Summary: Girl, 11 years old, dies because her parents pray for healing instead of taking her to a doctor.
God makes people doctors for a reason, right?
Forum Index > General Forum |
Gaetele
Esper760 Posts
Summary: Girl, 11 years old, dies because her parents pray for healing instead of taking her to a doctor. | ||
statix
United States1760 Posts
| ||
PissedOffEmo
Canada777 Posts
| ||
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
There is no God. | ||
![]()
vGl-CoW
Belgium8305 Posts
| ||
baal
10541 Posts
![]() | ||
imDerek
United States1944 Posts
| ||
Gaetele
Esper760 Posts
There was a major flood warning in the Parson's district, and his parishoners were quickly evacuating from the area. The parson stood pat. His parishoners noticed this and question him, "Reverend, aren't you leaving? A big flood is coming!" "No!" insisted the Parson. "God will deliver me!" So, along come the rains, the water rises and floods the Parson's basement and first floor. He moves to his second floor and watches the storm rage, the waters rise from his bedroom window. Along chugs a motorboat with rescuers. "Get in!" they exclaim. "C'mon, we got you!" "NO!" insisted the Parson. "God will deliver me!" The waters rise more, and the Parson takes to his attic, then his roof while the storm rages and the waters rise. Up above him hovers a helicopter, lowering a rope and harness. "Go rescue another who needs it!" announced the Parson. "God will deliver me!" So, the helicopter flies off. Soon thereafter, the waters rise further, and the Parson climbs his chimney while the waters rise to his waiste, his hosue completely submerged. Lo and behold a log bumps up to the chimney, but the Parson shoves it away and clutches his chimney, deep in prayer. The Parson did not survive the storm; the waters rose above his chimney and the Parson drowns. Standing before the Pearly Gates and greeted by his Lord, he looks to him with confusion and says, "Lord, I don't understand. I thought you promised you would deliver me from evil!" Jesus shakes his head. "Parson," he said, "I sent you a warning, a motorboat, a helicopter and a log ... What more did you WANT?" | ||
Polis
Poland1292 Posts
Anyway if God would not want diseases, he would not create them. | ||
Duke
United States1106 Posts
| ||
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
The mother believes the girl could still be resurrected, the police chief said. o.O | ||
KaasZerg
Netherlands927 Posts
This qualafies as neglect to me. Poor girl, born in the wrong family. | ||
baal
10541 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:43 DukE wrote: isn't this child abuse or neglect or something? -_- murder in the name of god has never been punished, more like praised | ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:42 baal wrote: Natural selection at its finest ![]() Man... there is NOTHING wrong with that! | ||
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:40 vGl-CoW wrote: this just proves that god is real and is able to dish out ownage harder than anybody Yeah I guess you're right. His way of saying screw you for confessing to the wrong religion; screw you for choosing one of the tens of thousands wrong interpretations every religion has branched into; and to end it screw you for choosing the wrong church out of millions. | ||
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:38 LaLuSh wrote: There it is. There is no God. How can you say ? i mean when you judge death, something imensely controversy, only with the point of view of a guy living in this colossal prison we call earth, your sight is too limited to understand the nature of death. Those fathers should have taken the kid to the doctor, maybe they are covering up for some kind of negligence But if a sick kids death was enough to destroy the beliefs of every religion .... Dont worry, they covered theyr asses by believing this is one of the sucky places where we spend most of our existance. | ||
MarklarMarklar
Fiji1823 Posts
sad world RIP GIRL with crazy parents | ||
Gokey
United States2722 Posts
| ||
lololol
5198 Posts
Yep, it's completely normal to gouge your own eye by shooting a scoped rifle. | ||
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
The girl's parents, Dale and Leilani Neumann, attributed the death to "apparently they didn't have enough faith," the police chief said. Too little faith is the least of those peoples problems ![]() | ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
For most of the time humanity was around, about a quarter to a half of children died before reaching adulthood. Generally speaking, the ones who died were weaker than the ones who survived. What happens to the genetics of a population when you go from filtering out the quarter or half weakest in every generation, to keeping 99+%? After about five or ten generations, don't you end up with a population of people full of allergies, and attention disorders, and diabetes, and social dysfunction, and depression, and weak eyes needing glasses, and laziness, and stupidity, and fatness, and clumsiness, and other low-grade inferiorities? What do the people look like after a hundred or a thousand generations? | ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:57 lololol wrote: Yep, it's completely normal to gouge your own eye by shooting a scoped rifle. In the first place, she's obviously not shooting, just spotting. In the second place, man... there is NOTHING wrong with THAT! | ||
illmatic
Canada53 Posts
| ||
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:53 D10 wrote: How can you say ? i mean when you judge death, something imensely controversy, only with the point of view of a guy living in this colossal prison we call earth, your sight is too limited to understand the nature of death. Those fathers should have taken the kid to the doctor, maybe they are covering up for some kind of negligence But if a sick kids death was enough to destroy the beliefs of every religion .... Dont worry, they covered theyr asses by believing this is one of the sucky places where we spend most of our existance. Not gonna make this into a long God vs. No God discussion. I have no problems with religion as long as it's not esoteric and seclusionary in the belief that MY religion is the ultimate road to salvation/whatever. For every religion claiming the aforementioned there stands a dim-witted homo sapiens turned prophet/saint/whatever grinning in the background, having achieved his or her goal in branching another one of these endless religions in another one of its endless branches/churches/whatever. I'm aware the above means I must reject the majority of today's modern religions since they're all based on canonised staples of bullshit that throughout history has branched out into new piles of shit, as a never ending stream of homo sapiens wise men claim to have found the true interpretation of the "word"/whatever. I'm actually okay with most buddhists and generally with people who believe in a personal God. They share a common trait you see; they mind their own business. | ||
rpf
United States2705 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:42 baal wrote: Natural selection at its finest ![]() So much for "eye relief." | ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
| ||
Jyun
United States45 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:53 LaLuSh wrote: Yeah I guess you're right. His way of saying screw you for confessing to the wrong religion; screw you for choosing one of the tens of thousands wrong interpretations every religion has branched into; and to end it screw you for choosing the wrong church out of millions. Wow, I hope not. If God does exist, I sincerely hope he's not completely evil to kill the child of a family just because they practiced the wrong faith. That's ridiculous and immoral. If a person killed the child for the same reason, everyone would condemn the person and call him/her evil. If you believe in God, at least hold your God to the highest moral standards, and don't use God as an excuse for the evil, as these parents have done. | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
| ||
Romance_us
Seychelles1806 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:16 illmatic wrote: What could a doctor do? Give her drugs........... Hold on, are you serious? MAYBE SAVE HER? | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
| ||
Fumanchu
Canada669 Posts
| ||
pyrogenetix
China5094 Posts
anyway this thread has awesome potential to turn into YET ANOTHER TEAMLIQUID RELIGION THREAD | ||
Hypnosis
United States2061 Posts
GIRL 0 | ||
Polyphasic
