can come out of a belief system responsible for a lot of bad leads me to believe the issue isn't so much with the belief system itself, but how people use it.

I disagree.

Believing in something without good evidence is inherently a bad thing, because it predisposes you to other acts of blind faith. That is a huge intellectual drawback, don't you think?

Wouldn't a better rule for determining what to believe or trust be "place trust only where it is earned?"

[RandomGuy]

You must be equal to God to know what is necessary [in all things]

I can see that mass drowning of people by way of Noah's flood was unneeded. Why not just simultaneously stop all the wicked people's hearts, but for Noah's family?

I can see that God ordering Moses to slaughter children was unnecessary for the same reason.

I am by far not equal to the capabilities attributed to God, and even I can see how unneeded those actions were.

Further, I can see that both actions are vile and reprehensible. My morals are superior to that of God, who sees no problem with either action.

[vy65]

I disagree.

Believing in something without good evidence is inherently a bad thing, because it predisposes you to other acts of blind faith. That is a huge intellectual drawback, don't you think?

Wouldn't a better rule for determining what to believe or trust be "place trust only where it is earned?"

How does religious belief predispose one to other acts of blind faith? I don't see that connection.

I think that there is something to be said for religious faith in an ethical or moral sense -- totally divorced from the institutionalization of religion. And I don't think it's pointless subjecting that faith the rigors of the scientific method. There's something to be said for a little mystery that evades scientific rationalization.

[rjv]

why didn't maher call out the augustinian tradition of theodicy (found in great abundance in catholicism and protestantism)? it's clearly a tradition that advocates just war or utilitarian evil with seemingly endless boundaries. and what of the trumpet of atheistic/nihilistic sponsored terrorism so prominent in europe throughout the 20th century (in both the form of state sponsored and individual terrorism)?

[DarrinS]

why didn't maher call out the augustinian tradition of theodicy (found in great abundance in catholicism and protestantism)? it's clearly a tradition that advocates just war or utilitarian evil with seemingly endless boundaries. and what of the trumpet of atheistic/nihilistic sponsored terrorism so prominent in europe throughout the 20th century (in both the form of state sponsored and individual terrorism)?

Because we live in 2013

[Blake]

There's something to be said for a little mystery that evades scientific rationalization.

Romantically speaking, maybe.

Real world speaking, no.....not a thing to be said.

[Blake]

Because we live in 2013

Islamophobic times we live in

[rjv]

Because we live in 2013


but the tradition of theodicy is still quite prominent in many christian denominations, including those that have a symbiotic relationship with western culture and governments. and the traditions begun at the start of the 20th century are the philosophical predecessors to today's brand of terrorism.

[rjv]

Islamophobic times we live in

agreed

[DarrinS]

Islamophobic times we live in

Willfully ignorant times we live in

[Blake]

Willfully ignorant times we live in

Yeah, I'd say that would describe Islamophobia

[Spurs da champs]

Sharia's law is the pinnacle of violence & hate, tbh.

[RandomGuy]

How does religious belief predispose one to other acts of blind faith? I don't see that connection.

I think that there is something to be said for religious faith in an ethical or moral sense -- totally divorced from the institutionalization of religion. And I don't think it's pointless subjecting that faith the rigors of the scientific method. There's something to be said for a little mystery that evades scientific rationalization.

Perhaps it would help if we define terms.

Define what you consider "faith".

[vy65]

Faith implies a sense of hope or expectancy in something that cannot be empirically proven -- in fact -- escapes rational proof. It's an a-rational belief in someone or something (didn't want to use the word belief, but that's the best I could do while dropping a deuce ...)

[DarrinS]

The belief that everything spontaneously came from nothing is also a leap of faith.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Faith implies a sense of hope or expectancy in something that cannot be empirically proven -- in fact -- escapes rational proof. It's an a-rational belief in someone or something (didn't want to use the word belief, but that's the best I could do while dropping a deuce ...)
So why is encouraging faith a good thing?

[2centsworth]

Another Bill Maher-esque smackdown. United Kingdom's "The Rumble".

http://bcove.me/j71v3w91

[redzero]

The belief that everything spontaneously came from nothing is also a leap of faith.

