On September 20 2010 08:55 wadadde wrote:The reason why religious people often take issue with people pointing out that they don't really have a leg to stand on, is IMO that they see their beliefs are such an integral part of their identity.
Actually you're exactly right. I came to this exact same conclusion sitting in my psychology lecture after writing that post. Attack the core of someones identity and you get rage, a state of mind not conducive to logic or reasoning.
On September 20 2010 08:55 wadadde wrote:The reason why religious people often take issue with people pointing out that they don't really have a leg to stand on, is IMO that they see their beliefs are such an integral part of their identity.
Actually you're exactly right. I came to this exact same conclusion sitting in my psychology lecture after writing that post. Attack the core of someones identity and you get rage, a state of mind not conducive to logic or reasoning.
That, combined with the fact that neither the theist nor the atheist position can be empirically proven.
Too bad, people forgot about the existentialist view: whether god exists or not should not f***ing matter!
On September 20 2010 08:55 wadadde wrote:The reason why religious people often take issue with people pointing out that they don't really have a leg to stand on, is IMO that they see their beliefs are such an integral part of their identity.
Actually you're exactly right. I came to this exact same conclusion sitting in my psychology lecture after writing that post. Attack the core of someones identity and you get rage, a state of mind not conducive to logic or reasoning.
That, combined with the fact that neither the theist nor the atheist position can be empirically proven.
Too bad, people forgot about the existentialist view: whether god exists or not should not f***ing matter!
It should matter within people's personal lives for whatever spiritual needs they have and whatnot. But indeed when it comes to business and a generalized society it should not matter. Hence secularism is good. (end of thread imo edit: or end of derailing haha)
Let's play a game: Guess whether I am atheist, Christian, or I follow the teachings of Buddha.
- I believe every person has the right to choose what they believe. - I believe no person should push their religion, there-lack-of, or anything in between upon others. - I believe nobody should try to cause harm to another person for any reason. - I believe a person has the right to defend themselves when they are, however, hurt by another person. - I believe morals are created by your surroundings, but that every person has the right morals to start out with in life. - I do not believe there is a sure-fire way to make the world a better place, but we can try and do as much as possible to improve it.
the pope is a stupid d***f**k. i don't understand how one of the world's biggest organizations fails to put an appropriate candidate in its most imporant position. the church needs better managers.
I remember when i first fell out of "religion." Thinking that I was just born christian, all though I was never made to go to church. I went straight to atheism because frankly, organized religion for me is a more nonsensical trip I don't need to go down. I do think though, that before you decide you are atheist to consider Agnostic, in that you believe your own ideas of what life is. Atheism after all means there is absolutely nothing more, and when you look at the magnitude of the universe, it's a little hard to say "Yeah man, all on accident."
I don't even care about those religious fanatics anymore: They ARE the new terrorists that hold mankind back with their ridiculous made-up stories just cuz they're afraid of death.
You just cannot argue with fanatics - they are crazy. Thats true for ALL religious ppl by the way...
On September 20 2010 16:45 exnomendei wrote: Let's play a game: Guess whether I am atheist, Christian, or I follow the teachings of Buddha.
- I believe every person has the right to choose what they believe. - I believe no person should push their religion, there-lack-of, or anything in between upon others. - I believe nobody should try to cause harm to another person for any reason. - I believe a person has the right to defend themselves when they are, however, hurt by another person. - I believe morals are created by your surroundings, but that every person has the right morals to start out with in life. - I do not believe there is a sure-fire way to make the world a better place, but we can try and do as much as possible to improve it.
1. Not Christian. Possibly Buddhist. 2. Not Christian. Possibly Buddhist. 3. Not Christian. Possibly Buddhist. 4. Possibly Christian. Not Buddhist. 5. Not Christian. Not Buddhist. 6. Not Christian. Possibly Buddhist.
Thinking your beliefs make you important: some sort of religion?.
I dont even care he said that. It just annoys me that Vatican and/or other religious interest groups always bitch about offensive things and write letters, and here they are making retarded Nazi allusions with other people's beliefs.
On September 20 2010 15:11 goldenkrnboi wrote: Also, what point are you trying to make? Communist regimes were also mostly irreligious because religion was eradicated for loyalty to the state, and most of them have fallen. world powers today have thrived in which the majority of the community is religious. Again, my (and what I believe to be the pope's) viewpoint is not that society cannot survive without religion. As the examples you've pointed out show, that's simply not true. I think that a society could grow further if christian values were more strongly implemented into society.
Strong Christian values like...
A raped virgin girl must marry her rapist. Your parking spot was God-given. Giving away all your material goods to the poor. (socialist?) Killing your children if they cheek you. Misguided obsession about reproductive organs. Slavery. Murdering non-Christians en masse. Assuming regular, organic illnesses to be supernatural possessions/marks.