United States841 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:38 PissedOffEmo wrote: we should blame china I try to be tolerant, but comments like these piss me off to no end. I am a Chinese American living in the US, and where did you get that comment about China? Please do not say these things. | ||
Romance_us
Seychelles1806 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:55 Fumanchu wrote: This is not the fault of God, nor the fault of the religion of Christianity. IMO this is more of the problem of not enough research. These parents should have read and studied the Bible in greater detail before coming to the decision that prayer was the only way to heal a child if you are Christian. The Bible does have countless stories of people who have been healed by prayer, but in most of these stories, you will find out that while these people were praying, they were doing everything physically possible to help the indivdual in need. A lot of Christians stand out in faith trying to declare their dedication and their love for Jesus, but unfortunately most of these people are not equipped with the knowledge to back up their declarementions. As for why God did not save this girl, I can't say. I don't think we will ever know why God puts diseases in countries or allows for floods and hurricanes to destroy cities and wreck lives. However, I have personally seen the works of God firsthand and know that he is real and active in the world today. I have literally seen someones chopped off arm grow back right in front of my face. No joke. And what kind of a God would he be if everytime we asked for something he gave it to us? That's not a God, that's a genie. Although this girl's death is tragic and could have been avoided, we cannot comprehend the ripple effect that it will have on people. Quite possibly this death could lead to something far greater than we can forsee. God moves in mysterious ways, and although trusting Him even after something like this is difficult, it's never the wrong choice. You have seen someone's chopped off arm grow back in front of your face..? I'm sorry, but I think that makes this entire post completely useless. And also, that's complete bullshit. It's funny how when God performs miracles and amazing tasks, there never happens to be any evidence of it whatsoever. | ||
Hippopotamus
1914 Posts
I have literally seen someones chopped off arm grow back right in front of my face. No joke. Win! | ||
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:55 NotSupporting wrote: The parents should be put in prison for this imo, same thing as if they would just have killed her. Almost worse since they let her suffer for a prolonged time before she died. Thats like even more cold blooded evil than just killing her. Not that things like that really could be compared. Cant really find words for this, just makes me sick. | ||
o3.power91
Bahrain5288 Posts
Its like jumping in a fire and saying "God will save me because i have faith". It is the parents to blame for believing God will help them if they refuse to try to help themselves. | ||
![]()
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
yeah God created doctors for a reason, you are right. | ||
skyglow1
New Zealand3962 Posts
| ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
| ||
Romance_us
Seychelles1806 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:23 {ToT}Strafe wrote: You guys are such haters. If I want to believe in God that is my choice and you shouldn't pound on me like this. Reading this thread I really feel as if I am under attack on my personal believes, without even posting. Every time you guys blame religion for death I can retort by giving an example of an atheist abducting, raping, murdering and so on. Almost all of you seem to forget that religion is something personal and that the actions of these parents aren't made by religion, but by themselves. I as a Christian wouldn't ever put my children through this, nor would any other sensible Christian I know. Stop taking a retarded person as an example to burn religion you can't relate to. But you see, the difference is that religion CAUSES abducting, raping, murdering, and so on. Atheism does not. You cannot do any of these things in the name of atheism, but countless deaths have been created due to "God's will". | ||
k0ziol
Poland75 Posts
| ||
kidd
United States2848 Posts
| ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:43 Polis wrote: No says God. Anyway if God would not want diseases, he would not create them. Lol. Spoken like a true, ignorant bastard. On March 27 2008 04:22 Jyun wrote: Wow, I hope not. If God does exist, I sincerely hope he's not completely evil to kill the child of a family just because they practiced the wrong faith. That's ridiculous and immoral. If a person killed the child for the same reason, everyone would condemn the person and call him/her evil. If you believe in God, at least hold your God to the highest moral standards, and don't use God as an excuse for the evil, as these parents have done. Since when have Christians been holding their God to a moral standard? Was it God's fault that the child died? Who made that assumption? I thought the child was ill and was destined to die anyways. Her parents failed to get her the proper medical attention she deserved. So, is it, "You can only be my God if you uphold a certain level of morality. Otherwise, you don't really deserve to be my God." While Christianity is a bit stupid itself, the people who criticize Christianity are no better. | ||
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:20 OneOther wrote: lol.. yeah God created doctors for a reason, you are right. yeah, credit to the op for the title | ||
ieatkids5
United States4628 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:55 Fumanchu wrote: I have literally seen someones chopped off arm grow back right in front of my face. No joke. um what? | ||
Koldblooded
United States661 Posts
| ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:30 Romance_us wrote: But you see, the difference is that religion CAUSES abducting, raping, murdering, and so on. Atheism does not. You cannot do any of these things in the name of atheism, but countless deaths have been created due to "God's will". I feel this is a common mistake people make. Religion does not kill. People do. The ones claim to do it for religion are the same atheïsts that kill for a thrill. They just claim to do it for God, which is obviously a false pretense. 'For God' is a reason often abused by people that do wrong to make it seem justified in hindsight. But then religion is never really the cause to begin with, the cause is much more something other than religion. It would be different when we all believed in a religion that has clear rules that leave only one possibility for interpretation and that says abduct, rape and murder are values which we should hold in high regard. This is however not the case. The Bible in it's current form and the way it's being read in the Western-World by individuals is much more often a religion that preaches pacifism rather than killing. And even if on occasion solely religion is to be blamed for a wrongful act then I am not sure how this outweighs the void in norms and morals atheism would leave in our lives and that could function as a feeding ground for fanatic lunatics out for a thrill or raping a little innocent girl. If you are a pure atheist I don't see any restraints from killing the person next to you other than your own feelings. | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:39 WhatisProtoss wrote: Lol. Spoken like a true, ignorant bastard. Since when have Christians been holding their God to a moral standard? Was it God's fault that the child died? Who made that assumption? I thought the child was ill and was destined to die anyways. Her parents failed to get her the proper medical attention she deserved. So, is it, "You can only be my God if you uphold a certain level of morality. Otherwise, you don't really deserve to be my God." While Christianity is a bit stupid itself, the people who criticize Christianity are no better. If Christianity is indeed stupid, then criticizing it would certainly not be a stupid thing regarding the influential factor of Christianity globally. So I am really not sure what you mean. | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:38 kidd wrote: Obviously Religion has its issues, but even an intelligent althiest can agree that it also has its positives. The positives could be achieved without the negatives. This story is no reason for someone to start bashing on Christianity (or any other religion) just because there were some idiots that made a very bad decision. Like all stories there is two sides to everything. This story is a perfect reason for people to express their dislike of those who believe what those people do. I'm looking at you, Christian Scientists. | ||