Who believes that?

[mingus]

A lot of wisdom in religion and a lot of fundamentalist stuff that is clearly bogus and in some cases dangerous. Some people are wise enough to recognize the latter and some are not. To incriminate an entire teaching and it's followers though is painting with broad brush. Maher does that a lot though so no surprise. Maher is as unfair and intentionally obtuse as anyone on left or right IMO.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The belief that everything spontaneously came from nothing is also a leap of faith.

Saying there are things that we don't know is a given.

[mingus]

I think the good that comes from religion is overwhelmingly outweighed by the bad that comes from it, especially in current times.

Prove it. Or argue you it. That seems like a helluva claim coming from someone who is probably one year removed from living in mommy's and daddy's basement.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Prove it. Or argue you it. That seems like a helluva claim coming from someone who is probably one year removed from living in mommy's and daddy's basement.
Prove that I'm one year removed from mommy and daddy's basement.

:lol mingus
:lol angry zionist
:lol mommy and daddy basement jokes
:lol uneducated shimmy neocon

Your anger is a shining example of bad religion, tbh.

[spursncowboys]

Prove it. Or argue you it. That seems like a helluva claim coming from someone who is probably one year removed from living in mommy's and daddy's basement.
That's a big assumption on your part that he moved out

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

:lol people who I've pissed off so much they dream of me being a loser with no future
:lol your jeebotard lives being so miserable you hope mine is just as bad
:lol these baseless insults aren't very godlike, tbh

[spursncowboys]

Saying there are things that we don't know is a given.
One thing I don't understand about atheists is their attempts to make people live their values... Sure some christians do, but they have a higher calling, in their eyes. Atheists do it to be douchbags. Plus the christians who do it, do it as a positive. "Being a Christian will make your life better and a positive afterlife." But atheists do it as a negative. Why? What benefit do atheists get by being douchie about it? Nothing except them increasing their superiority complex.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

One thing I don't understand about atheists is their attempts to make people live their values... Sure some christians do, but they have a higher calling, in their eyes. Atheists do it to be douchbags. Plus the christians who do it, do it as a positive. "Being a Christian will make your life better and a positive afterlife." But atheists do it as a negative. Why? What benefit do atheists get by being douchie about it? Nothing except them increasing their superiority complex.
No, they don't do it as a positive. There's nothing positive about making gay couples pay up to 60% more in taxes than straight couples do.

:crymaking them pay more taxes is for their own good:cry

[spursncowboys]

No, they don't do it as a positive. There's nothing positive about making gay couples pay up to 60% more in taxes than straight couples do.

:crymaking them pay more taxes is for their own good:cry
The IRS, which I don't think of when I think of Christians, also make single people pay that tax. I have to pay 10% more as a single person? WFT! I agree. Lets lower everyones taxes.

[spursncowboys]

So because gays are not categorized and made to declare their sexual preference for tax purposes, Christians are bad??

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

The IRS, which I don't think of when I think of Christians, also make single people pay that tax. I have to pay 10% more as a single person? WFT! I agree. Lets lower everyones taxes.
:lol intellectually dishonest responses
:lol defending Christian persecution of other groups as something positive

[spursncowboys]

:lol intellectually dishonest responses
:lol defending Christian persecution of other groups as something positive
How? I honestly agree with you that single people shouldn't have to pay more in taxes. I just don't believe gays should get a special tax rate?
Define persecution

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

http://icplibrary.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/wes_003.jpg

http://www.duffelblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/westborochurch-620x342.jpg

compassionate Christians, tbh

[Woo Bum-kon]

:lol It's okay for Christfags to shove their shitty religion down our throats because they think they're helping.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

How? I honestly agree with you that single people shouldn't have to pay more in taxes. I just don't believe gays should get a special tax rate?
Define persecution
Gay couples pay up to 60% more in taxes than straight couples because Christians think they shouldn't be recognized as married, filing jointly.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

:lol It's okay for Christfags to shove their shitty religion down our throats because they think they're helping.
:cryit's obvious we help people by shoving religion down their throat since we say we help them:cry

[spursncowboys]

Idiots...Good job having real reasons. Intellectual bastardizing.