On September 20 2010 15:11 goldenkrnboi wrote: Also, what point are you trying to make? Communist regimes were also mostly irreligious because religion was eradicated for loyalty to the state, and most of them have fallen. world powers today have thrived in which the majority of the community is religious. Again, my (and what I believe to be the pope's) viewpoint is not that society cannot survive without religion. As the examples you've pointed out show, that's simply not true. I think that a society could grow further if christian values were more strongly implemented into society.
Strong Christian values like...
A raped virgin girl must marry her rapist. Your parking spot was God-given. Giving away all your material goods to the poor. (socialist?) Killing your children if they cheek you. Misguided obsession about reproductive organs. Slavery. Murdering non-Christians en masse. Assuming regular, organic illnesses to be supernatural possessions/marks.
On September 20 2010 08:55 wadadde wrote:The reason why religious people often take issue with people pointing out that they don't really have a leg to stand on, is IMO that they see their beliefs are such an integral part of their identity.
Actually you're exactly right. I came to this exact same conclusion sitting in my psychology lecture after writing that post. Attack the core of someones identity and you get rage, a state of mind not conducive to logic or reasoning.
That, combined with the fact that neither the theist nor the atheist position can be empirically proven.
Too bad, people forgot about the existentialist view: whether god exists or not should not f***ing matter!
It matters when they try to teach creationism in schools.
This pope needs to dress up the alter boy in his Hitler youth uniform and molest him because he couldn't be any more of a fucking hypocrite. This is the same pope that suggested using condoms would still give HIV. The pope is worse than Hitler in the trauma he is causing for generations. At least Hitler killed most of his victims. Religion poisons everything.
On September 19 2010 16:32 hypercube wrote: It's funny how public personas can get away with statements that would get you banned on any respectable message board. Not for inflamatory language, just plain old trolling;
heh, the best post was all the way back on page one.
I think my other fav (from another board) was that 'well, you're allowed to start comparing people to nazis when you've actually been a nazi' ˙ Some other stupid shit that was said during this same tour: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11325699 "England today is a secularised, pluralistic country. When you land at Heathrow Airport, you sometimes think you'd landed in a Third World country." Asked whether Christians were discriminated against in the UK, he said: "Particularly in England, an aggressive neo-atheism is widespread. For example, if you wear a cross with British Airways, you're discriminated against."
Now an immature, yet funny, picture to complete my wonderful post:
On September 20 2010 15:11 goldenkrnboi wrote: Also, what point are you trying to make? Communist regimes were also mostly irreligious because religion was eradicated for loyalty to the state, and most of them have fallen. world powers today have thrived in which the majority of the community is religious. Again, my (and what I believe to be the pope's) viewpoint is not that society cannot survive without religion. As the examples you've pointed out show, that's simply not true. I think that a society could grow further if christian values were more strongly implemented into society.
Strong Christian values like...
A raped virgin girl must marry her rapist. Your parking spot was God-given. Giving away all your material goods to the poor. (socialist?) Killing your children if they cheek you. Misguided obsession about reproductive organs. Slavery. Murdering non-Christians en masse. Assuming regular, organic illnesses to be supernatural possessions/marks.
The good ol' days.
stop trolling.
Most of those things are in your bible. Maybe you should tell it to stop trolling.
On September 20 2010 16:45 exnomendei wrote: Let's play a game: Guess whether I am atheist, Christian, or I follow the teachings of Buddha.
- I believe every person has the right to choose what they believe. - I believe no person should push their religion, there-lack-of, or anything in between upon others. - I believe nobody should try to cause harm to another person for any reason. - I believe a person has the right to defend themselves when they are, however, hurt by another person. - I believe morals are created by your surroundings, but that every person has the right morals to start out with in life. - I do not believe there is a sure-fire way to make the world a better place, but we can try and do as much as possible to improve it.
On September 19 2010 16:32 hypercube wrote: It's funny how public personas can get away with statements that would get you banned on any respectable message board. Not for inflamatory language, just plain old trolling;
heh, the best post was all the way back on page one.
I think my other fav (from another board) was that 'well, you're allowed to start comparing people to nazis when you've actually been a nazi' ˙ Some other stupid shit that was said during this same tour: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11325699 "England today is a secularised, pluralistic country. When you land at Heathrow Airport, you sometimes think you'd landed in a Third World country." Asked whether Christians were discriminated against in the UK, he said: "Particularly in England, an aggressive neo-atheism is widespread. For example, if you wear a cross with British Airways, you're discriminated against."
Now an immature, yet funny, picture to complete my wonderful post:
Why do you Americans not distinguish between Catholics and Protestants/Christians, it's not the same thing. I really really do not understand, is it all just the same thing to you people? It makes having a discussion so much more difficult when you don't distinguish between different religious schools when having a discussion about religion.