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:55 Fumanchu wrote: This is not the fault of God, nor the fault of the religion of Christianity. IMO this is more of the problem of not enough research. These parents should have read and studied the Bible in greater detail before coming to the decision that prayer was the only way to heal a child if you are Christian. The Bible does have countless stories of people who have been healed by prayer, but in most of these stories, you will find out that while these people were praying, they were doing everything physically possible to help the indivdual in need. A lot of Christians stand out in faith trying to declare their dedication and their love for Jesus, but unfortunately most of these people are not equipped with the knowledge to back up their declarementions. As for why God did not save this girl, I can't say. I don't think we will ever know why God puts diseases in countries or allows for floods and hurricanes to destroy cities and wreck lives. However, I have personally seen the works of God firsthand and know that he is real and active in the world today. I have literally seen someones chopped off arm grow back right in front of my face. No joke. And what kind of a God would he be if everytime we asked for something he gave it to us? That's not a God, that's a genie. Although this girl's death is tragic and could have been avoided, we cannot comprehend the ripple effect that it will have on people. Quite possibly this death could lead to something far greater than we can forsee. God moves in mysterious ways, and although trusting Him even after something like this is difficult, it's never the wrong choice. wow what a sad post. Did you ever consider that diseases, floods and hurricanes are natural phenomena? Occasionally these things destroy cities and kill innocent children. It's not their fault and it just happens. And then you dare suggest that it might actually be a good thing for them that their daughter died...that's fucked up beyond words | ||
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
maybe this girl has sick left arm strength | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:30 Romance_us wrote: But you see, the difference is that religion CAUSES abducting, raping, murdering, and so on. Atheism does not. You cannot do any of these things in the name of atheism, but countless deaths have been created due to "God's will". Oh boy. Antisemitism can be considered atheism, since it is the polar opposite of Jewish religion: hatred of Jewish religion. I believe antisemitism caused 60 million deaths.... | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:47 {ToT}Strafe wrote: If you are a pure atheist I don't see any restraints from killing the person next to you other than your own feelings. Unlike you, apparently, I don't need the threat of eternal damnation to keep me from murdering. | ||
Romance_us
Seychelles1806 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:53 WhatisProtoss wrote: Oh boy. Antisemitism can be considered atheism, since it is the polar opposite of Jewish religion: hatred of Jewish religion. I believe antisemitism caused 60 million deaths.... Hitler believed in God. And NO, you are WRONG. Many anti-Semites have religions... Just not Jewish obviously. | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:53 WhatisProtoss wrote: Oh boy. Antisemitism can be considered atheism, since it is the polar opposite of Jewish religion: hatred of Jewish religion. I believe antisemitism caused 60 million deaths.... No. | ||
QuanticHawk
United States32051 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:55 Fumanchu wrote: I have literally seen someones chopped off arm grow back right in front of my face. No joke. lil too much DBZ! ![]() "They are still in the home," he said. "There is no reason to remove them. There is no abuse or signs of abuse that we can see." Throw that douchebag of a cop in the jail with them, wtf | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:53 WhatisProtoss wrote: Oh boy. Antisemitism can be considered atheism, since it is the polar opposite of Jewish religion: hatred of Jewish religion. I believe antisemitism caused 60 million deaths.... Antisemitism was never the cause for WW2 the Jews that lost their lifes during the war were merely a victim on the side. And I can tell you that most of those 60 million weren't Jews but anti-antisemitic Russians fighting Nazi Germans. | ||
Ack1027
United States7873 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:53 WhatisProtoss wrote: Oh boy. Antisemitism can be considered atheism, since it is the polar opposite of Jewish religion: hatred of Jewish religion. I believe antisemitism caused 60 million deaths.... lol. | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:54 Mindcrime wrote: Unlike you, apparently, I don't need the threat of eternal damnation to keep me from murdering. Nor do I, but can you speak for billy bob chewing tobacco in his pickup truck while watching the girls leave junior high in their uniform? | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:50 {ToT}Strafe wrote: If Christianity is indeed stupid, then criticizing it would certainly not be a stupid thing regarding the influential factor of Christianity globally. So I am really not sure what you mean. I'm actually a church-goer who has lost a considerable amount of faith in the past few years. I don't like the way Christians advertise faith because it's illogical. Anyways, your statement is a crazy one. "If Christianity is indeed stupid, then criticizing it would certainly not be a stupid thing regarding the influential factor of Christianity globally." Smoking cigarettes is a stupid and unhealthy habit. A sixth of the world's population smokes. Therefore, I cannot criticize smoking? Simply because it has a large influence around the globe? Billions of people drink alcohol, even though it's generally unhealthy. But, because it has such a large radius of influence, criticizing alcohol and it's bad effects is stupid? Think of what you're saying. | ||
CDRdude
United States5625 Posts
Also, please stop using this as an excuse to rail hate on the Christians. Yes, bad things have been done in gods name, but so have some good things. Bad things have been done in the name of atheism too. That doesn't make it wrong, it makes the individual wrong. Basically, {ToT}Strafe is right, don't judge the many by the actions of a few. The last thing I have to say is that this guy is full of crap: On March 27 2008 04:55 Fumanchu wrote: I have literally seen someones chopped off arm grow back right in front of my face. No joke. | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
On March 27 2008 05:47 {ToT}Strafe wrote: If you are a pure atheist I don't see any restraints from killing the person next to you other than your own feelings. Omg, this is seriously messed up. There is nothing good with religion but keeping pepole under fear to controll them, find reasons for bad things happening and do sick actions. I will always fight against religion until the day I die. | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:00 WhatisProtoss wrote: I'm actually a church-goer who has lost a considerable amount of faith in the past few years. I don't like the way Christians advertise faith because it's illogical. Anyways, your statement is a crazy one. "If Christianity is indeed stupid, then criticizing it would certainly not be a stupid thing regarding the influential factor of Christianity globally." Smoking cigarettes is a stupid and unhealthy habit. A sixth of the world's population smokes. Therefore, I cannot criticize smoking? Simply because it has a large influence around the globe? Billions of people drink alcohol, even though it's generally unhealthy. But, because it has such a large radius of influence, criticizing alcohol and it's bad effects is stupid? Think of what you're saying. No, therefore you SHOULD criticize it. | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:01 NotSupporting wrote: Omg, this is seriously messed up. There is nothing good with religion but keeping pepole under fear to controll them, find reasons for bad things happening and do sick actions. I will always fight against religion until the day I die. Fine. 'Fight' it for your own believe. You are no better than which you pretend to fight. In fact you fight yourself if you truly do which you just wrote. | ||