[Blake]

One thing I don't understand about atheists is their attempts to make people live their values...

Give an example, strawman.

[Woo Bum-kon]

:lol A theist criticizing people for having poor reasons to believe in things. Now I've seen it all.

[Blake]

Prove it. Or argue you it. That seems like a helluva claim coming from someone who is probably one year removed from living in mommy's and daddy's basement.

Why should he prove his opinion to a jackass like you?

[spursncowboys]

:cryit's obvious we help people by shoving religion down their throat since we say we help them:cry
:lmao seriously? Sandusky... Not bad

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

:lmao seriously? Sandusky... Not bad
What?

[spursncowboys]

Sandusky is now on facebook. He's trying to friend me.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Sandusky is now on facebook. He's trying to friend me.
Ok...?

[mingus]

Prove that I'm one year removed from mommy and daddy's basement.

:lol mingus
:lol angry zionist
:lol mommy and daddy basement jokes
:lol uneducated shimmy neocon

Your anger is a shining example of bad religion, tbh.

I'm not angry at all. Hell, I'd have a beer with anyone here because it's all for fun and I don't let ideological differences get in the way.

But you make highly asssumptuous claims.

[Spurminator]

One thing I don't understand about atheists is their attempts to make people live their values... Sure some christians do, but they have a higher calling, in their eyes. Atheists do it to be douchbags. Plus the christians who do it, do it as a positive. "Being a Christian will make your life better and a positive afterlife." But atheists do it as a negative. Why? What benefit do atheists get by being douchie about it? Nothing except them increasing their superiority complex.

Speaking as a Christian, this is all pretty ridiculous.

For one, the scoreboard is still heavily in favor of Christians when it comes to making people live their values. Marriage laws, obscenity laws, prayers and Christian-themed songs at public and school events. As far as I know, we've had no serious legislation brought forward that says people aren't allowed to believe in God.

Secondly, athiests believe their values are based on a higher calling... That calling is progress and evolution. They believe the human race has moved beyond the need to believe in a superior Being, and that holding onto religion holds the human race back. They have equal if not more right to accuse Christians of being douchebags, and based on the way so many religious people behave, I can't blame them for wanting to see people turn away from religion.

[mingus]

Why should he prove his opinion to a jackass like you?

Better than a cuck jackass.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Also here is another example of religion on THE University of Arizona's campus. Brother Dean, someone who frequently preaches on the mall decided to make a sign that said, "You deserve rape" for a day intended to raise sexual assault awareness (he's the one on the left, the other two are godless atheists protesting him):

http://media.azw.s3.amazonaws.com/16641_n424brodeanryanrevockrgbf.jpg

[spursncowboys]

So college kids being obscene is a reason why christians=bad? You must hate atheists then...

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

So college kids being obscene is a reason why christians=bad? You must hate atheists then...
Brother Dean is a devout Christian. The other two aren't exactly being obscene, but since you're a Christian I can see how you'd be offended by the sign "Nobody deserves rape" since rape is a quintessential part of Christianity.

[mingus]

Lol rape is a quintessential part of Christianity. SMH

[FuzzyLumpkins]

One thing I don't understand about atheists is their attempts to make people live their values... Sure some christians do, but they have a higher calling, in their eyes. Atheists do it to be douchbags. Plus the christians who do it, do it as a positive. "Being a Christian will make your life better and a positive afterlife." But atheists do it as a negative. Why? What benefit do atheists get by being douchie about it? Nothing except them increasing their superiority complex.

Give me a break. The doctrine of christianity is heavy on ministry. There is another word for that: proselytizing. With that is a doctrine. Protestants like to hem and haw about what they actually follow but follow them they do. It's just typically from whatever they have gotten from whatever pulpit they listened to for their years.

When it comes down to it, the only reason to believe that shit is because someone told you. Either through a book that was read or being told straight out. It's a pattern that you see over and over again. Religion is a product of environment and a learned behavior.