Catholicism doesn't = Christianity and it's been posted at least 10 times in this thread.
In England which the article you quoted is about, there is a huge difference between Catholics and Christians both historically and culturally. Therefore they should not be referred to as the same thing, it makes no sense.
Edit: I just searched this on Wikipedia and realize now, that I have bugger all chance of winning this definition argument. It's still awful though, in my opinion, that so many people use the same term for things that are so incredibly different both in the way that it's practiced but also historically and culturally. *sigh*
[B] I think atheism is the most dangerous thing out there because it removes all restraints and takes away any morals and inserts nothing. Human beings are selfish and evil and taking off the restraints will unleash the monster. You can justify anything with atheism as long as if further's your own goals. Atheists are only accountable to themselves and can easily change any moral or value. We have already seen it with Hitler, Stalin, and Mao among others. Human beings become expendable and their is no value to life (look at abortion). People are already selfish and apathetic but the rise in militant atheism is going to make it even worse.
Most people believe this even though the internet, and gaming are filled with young liberals/atheists for the most part so I'll get like 50 flames for this but I don't care. You can criticize me and the Pope all you want but I should be able to criticize atheism just as well.
Right, so you believe that during the old testament Moses came up with a set of religious constraints because his people where killing, stealing, lying and being adulterers left and right? and i suppose you support slavery? Moses supported slavery. Why arent you supporting slavery?
Because the funny thing is for all of its worth the new testament HAS 0 RULES. Thats right, during his rise and fall the only thing you can commend Jesus for saying is. "Do onto others as you would have done onto yourself"
but dont quote me directly because last i read the bible i was in my rites to manhood and 16 years of age. ATHEISM follows the laws of man set down by the UN and for all that is good those are the laws we all follow. They where not written by one man, but by many men representing the respective regions of their own worlds.
On September 19 2010 16:32 hypercube wrote: It's funny how public personas can get away with statements that would get you banned on any respectable message board. Not for inflamatory language, just plain old trolling;
heh, the best post was all the way back on page one.
I think my other fav (from another board) was that 'well, you're allowed to start comparing people to nazis when you've actually been a nazi' ˙ Some other stupid shit that was said during this same tour: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11325699 "England today is a secularised, pluralistic country. When you land at Heathrow Airport, you sometimes think you'd landed in a Third World country." Asked whether Christians were discriminated against in the UK, he said: "Particularly in England, an aggressive neo-atheism is widespread. For example, if you wear a cross with British Airways, you're discriminated against."
Now an immature, yet funny, picture to complete my wonderful post:
Why do you Americans not distinguish between Catholics and Protestants/Christians, it's not the same thing. I really really do not understand, is it all just the same thing to you people? It makes having a discussion so much more difficult when you don't distinguish between different religious schools when having a discussion about religion.
Catholicism doesn't = Christianity and it's been posted at least 10 times in this thread.
In England which the article you quoted is about, there is a huge difference between Catholics and Christians both historically and culturally. Therefore they should not be referred to as the same thing, it makes no sense.
Wrong. There is a huge difference between Catholics and Protestants and Anglicans. They are all Christians.
On September 19 2010 16:32 hypercube wrote: It's funny how public personas can get away with statements that would get you banned on any respectable message board. Not for inflamatory language, just plain old trolling;
heh, the best post was all the way back on page one.
I think my other fav (from another board) was that 'well, you're allowed to start comparing people to nazis when you've actually been a nazi' ˙ Some other stupid shit that was said during this same tour: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11325699 "England today is a secularised, pluralistic country. When you land at Heathrow Airport, you sometimes think you'd landed in a Third World country." Asked whether Christians were discriminated against in the UK, he said: "Particularly in England, an aggressive neo-atheism is widespread. For example, if you wear a cross with British Airways, you're discriminated against."
Now an immature, yet funny, picture to complete my wonderful post:
Why do you Americans not distinguish between Catholics and Protestants/Christians, it's not the same thing. I really really do not understand, is it all just the same thing to you people? It makes having a discussion so much more difficult when you don't distinguish between different religious schools when having a discussion about religion.
Catholicism doesn't = Christianity and it's been posted at least 10 times in this thread.
In England which the article you quoted is about, there is a huge difference between Catholics and Christians both historically and culturally. Therefore they should not be referred to as the same thing, it makes no sense.
Wrong. There is a huge difference between Catholics and Protestants and Anglicans. They are all Christians.
Well, in our country we do not use the same term for Catholics and Protestants. Anyway it's a hopeless discussion for me to win, it's just a difference of the usage of the word in our respective languages. I have to say i prefer ours a lot though, due to the fact that it's far easier to distinguish what is what. If in Denmark you say you're Christian it basically means, that you're a protestant of some sort, whereas if you're Catholic you say you're a Catholic. I never realized that Danish and American (English) were so different.