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:00 WhatisProtoss wrote: I'm actually a church-goer who has lost a considerable amount of faith in the past few years. I don't like the way Christians advertise faith because it's illogical. Anyways, your statement is a crazy one. "If Christianity is indeed stupid, then criticizing it would certainly not be a stupid thing regarding the influential factor of Christianity globally." Smoking cigarettes is a stupid and unhealthy habit. A sixth of the world's population smokes. Therefore, I cannot criticize smoking? Simply because it has a large influence around the globe? Billions of people drink alcohol, even though it's generally unhealthy. But, because it has such a large radius of influence, criticizing alcohol and it's bad effects is stupid? Think of what you're saying. "If Christianity is indeed stupid, then criticizing it would certainly not be a stupid thing regarding the influential factor of Christianity globally." would translate to "Smoking cigarettes is a stupid and unhealthy habit. A sixth of the world's population smokes. Therefore, criticizing smoking is a good idea" | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:04 jtan wrote: "If Christianity is indeed stupid, then criticizing it would certainly not be a stupid thing regarding the influential factor of Christianity globally." would translate to "Smoking cigarettes is a stupid and unhealthy habit. A sixth of the world's population smokes. Therefore, criticizing smoking is a good idea" If you did not realize already, he is a blind follower of faith. Therefore, that statement was assumed to be sarcastic. Otherwise, why would he so strongly argue against anyone who criticizes Christianity? On March 27 2008 06:03 {ToT}Strafe wrote: Fine. 'Fight' it for your own believe. You are no better than which you pretend to fight. In fact you fight yourself if you truly do which you just wrote. Dimwit. Listen closely. Every single person is born with a sense of morality. Some people have chosen to back up their sense of morality with Christianity, giving themselves a punishment for not acting morally good. Others have strengthened their morality alone without the aid of Christianity. Whether or not Christianity exists, morality will always exist. | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:01 CDRdude wrote: Bad things have been done in the name of atheism too. Such as? | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:06 WhatisProtoss wrote: Dimwit. Listen closely. Every single person is born with a sense of morality. Some people have chosen to back up their sense of morality with Christianity, giving themselves a punishment for not acting morally good. Others have strengthened their morality alone without the aid of Christianity. Whether or not Christianity exists, morality will always exist. The thing is just that young kids are not choosing Christianity, it's there parents who choose to brainwash there kids to "belive". | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:11 NotSupporting wrote: The thing is just that young kids are not choosing Christianity, it's there parents who choose to brainwash there kids to "belive". Their kids will have lives of their own. They can make decisions for themselves. And usually, the kids who are forced to go to church have less faith than the kids who find it on their own. Christians believe that God instills a sense of morality in every person. The "knowledge of good and evil." So, even in the eyes of Christians, you don't have to believe in God to have that moral compass. (1) Persecution of those with faith in China. (2) Assyrian Genocide (3) Persecution of Christians in Soviet Union (4) Execution of any Christian during Nero's rule of the Roman Empire. | ||
._.
1133 Posts
There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of atheism. It is interesting to note that most of that disagreement comes from theists — atheists themselves tend to agree on what atheism means. Christians in particular dispute the definition used by atheists and insist that atheism means something very different. The broader, and more common, understanding of atheism among atheists is quite simply "not believing in any gods." No claims or denials are made — an atheist is just a person who does not happen to be a theist. Sometimes this broader understanding is called "weak" or "implicit" atheism. Most good, complete dictionaries readily support this. There also exists a narrower sort of atheism, sometimes called "strong" or "explicit" atheism. With this type, the atheist explicitly denies the existence of any gods — making a strong claim which will deserve support at some point. Some atheists do this and others may do this with regards to certain specific gods but not with others. Thus, a person may lack belief in one god, but deny the existence of another god. But lest we forget, the greatest social developments in this country have been from secular reasoning and not religious. From democracy, to universal civil rights, it has been thanks to rationale and the work of the enlightenment, and not the mighty hand of God. I mean jeez, the south used to be Democratic up until the civil rights movement came along, and they've all been Republican since. Racist much? But I see religion like a drug, too much of it, it'll cause hallucinations, irrational thinking, disturbing fantasies, and insensible behavior.But, Christianity in moderation is fine, its ok if you see everything with moderation, with metaphors and not into 100% context. Even though God may not exist, if it gives people security and a false sense of happiness in a bubble. Ignorance is a bliss ain't it? By the way, I think using religion synonymous with evil is silly. It is true that religion has been used for many "evil" things, but religion is a reflection of human character and our ability to manipulate others, one way or another. Religion is a byproduct of one of our social developments, and even without it, we would still act accordingly the same, with another bullshit reason to kill someone. Ex: Man finds out wife is cheating on him. Is he gonna be like, "WOMAN HOW DARE YOU DEFILE THE HOLY SANCTITY OF OUR MARRIAGE IN THE EYES OF OUR ALMIGHTY LORD?" Nono, he's gonna be like, "Fuck you bitch, why you be cheating on me?" and promptly shoot her up with a .45. | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:13 WhatisProtoss wrote: Their kids will have lives of their own. They can make decisions for themselves. And usually, the kids who are forced to go to church have less faith than the kids who find it on their own. (1) Persecution of those with faith in China. (2) St Bartholomew's Day Massacre (3) Assyrian Genocide (4) Persecution of Christians in Soviet Union (5) Execution of any Christian during Nero's rule of the Roman Empire. This is not true at all. Do you really think that a little girl in a deep beliving Islamic family could just go against thier religion? Just take of thier veil off and live a free life? This is same with every religion (as I know). | ||
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
Unfortunately this little girl had to be the thing that taught her parents that science and religion can co-exist. | ||
._.
1133 Posts
Or when they claim, atheism has killed people, in its name. | ||
MoNKeYSpanKeR
United States2869 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:56 pyrogenetix wrote: owned anyway this thread has awesome potential to turn into YET ANOTHER TEAMLIQUID RELIGION THREAD Potential? It already has ![]() | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:20 NotSupporting wrote: This is not true at all. Do you really think that a little girl in a deep beliving Islamic family could just go against thier religion? Just take of thier veil and live a free life? Haven't you heard the countless stories of kids who ran away from home? It's not like kids haven't tried to live a free life. Many have succeeded. | ||
Romance_us
Seychelles1806 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:13 WhatisProtoss wrote: (1) Persecution of those with faith in China. (2) Assyrian Genocide (3) Persecution of Christians in Soviet Union (4) Execution of any Christian during Nero's rule of the Roman Empire. (1) This is done is the name of COMMUNISM. Not Atheism. The Chinese government simply will not tolerate the fact their citizens believe in a higher power than themselves. (2) Extremely questionable. (3) Again, political motivation, not religious. (4) I'm not familiar of this, I will research though. EDIT: Researched #4. Nero was JEWISH. This is a false claim. | ||
._.