Again there is no objective proof. You don't even dispute that. You can believe whatever you want to but when it comes down to public policy ie politics, religion needs to stay away.

[Blake]

Better than a cuck jackass.

That didn't answer the question. The name calling came quicker than normal.

How long before you brag about your income?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

That didn't answer the question. The name calling came quicker than normal.

How long before you brag about your income?
He says he doesn't take this seriously though!

[Clipper Nation]

One thing I don't understand about atheists is their attempts to make people live their values...

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao































:lmao

[vy65]

So why is encouraging faith a good thing?

I don't think I said it should be encouraged or even is a good thing.

[LnGrrrR]

The belief that everything spontaneously came from nothing is also a leap of faith.

One that takes less of a leap, in my mind, than a conscious "creator" than formed everything from nothing, and is somehow able to affect the universe without being bound to the physics of that universe.

Additionally, I don't know many people who think that everything came from "nothing". Everything now spread out came from a highly highly highly compressed ball of everything is a better way to put it.

[Blake]

Lol rape is a quintessential part of Christianity. SMH

Mary wasn't given a choice.

[boutons_deux]

Rubio ‘open’ to cutting off all Muslim student visas

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) on Wednesday said that he was “open” to considering the idea of halting all student visas from Muslim countries as a reaction to this month’s Boston Marathon bombings.

Earlier this week, Fox News host Bob Beckel first suggested (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/04/23/fox-newss-beckel-promotes-crackpot-plan-against-muslim-students/) that there should be a two-year suspension of 75,000 student visas from Muslim countries, even though the two men suspected of carrying out the Boston bombings emigrated from Russia as refugees (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/bombing-suspects-immigration-status-emerges-reform-bill-talks-160951186--election.html).


“I think we really have to consider, given the fact so many people hate us, that we’re going to have to cut off Muslim students coming to this country for some period of time so that we can absorb what we’ve got and look at what we’ve got and decide whether some of the people here should be going — be sent home or sent to prison,” Beckel opined.


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/25/rubio-open-to-cutting-off-all-muslim-student-visas/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

Colleges won't like this because many of them pocket $100Ms from wealthy foreign (Muslim) students.

[DarrinS]

One that takes less of a leap, in my mind, than a conscious "creator" than formed everything from nothing, and is somehow able to affect the universe without being bound to the physics of that universe.

Additionally, I don't know many people who think that everything came from "nothing". Everything now spread out came from a highly highly highly compressed ball of everything is a better way to put it.


Where did the compressed ball of everything come from?

Also, do atheists acknowledge the big bang?

[Blake]

Where did the compressed ball of everything come from?

Also, do atheists acknowledge the big bang?

It's possible that this matter has always existed, always in motion

also possible that there has been lots of big bangs

[rjv]

.

Additionally, I don't know many people who think that everything came from "nothing". Everything now spread out came from a highly highly highly compressed ball of everything is a better way to put it.

from a cosmological point of view, that certainly brings hope for greater puzzles to resolve. that is, all inflation does is push the fine-tuning problems back to an earlier epoch (or beyond the horizon, so to speak). philosophically, the subject of supervenience has its place here as well (i.e., top-down, bottom-up causation).

[Woo Bum-kon]

Where did the compressed ball of everything come from?

Where did your God come from?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Where did the compressed ball of everything come from?

Also, do atheists acknowledge the big bang?

Why do they have to acknowledge anything. You are the one of the religion that says 'God works in mysterious ways' everytime something happens that flies in the face of all the way God is supposed to be. ie omniscient, omnipotent and benevolent. Theodicy is another word for it.

Believe nothing without proof and don't be afraid to say 'I don't know' in place of explaining things with obvious bullshit.

[RandomGuy]

Where did the compressed ball of everything come from?

Also, do atheists acknowledge the big bang?

1. We don't know.

2. Insofar as it is generally acknolwedged by the scientists/experts who study it yes. They have earned my trust, so will grant them a pretty good chance at getting it right.


My turn:
So what about the compressed ball of everything?