1133 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:24 WhatisProtoss wrote: Haven't you heard the countless stories of kids who ran away from home? It's not like kids haven't tried to live a free life. Many have succeeded. Myth: How many people in Communist Russia and China have been killed because of atheism and secularism? None, probably. How can that be? After all, millions and millions of people died in Russia and China under communist governments — and those governments were both secular and atheistic, right? So weren't all of those people killed because of atheism — indeed, in the name of atheism and secularism? No, that conclusion does not follow. Atheism itself isn't a principle, cause, philosophy, or belief system which people fight, die, or kill for. Being killed by an atheist is no more being killed in the name of atheism than being killed by a tall person is being killed in the name of tallness. People were killed in communist nations for a lot of different reasons. Some were communists who disagreed with those in power and were killed because of that. Some were anti-communists opposed the government and were killed for that. Some were simply in the way or inconvenient and were killed for that. These are political disagreements that people were being killed over, not murder in the name of atheism. But weren't a lot of people killed because they were Christian? Certainly — but not simply because they were Christian. Communists typically regarded religious organizations as a hinderance towards the creation of a worker's paradise. Some religious groups also opposed the communists. Once again, we are generally looking at political issues, not a question of atheism. Even if some people were killed simply because they followed a religion, it does not follow that they were killed in the name of atheism. Why? Because atheism is not inherently opposed to religion: it is possible to be both an atheist and religious and some religions are themselves atheistic. Atheism also isn't a belief system or ideology which can, by itself, inspire people to do things — good or bad. To understand this better, consider times in the past when religion has been involved with violence — the Inquisition would be good. How many people were killed during the Inquisition in the name of theism? None. Those doing the killing acted not because of theism, but rather because of Christian doctrines. The belief system is what inspired people to act (sometimes for good, sometimes for ill). The single belief of theism, however, did not. Similarly, communism certainly inspired people to act and gave them motivations to do certain things, but atheism — which is the absence of a belief and not even a belief itself — did not. The assumption that people in Russia and China were killed merely on account of atheism is based upon two other myths: first, that atheism is itself some sort of philosophy or belief system which can motivate people, and second that atheism is somehow interchangeable with the actual belief system of communism. It also pretends that all the various elements of communist totalitarianism were irrelevant to what happened — which is utter nonsense. The aforementioned parallel explains why this response is not one which religious theists can use to deny their religion's responsibility for violence in the past. Atheism and theism may not themselves be sufficient to justify violence and murder (or good behavior, for that matter), but belief systems which incorporate them are more than sufficient. Communism (or at least certain forms of it) can be blamed for communist violence; Christianity (or at least certain forms of it) can also be blamed for Christian violence. As a belief system with specific doctrines that were openly held up as justifying or sanctioning violence, religion must be held responsible for the violence committed in its name. Whether theism can be slightly more culpable than atheism is a matter of dispute. Not being any belief at all, atheism can't motivate anyone in any direction to do anything. Theism is a belief, however, so at least the potential for some sort of motivation in some direction exists. It's been argued, for example, that monotheism is inherently more prone to violence because of the way it tends to be exclusivist — unlike polytheism, which tends to be more tolerant of cultural and religious differences. It's difficult to say, though, how many of these problems are really inherent in the type of theism and how many are cultural products of the religious belief systems that incorporate them. Whatever culpability theism itself might have, it's likely small enough to dismiss, allowing us to treat it and atheism as functionally equal in this context. | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:24 WhatisProtoss wrote: Haven't you heard the countless stories of kids who ran away from home? It's not like kids haven't tried to live a free life. Many have succeeded. And you think that is absolutely normal? A kid has to run away from home because of "religion"? | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:13 WhatisProtoss wrote: (1) Persecution of those with faith in China. Atheism wasn't the motivator. Many of those persecuted in China are Theravada Buddhists... most of whom are atheists themselves. (2) St Bartholomew's Day Massacre Uh, that involved Catholics and Huguenots. Nice try though. (3) Assyrian Genocide Again, no atheists involved. (4) Persecution of Christians in Soviet Union Atheism wasn't the motivator there. Subordinance to the state was the motivator. If you look at how the USSR treated the various religious groups within its borders over its history, you'll find that to be the case. (5) Execution of any Christian during Nero's rule of the Roman Empire. Nero was an atheist? | ||
Skittled
United States160 Posts
really, that just sums it up right about. there is no god. would god let such firm followers die like that? wouldnt god send a doctor over for some reason? | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:26 Romance_us wrote: (1) This is done is the name of COMMUNISM. Not Atheism. The Chinese government simply will not tolerate the fact their citizens believe in a higher power than themselves. (2) Extremely questionable. (3) Again, political motivation, not religious. (4) I'm not familiar of this, I will research though. Wait, I thought atheism was the unbelief of religion. The anti-religion. Isn't it pretty anti-religion for a government to be anti-religion? Haha. Communism fits the bill. If a government wants to banish religion, doesn't it mean that the government is atheist? It certainly cannot mean that the government holds any religious belief, of course.... | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:29 Mindcrime wrote: Atheism wasn't the motivator. Many of those persecuted in China are Theravada Buddhists... most of whom are atheists themselves. Uh, that involved Catholics and Huguenots. Nice try though. Again, no atheists involved. Atheism wasn't the motivator there. Subordinance to the state was the motivator. If you look at how the USSR treated the various religious groups within its borders over its history, you'll find that to be the case. Nero was an atheist? You're trying to distinguish whether the persecutors have explicitly stated that they are atheist? ![]() It was the persecution of religious belief. How much clearer can it get? Isn't it strong evidence that the persecutor is an atheist, if he kills any religious believer? Given: Atheist does not believe in any form of God or supernatural. Prompt: If believers of God/supernatural are being killed, then what is the faith of the killers? (A) Opposing religious believers (other churches/beliefs) (B) Non believers. (AKA Atheists) | ||
liosama
Australia843 Posts
The girl's parents, Dale and Leilani Neumann, attributed the death to "apparently they didn't tech to academy early enough," the police chief said. | ||
MTF
United States1739 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:31 WhatisProtoss wrote: Wait, I thought atheism was the unbelief of religion. The anti-religion. Isn't it pretty anti-religion for a government to be anti-religion? Haha. Communism fits the bill. If a government wants to banish religion, doesn't it mean that the government is atheist? It certainly cannot mean that the government holds any religious belief, of course.... You're trying to attribute the banishment of religion (not to mention through active violence) to atheism, though. Whether or not a government is atheist or not does not dictate whether they are trying to abolish religion. It follows logic, of course, that such a government would have to be atheistic; implying that all atheist governments must attempt to abolish religion is, however, extremely ridiculous. | ||
ClockworkBlues
Canada74 Posts
...Anywho, It's unfair to judge millions of people by the actions of two parents who obviously have some kind of delusional complex. | ||
._.
1133 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:35 WhatisProtoss wrote: You're trying to distinguish whether the persecutors have explicitly stated that they are atheist? ![]() It was the persecution of religious belief. How clearer can it get? Isn't it strong evidence that the persecutor is an atheist, if he kills any religious believer? Are you kidding me. Have you not heard of the Spanish Inquisition? My mind is numb, do you even read my well-intentioned posts or not? | ||
QuanticHawk
United States32051 Posts
| ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:31 WhatisProtoss wrote: Wait, I thought atheism was the unbelief of religion. The anti-religion. Isn't it pretty anti-religion for a government to be anti-religion? Haha. Communism fits the bill. If a government wants to banish religion, doesn't it mean that the government is atheist? It certainly cannot mean that the government holds any religious belief, of course.... a- 1 or an- pref. Without; not the·ism –noun 1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism). 2. belief in the existence of a god or gods (opposed to atheism). Atheism is not the same thing as antireligion. Indeed, some religions, like Theravada Buddhism, are atheistic. | ||
OctoPuSs
Canada5279 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:35 WhatisProtoss wrote: You're trying to distinguish whether the persecutors have explicitly stated that they are atheist? ![]() It was the persecution of religious belief. How clearer can it get? Isn't it strong evidence that the persecutor is an atheist, if he kills any religious believer? It's not like people haven't killed others for praying to a different invisible man than their own. Remove your blinders. | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:36 ClockworkBlues wrote: ...Anywho, It's unfair to judge millions of people by the actions of two parents who obviously have some kind of delusional complex. We are not. | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:38 ._. wrote: Are you kidding me. Have you not heard of the Spanish Inquisition? My mind is numb, do you even read my well-intentioned posts or not? No, who are you? And why should I have read your posts? | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:35 WhatisProtoss wrote: You're trying to distinguish whether the persecutors have explicitly stated that they are atheist? ![]() It was the persecution of religious belief. How much clearer can it get? Isn't it strong evidence that the persecutor is an atheist, if he kills any religious believer? Given: Atheist does not believe in any form of God or supernatural. Prompt: If believers of God/supernatural are being killed, then what is the faith of the killers? (A) Opposing religious believers (other churches/beliefs) (B) Non believers. (AKA Atheists) 1. Three of the events you posted involved no atheists at all. 2. That atheists have done bad things has never been contested. That people have done bad things in the name of atheism has. There is a difference. | ||
QuanticHawk
United States32051 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:41 WhatisProtoss wrote: No, who are you? And why should I have read your posts? Uh-oh, better watch out! The inner elitist in WIP is coming out! You can't compete with MIT! | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:41 Mindcrime wrote: 1. Three of the events you posted involved no atheists at all. 2. That atheists have done bad things has never been contested. That people have done bad things in the name of atheism has. There is a difference. Ah, okay. You win then. Yes, many deaths have been caused by Christians and in the name of Christianity. Yes, many deaths have been caused by Atheists, but not necessarily in the name of Atheism. Okay, I can live with that. | ||
._.
1133 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:41 WhatisProtoss wrote: No, who are you? And why should I have read your posts? Prove to me that your not some stubborn Christian with a terrible and misinterpreted definition of Atheism? Why not read my posts before you continue on with your ignorance? Why not listen to criticism of others every so often? Even if I am unknown, why not take the effort into opening your mind? | ||
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
Religion has specific dogmas which in some cases can be reasons for atrocities. Nothing can really be done in the name of atheism since atheism describes the lack of belief in a specific dogma and nothing else. This doesn't mean all atheists are good people, since they can hold other dogmatic values, like those of nazism, communism, racism, antisemitism etc, but religious people might hold these values too. It's like comparing crimes done by racists with those committed by non-racists, it makes no sense. | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:45 Hawk wrote: Uh-oh, better watch out! The inner elitist in WIP is coming out! You can't compete with MIT! Haha, but isn't it ridiculous how some random kid demands that you should have read his posts? I mean, I'm having quite the busy time with other people who are exchanging with me... On March 27 2008 06:46 ._. wrote: Prove to me that your not some stubborn Christian with a terrible and misinterpreted definition of Atheism? Why not read my posts before you continue on with your ignorance? Why not listen to criticism of others every so often? Even if I am unknown, why not take the effort into opening your mind? Wait, why should I prove anything to you? I'm certainly not ignorant. And as you can see, I have been criticizing both sides of the playing field, atheists and Christians alike. So, the fact that you're bitching at my "ignorance" and failure to read your posts makes me LESS motivated to skim through several pages of forum just to find them. | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:50 WhatisProtoss wrote: I'm certainly not ignorant. disagree | ||
NotSupporting
Sweden1998 Posts
. . . -------------------------------- NOW there we went offtopic, gg no re. | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
Ignorance = the condition of being uninformed or uneducated Maybe biased, yes. Stubborn, yes. Argumentative, yes. Not ignorant. | ||
QuanticHawk
United States32051 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:50 WhatisProtoss wrote: Haha, but isn't it ridiculous how some random kid demands that you should have read his posts? I mean, I'm having quite the busy time with other people who are exchanging with me... Wait, why should I prove anything to you? I'm certainly not ignorant. And as you can see, I have been criticizing both sides of the playing field, atheists and Christians alike. So, the fact that you're bitching at my "ignorance" and failure to read your posts makes me LESS motivated to skim through several pages of forum just to find them. I guess your style of debating differs from mine. Generally, I don't give my arguement, then stick my fingers in my ears and go LA LALALALALALAL | ||
o3.power91
Bahrain5288 Posts
LMFAO!!! XD | ||
Scorpion
United States1974 Posts
| ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:54 WhatisProtoss wrote: Ignorance = the condition of being uninformed or uneducated Maybe biased, yes. Stubborn, yes. Argumentative, yes. Not ignorant. That you defined atheism as being equivalent to antireligion tells me that you are ignorant. | ||
Proposal
United States1310 Posts
On the other hand, pity that the girl died. | ||
._.