[RandomGuy]

One thing I don't understand about atheists is their attempts to make people live their values... Sure some christians do, but they have a higher calling, in their eyes. Atheists do it to be douchbags. Plus the christians who do it, do it as a positive. "Being a Christian will make your life better and a positive afterlife." But atheists do it as a negative. Why? What benefit do atheists get by being douchie about it? Nothing except them increasing their superiority complex.

Bullshit.

Double standard much?

Atheists, in general, don't talk about this stuff because they want to be douchebags, any more than Christians, in general, do.

Both groups talk about this stuff because they believe in the truth and that truth matters.

"Being an Atheist will make your life better" seems to be a pretty positive message to me.

Don't get all pissy at me because I rub your nose in the things you want to ignore about Christianity and its horribly flawed foundations. I watch enough Sunday preachers to know exactly who has the superiority complex.

Nothing makes people think themselves superior to all others than believing that they have God on their side.

[mingus]

Mary wasn't given a choice.

I don't see how that disputes what I said.

[DarrinS]

Where did your God come from?

It's turtles all the way down

[baseline bum]

Mary wasn't given a choice.

???? Mary was a cheating whore who had a bastard child and made up a ridiculous story to keep her count-to-potato dumb husband from stoning her to death for cucking him. Got her just due when her shame was nailed to that cross tbh.

[Blake]

I don't see how that disputes what I said.

Strange that you would "lol....smh" at something you agree with

[Blake]

???? Mary was a cheating whore who had a bastard child and made up a ridiculous story to keep her count-to-potato dumb husband from stoning her to death for cucking him. Got her just due when her shame was nailed to that cross tbh.

Yeah that's probably what really went down, but let's say that virgin Mary told the truth and Jesus was God's semen.

Immaculate rape.

[Avante]

The internet, book stores, full of what it takes to learn about Islam. Yes a religion of violence towards non believers. Only a fool wouldn't get it.

A bomb goes off anywhere in the world nobody is thinking.....those damn Christians again.....now are they?

Killing over cartoons pretty much says it all.

[DisAsTerBot]

The internet, book stories, full of what it takes to learn about Islam. Yes a religion of violence towards non believers. Only a fool wouldn't get it.

A bomb goes off anywhere in the world nobody is thinking.....those damn Christians again.....now are they?

Killing over cartoons pretty much says it all.

if it's at an abortion clinic, that's my first thought: crazy christians

[Avante]

BOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....1000 people killed and maimed. We don't know who did it....yet! So tell me who will we all be thinking did it? Where does law enforcement first start looking?

You see a collie across the street eyeing you, yep...concern. You see a pit bull across the street eyeing you, yep...fear. That is Islam.

[Blake]

Yes a religion of violence towards non believers. Only a fool wouldn't get it.



That's Christianity too, fool.

[Blake]

You see Avante posting....yep, fucktard.

[LnGrrrR]

Where did the compressed ball of everything come from?

Also, do atheists acknowledge the big bang?

As Blake said, its likely it has always existed. Which seems at least as fair an answer to me as "God has always existed".

[LnGrrrR]

It's turtles all the way down

:lol :tu

[DarrinS]

As Blake said, its likely it has always existed. Which seems at least as fair an answer to me as "God has always existed".

If both are fair answers, then the existence of God is as rational is the nonexistence of God.

[LnGrrrR]

If both are fair answers, then the existence of God is as rational is the nonexistence of God.

If the existence or nonexistence of God only rested on that fact, sure. Except those who claim that God exists tend to apply some other features to him, like that he created the universe, or various other characteristics/actions. If you are saying "Some form of being exists that can't/hasn't interacted with us"... Sure, I can't disprove it. No one could.

[Blake]

If both are fair answers, then the existence of God is as rational is the nonexistence of God.

No, it's not for all reasons that are spaghetti based.

[mingus]

Strange that you would "lol....smh" at something you agree with

What?

This thread has veered off so far from OP as due most of the threads like this. DoK has yet to answer my question and neither have you, and nothing else has to be said. We then come to a red herring discussion about rape. Have at it, ankle biters.