1133 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:50 WhatisProtoss wrote: Haha, but isn't it ridiculous how some random kid demands that you should have read his posts? I mean, I'm having quite the busy time with other people who are exchanging with me... Wait, why should I prove anything to you? I'm certainly not ignorant. And as you can see, I have been criticizing both sides of the playing field, atheists and Christians alike. So, the fact that you're bitching at my "ignorance" and failure to read your posts makes me LESS motivated to skim through several pages of forum just to find them. "why should I do this for you?" Why should I do this because your bitching about your own ignorance?" Ego much? You assumed I didn't read about your tidbit that Christianity can be retarded, but then again, why would I respond to you if I did not read your posts? So its a matter of presentation and not a matter of factuality? Should I get myself a suit and tie, get a tophat, grab out Richard Dawkins by the ears out from the hat? Should I have written my sentences and cited sources in MLA format, should I have left out offensive vulgar words and replaced them with sensible mannerisms? By the way, I'm smiling as I wrote those words, I ain't bitching or getting a constipation, just slightly entertained. | ||
Romance_us
Seychelles1806 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:54 WhatisProtoss wrote: Ignorance = the condition of being uninformed or uneducated Maybe biased, yes. Stubborn, yes. Argumentative, yes. Not ignorant. ... All four of your reasons for atheism motivated crime were incorrect.. Yes, you are ignorant.. | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:59 Mindcrime wrote: That you defined atheism as being equivalent to antireligion tells me that you are ignorant. You realize that almost all people who are antireligion are atheist? It's like saying, probably all Christians are believers in God. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:06 WhatisProtoss wrote: If you did not realize already, he is a blind follower of faith. Therefore, that statement was assumed to be sarcastic. Otherwise, why would he so strongly argue against anyone who criticizes Christianity? If you didn't realize already I am not a blind follower of faith. In fact I'm not a Christian, but I'm Jewish. Although not a practicing one , because I believe the whole idea of a God is although very explaining and comforting still a far fetched story. Not saying there isn't one though, so that would make me agnostic I guess. So that argument was no where near sarcastic. But thanks for not being able to read properly and then calling me an idiot for your own mistake. Happens more often though. No hard feelings. Dimwit. Listen closely. Every single person is born with a sense of morality. Some people have chosen to back up their sense of morality with Christianity, giving themselves a punishment for not acting morally good. Others have strengthened their morality alone without the aid of Christianity. Whether or not Christianity exists, morality will always exist. Nobody is born with a sense of morality. Society or environment instills morality in a person. I highly doubt anyone is born with a sense of good and right. The morality of a person today is the product of a life long shaping process. If I were to be raised among Muslims from day one who commonly believe it is good to kill men who are physically attracted to other men then this I would believe. If I were to be raised in a family of atheist and only know and interact with other atheist who all share the idea that you should rape muslims for some reason, then this I would feel is right as well. Weird as it may seem, but you are the product of the interaction with your environment. I don't think you can disagree with me that you are born carteblanche. So choosing to back up morality with Christianity is absolutely ridiculous. If anything religion brings along values from whereon you choose to follow them. You don't pick the religion merely to back up the morality you were born with. This is absurd. | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:06 {ToT}Strafe wrote: Nobody is born with a sense of morality. Society or environment instills morality in a person. I highly doubt anyone is born with a sense of good and right. The morality of a person today is the product of a life long shaping process. If I were to be raised among Muslims from day one who commonly believe it is good to kill men who are physically attracted to other men then this I would believe. If I were to be raised in a family of atheist and only know and interact with other atheist who all share the idea that you should rape muslims for some reason, then this I would feel is right as well. Weird as it may seem, but you are the product of the interaction with your environment. I don't think you can disagree with me that you are born carteblanche. So choosing to back up morality with Christianity is absolutely ridiculous. If anything religion brings along values from whereon you choose to follow them. You don't pick the religion merely to back up the morality you were born with. This is absurd. When you kill that man, you will hear him screaming. When you draw blood, you will clearly see that you are causing him pain. And, you would want others to treat you well too, right? You wouldn't want people coming around and stabbing you for no reason. Therefore, it's like a series of logic. (A) You are told that killing is good. (B) You don't like being in pain. (C) You see that you are causing pain to others when you are about to kill them. (D) You don't want that kind of treatment on yourself. (E) You realize that killing others is not such a good thing. We judge actions based on how we ourselves would like to be treated. "What thou avoidest suffering thyself seek not to impose on others." (Epictetus) | ||
MTF
United States1739 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:05 WhatisProtoss wrote: You realize that almost all people who are antireligion are atheist? It's like saying, probably all Christians are believers in God. True, but it does not follow that all atheists are antireligion. This is like saying that all believers in God are probably Christian. | ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:05 WhatisProtoss wrote: You realize that almost all people who are antireligion are atheist? It's like saying, probably all Christians are believers in God. You're not doing yourself any favors here. I had thought that you were merely ignorant. I am now certain that you are stupid. An atheist is not necessarily an antireligionist just as a rectangle is not necessarily a square. Got that? Christians, on the other hand, believe in some sort of god by definition. | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:13 Mindcrime wrote: You're not doing yourself any favors here. I had thought that you were merely ignorant. I am now certain that you are stupid. An atheist is not necessarily an antireligionist just as a rectangle is not necessarily a square. Got that? Christians, on the other hand, believe in some sort of god by definition. Actually, Christians believe in God. Not some sort of god. On March 27 2008 07:11 MTF wrote: True, but it does not follow that all atheists are antireligion. This is like saying that all believers in God are probably Christian. Exactly, which is the point I was getting at. So, when Christians committed murders, they weren't speaking for all religions, but it was a somewhat religious cause. When Muslims committed murders, they weren't speaking for all religions, but it was for a somewhat religious cause. When antireligious people committed murders, they weren't speaking for all atheists, but it was for a somewhat atheistic cause. | ||
Snet
![]()
United States3573 Posts
If these people aren't put in jail it will be pretty screwed up. | ||
WhatisProtoss
Korea (South)2325 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:21 Snet wrote: Religion is a dangerous thing when combined with fucking lunatics. If these people aren't put in jail it will be pretty screwed up. Yep, very true. Evidence of the many historical wars and homicides. Actually, lunatics in general are dangerous combined with anything. But, I don't think they will be put into jail. They didn't do anything wrong. They just didn't do anything right. | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:10 WhatisProtoss wrote: When you kill that man, you will hear him screaming. When you draw blood, you will clearly see that you are causing him pain. And, you would want others to treat you well too, right? You wouldn't want people coming around and stabbing you for no reason. Therefore, it's like a series of logic. (A) You are told that killing is good. (B) You don't like being in pain. (C) You see that you are causing pain to others when you are about to kill them. (D) You don't want that kind of treatment on yourself. (E) You realize that killing others is not such a good thing. We judge actions based on how we ourselves would like to be treated. "What thou avoidest suffering thyself seek not to impose on others." (Epictetus) Very untrue. Among all societies which have been studied by anthropologists or ethnographers there were only few universal values. Murder is universally considered wrong. However about almost anything else peoples have different values at times. The reason murder is seen as wrong, is almost certainly because no society could function when people murder each other. So practically in this world it leaves no room for any society not to condemn murder. But since I have talk in a more simplistic way to you and apparently I have to explain every single thing to you I must add that the things I said were hypothetical. So now, you are raised among savages who are a tight group of people consisting of maybe 5 nuclear families all with mother father and maybe three or four children. Now these people only eat flesh of humans. All their lives as they know it they raid villages and eat the flesh of the ones they kill. This seems absurd, but these people would certainly not share your value that killing other people would be wrong. And because you will reply to this saying it is not possible. Indeed it is not that's why its hypothetical and far fetched, but the point is to