[Blake]

What?

This thread has veered off so far from OP as due most of the threads like this. DoK has yet to answer my question and neither have you, and nothing else has to be said. We then come to a red herring discussion about rape. Have at it, ankle biters.

"what?" is the first question you've asked in this thread, jackass.

And you have yet to answer my direct question to you.

don't let the door hit you etc..

[Avante]

So many here really do need to actually bone up just a little on what Islam is, it's very obvious that never happened.

[rjv]

It's possible that this matter has always existed, always in motion

i'm not sure i would refer to it as 'matter'. the current theories on the origins of light matter along with the corresponding observations of their presence stongly implies a beginning of matter and certainly space, if not time as well. if the latter is correct then there was never a 'before'.



also possible that there has been lots of big bangs

that is certainly the reaction to the problem of the popular model of a steady state universe. that is, perhaps there is some sort of undefined quantum effect that creates an infinite number of expansions and contractions of the universe. this model, however, has to consider the question of whether or not this is an open or closed universe and entropy density considerations.

[rjv]

^^ a good analogy would be this thread. is it a phoenix of another thread ? is it open or closed ? is there bottom up or top down causation for this threads inflation ?

[rjv]

So many here really do need to actually bone up just a little on what Islam is, it's very obvious that never happened.

i have to agree with blake's assertion regarding christianity's current state (and it's own culpability when it comes to bloodshed). when one takes into consideration how christianity has evolved, by means of theodicy, into a moral catapult for 'justified' war (st augustine's just war theory for instance) it certainly can be regarded as a catalyst for violence (perhaps not for such superfluous reasons but arguably on a larger scale). nietzcshe may have been right when he asserted that there has not been a legitimate christian since christ himself or that christianity (in its most prominent forms) is responsible for the death of god.

[Blake]

^^ a good analogy would be this thread. is it a phoenix of another thread ? is it open or closed ? is there bottom up or top down causation for this threads inflation ?

:lol

[Woo Bum-kon]

So many here really do need to actually bone up just a little on what Islam is, it's very obvious that never happened.

The Qu'Ran is violent, just like the Bible.

[Woo Bum-kon]

If both are fair answers, then the existence of God is as rational is the nonexistence of God.

The existence of a God isn't supported by any evidence, so it's not a rational answer.

[Avante]

The Qu'Ran is violent, just like the Bible.

Pretty obvious you haven't read either. Two totally different levels of violence there.

[Avante]

i have to agree with blake's assertion regarding christianity's current state (and it's own culpability when it comes to bloodshed). when one takes into consideration how christianity has evolved, by means of theodicy, into a moral catapult for 'justified' war (st augustine's just war theory for instance) it certainly can be regarded as a catalyst for violence (perhaps not for such superfluous reasons but arguably on a larger scale). nietzcshe may have been right when he asserted that there has not been a legitimate christian since christ himself or that christianity (in its most prominent forms) is responsible for the death of god.

What does Christianity have to do with anything?

[Woo Bum-kon]

Pretty obvious you haven't read either. Two totally different levels of violence there.

Explain. The Bible tells its followers to kill non-believers and homosexuals, too. God also commits genocide, wipes out entire cities, sends bears to maul children to death, etc. in the Bible.

What's an acceptable level of violence for you?

[Avante]

Explain. The Bible tells its followers to kill non-believers and homosexuals, too. God also commits genocide, wipes out entire cities, sends bears to maul children to death, etc. in the Bible.

What's an acceptable level of violence for you?

It's the overwleming amount of kill kill kill chop, burn kill kill..we find in the Koran. Tons of it, tons! Chop off hands and feet from opposite sides...huh?

What does any talk of the realities of Islam and the violence we all know is the core of that religion have to do with Christianity? You really don't see a difference?

[Woo Bum-kon]

It's the overwleming amount of kill kill kill chop, burn kill kill..we find in the Koran. Tons of it, tons! Chop off hands and feet from opposite sides...huh?

What does any talk of the realities of Islam and the violence we all know is the core of that religion have to do with Christianity? You really don't see a difference?

The Bible has an overwhelming amount of murder in it, too. Genocides. Entire cities being destroyed.

I don't necessarily disagree with you about violence in Islam. However, I don't agree with how you came to your conclusion. The Bible is not less violent than the Qu'Ran. Period. God loves to murder and wants others to murder. It's right there in the text. The fact that Christians don't follow those teachings is because they either don't know about it or know about it and try to rationalize it.

[Avante]

Where does God want others to murder non believers. Educate me.

[Woo Bum-kon]

Okay, since you criticized me for not having read the Bible even though you seem to have not read it yourself:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Chronicles%2015:12-13&version=NIV

"12 They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their ancestors, with all their heart and soul. 13 All who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman."

2 Chronicles 15: 12-13

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2022&version=NASB

20 “He who sacrifices to [r (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2022&version=NASB#fen-NASB-2134r)]any god, other than to the Lord alone, shall be [s (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2022&version=NASB#fen-NASB-2134s)]utterly destroyed.

Exodus 22


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2017:2-5%20&version=NASB


2 “If there is found in your midst, in any of your [a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2017:2-5%20&version=NASB#fen-NASB-5367a)]towns, which the Lord your God is giving you, a man or a woman who does what is evil in the sight of the Lord your God, by transgressing His covenant, 3 and has gone and served other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the heavenly host, which I have not commanded, 4 and if it is told you and you have heard of it, then you shall inquire thoroughly. Behold, if it is true and the thing certain that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, 5 then you shall bring out that man or that woman who has done this evil deed to your gates, that is, the man or the woman, and you shall stone them to [b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2017:2-5%20&version=NASB#fen-NASB-5370b)]death.

Deuteronomy 17:2-5

Next time, actually read up before you claim something.

[Avante]

That pales in comparision to what we see coming from the Koran. Not even in the same ball park.

But....the real thing is what we are seeing today.

W3_qelW5qp4

[Woo Bum-kon]

So, now that you have been educated, you can't bitch about the Qu'Ran instructing Muslims to kill non-believers because the Bible does the same thing.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

http://change-production.s3.amazonaws.com/photos/6/is/oj/UyisojBVidkqvDe-556x313-noPad.jpg?1366949192

[rjv]

What does Christianity have to do with anything?

in regard to the original theme of this thread, christianity as an organized religion is as responsible for bloodshed as are radical islamists. state sponsored terrorism, or rationalized violence ultimately still belongs to the same set as individual terrorism.

[RandomGuy]

Pretty obvious you haven't read either. Two totally different levels of violence there.

I've read both. I highly doubt you have read the Q'uran in its entirety.

Since I think that both are full of hooey, I can say that I found both to contain rather repulsive amounts of violence.

Quite frankly, I don't see much point in trying to say which is more or less violent. They both are violent, and both little more than the delusional ramblings of bronze age herders.

If it makes you happy to think one is less violent, by all means, I will readily accede the bible is, since that is your favorite theory, as long as you acknowlege the Christian bible is violent. It doens't matter to me, either way.

[RandomGuy]

That pales in comparision to what we see coming from the Koran. Not even in the same ball park.

But....the real thing is what we are seeing today.

W3_qelW5qp4




A witch-hunt is a search for witches or evidence of witchcraft, often involving moral panic,[1] or mass hysteria.[2] Before 1750 it was legally sanctioned and involving official witchcraft trials. The classical period of witchhunts in Europe and North America falls into the Early Modern period or about 1480 to 1750, spanning the upheavals of the Reformation and the Thirty Years' War, resulting in an estimated 40,000 to 60,000 executions[3]--not including a million Cathars who were declared to be witches.

Perhaps the most heinous indictment against supposed witches began early in the thirteenth century as Pope Innocent III declared the Cathars, numbering almost a million, to be "witches" and brought Christian forces against them to wipe out every last one: man, woman, child.[4][5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Punishing-witches-Laienspiegel.jpg/250px-Punishing-witches-Laienspiegel.jpg

Modern African Christians are still killing witches even today. That stuff is gruesome, so I will spare you the pictures.