illustrate another point. Confusing I know. Ask any man in Holland with two dutch parents who were socially active during the 70's and 80's how he feels about homosexuality and he will give you a typical tolerant answer, that they are just like you and me. Ask any man who was raised in Iran with parents active during the Revolution led by Khomeini and he will tell you that homosexuals deserve to die. This illustrates that values are instilled in a person by society. I really don't get how you can think you are born with morals. That sounds so ignorant to me. Yes I choose ignorant, because I know you don't mind to be called a lot of things, but ignorant you are. One of the most influential writers in early modern Europe Thomas Hobbes believed when there was no order all men would be savages and only be led by one thing namely self interest. The result would be murder,pillage and a whole lot of other gruesome things. Therefore he believed absolutism should be with the king in order to create order. And with order a livable society. Hobbes influence stretches far beyond the crappy fag you quoted. ![]() | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:23 WhatisProtoss wrote: Yep, very true. Evidence of the many historical wars and homicides. Actually, lunatics in general are dangerous combined with anything. But, I don't think they will be put into jail. They didn't do anything wrong. They just didn't do anything right. If you believe letting your daughter die willfully isn't anything wrong then I wouldn't mind you being locked up with them. | ||
MTF
United States1739 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:16 WhatisProtoss wrote: Exactly, which is the point I was getting at. So, when Christians committed murders, they weren't speaking for all religions, but it was a somewhat religious cause. When Muslims committed murders, they weren't speaking for all religions, but it was for a somewhat religious cause. When anti-religious people committed murders, they weren't speaking for all atheists, but for a somewhat atheistic cause. No, this is seriously flawed logic. Christians committing murder under Christian doctrine = Christians committing murder for their belief system. Not all religious causes, but for Christian causes. Anti-religious people committing murder under anti-religious doctrines = Anti-religious people killing for anti-religious cause. Atheists people committing murder under atheistic causes = Atheists committing murder for atheistic causes. Anyone committing murder under personal issue = Murderous person, with no theistic/political intent. Atheism =/= Anti-religion, no matter how you're trying to word it. Anti-religious people are atheistic by nature, but atheist principles cannot be inherently allied to anti-religion simply because they share the idea of no God. There is a decisive difference between the two; atheism does not entail anti-religionism. Thus, someone committing murder due to their anti-religionistic views is not by any means committing murder for their atheistic views. It honestly just seems like you're trying overly hard to tie the two together. | ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
| ||
bdams19
United States1316 Posts
she's about to get hit in the face with the recoil | ||
![]()
Mynock
4492 Posts
| ||
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
| ||
DamageControL
United States4222 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:36 Mynock wrote: My penis grew 5 inches right in front of my eyes. No joke. Edit: Tasteless | ||
DamageControL
United States4222 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:35 bdams19 wrote: she's about to get hit in the face with the recoil I dont think he was talking about the position of the gun | ||
merz
Sweden2760 Posts
On another note, religion vs atheism is a very dangerous subject to dive into if you don't have all the facts. I don't have all the facts, therefor I stay out of it, that way I won't have to make a complete ass of myself while constantly being proved wrong. | ||
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
http://www.tbd.com/content/article/basic_article.article:::love_life_history_vibrators + Show Spoiler + The Astonishing History of Vibrators MichaelCastleman MichaelCastleman Staff Posted: May 18, 07 9:56am More on TeeBeeDee: Join the Sex Talk Group Asking for A New Erotic Move Viagra-Vation: Relationships and Erection Medication Androgen May Help Women's Libidos Mention vibrators, and most people think of women's sexual pleasure. But that was the furthest thing from the minds of the male doctors who invented them more than a century ago. They were more interested in a labor-saving device to spare their own hands the fatigue caused by treating "female hysteria." This condition involved a number of vague, chronic complaints in adult women, including: anxiety, sleeplessness, irritability, nervousness, erotic fantasies, and moisture inside the vagina. Female hysteria was actually women's sexual frustration. The history of vibrators is a strange tale that provides insights into both the history of sex toys, and cultural notions about women's sexuality. Until the 20th century, American and European men believed that women were incapable of sexual desire and pleasure. Women of that era basically concurred. They were socialized to believe that "ladies" had no sex drive, and were merely passive receptacles for men's unbridled lust, which they had to endure to hang on to their husbands and have children. Not surprisingly, these beliefs led to a great deal of sexual frustration on the part of women. Over the centuries, doctors prescribed various remedies for hysteria (named for the Greek for "uterus"). In the 13th century, physicians advised women to use dildos. In the 16th century, they told married hysterics to encourage the lust of their husbands. Unfortunately, that probably didn't help too many wives, because modern sexuality research clearly shows that most women rarely experience orgasm from intercourse, but need direct clitoral stimulation. For hysteria unrelieved by husbandly lust, and for widows, and single and unhappily married women, doctors advised horseback riding, which, in some cases, provided enough clitoral stimulation to trigger orgasm. But many women found little relief from horseback riding, and by the 17th century, dildos were less of an option because the arbiters of decency had succeeded in demonizing masturbation as "self-abuse." Fortunately, an acceptable, reliable treatment emerged: having a doctor or midwife "massage the genitalia with one finger inside, using oil of lilies or crocus" as a lubricant. With enough genital massage, hysterical women could experience sudden, dramatic relief through "paroxysm," which virtually no medical authority called orgasm, because, of course, everyone knew that women did not have sexual feelings, so they could not possibly experience sexual climax. By the 19th century, physician-assisted paroxysm was firmly entrenched in Europe and the U.S. It was a godsend for many doctors. At that time, the public viewed physicians with tremendous distrust. Most doctors had little or no scientific training, and they had few treatments that worked. But thanks to genital massage, hysteria was a condition doctors could treat with great success. This produced large numbers of grateful women, who returned faithfully and regularly, eager to pay for additional treatment. But treating hysteria also had a downside for doctors? tired fingers from all that massage. Nineteenth-century medical journals lamented that many hysterics taxed their doctors' stamina. Physicians complained of having trouble maintaining therapeutic massage long enough to produce the desired result. (For a look at 19th century treatment of female hysteria, see the film, The Road to Wellville.) Necessity being the mother of invention, physicians began experimenting with mechanical substitutes for their hands. They tried a number of genital massage contraptions, among them water-driven devices (the forerunners of today's shower massagers), and steam-driven pumping dildos. But these machines were cumbersome, messy, often unreliable, and sometimes dangerous. In the late 19th century, electricity became available for home use and the first electric appliances were invented: the sewing machine, the electric fan, and the toaster. These were followed soon after, around 1880, by the electromechanical vibrator, patented by an enterprising British physician, Dr. Joseph Mortimer Granville. The electric vibrator was invented more than a decade before the vacuum cleaner and the electric iron. Electric vibrators were an immediate hit. They produced paroxysm quickly, safely, reliably, and inexpensively?and as often as women might desire it. By the dawn of the 20th century, doctors had lost their monopoly on vibrators and hysteria treatment as women began buying the devices themselves. Advertisements appearing in such magazines as "Women's Home Companion," "Needlecraft," and the Amazon.com of that era, the "Sears & Roebuck Catalogue" ("...such a delightful companion....all the pleasures of youth...will throb within you...."). Electricity gave women vibrators, but ironically, within a few decades, electricity almost took the devices away from them. With the invention of motion pictures, vibrators started turning up in pornography and gained an unsavory reputation. By the 1920s, they had become socially unacceptable. Vibrator ads disappeared from the consumer media. From the late 1920s and well into the 1970s, they were difficult to find. But some inventions are so useful that they survive despite attempts at suppression. Today, an estimated 25 percent of women own vibrators, and 10 percent of American couples use them in partner sex. Just think, we owe the world's most popular sex toy to physicians' fatigued fingers. | ||
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
| ||
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On March 27 2008 07:16 WhatisProtoss wrote: Actually, Christians believe in God. Not some sort of god. Different sects interpret the Bible and the God depicted in it quite differently. Gnostics who self-identified as Christians had a very different definition of God than anyone alive today. I said what I said so as to be inclusive. | ||
AdviCe
United States123 Posts
| ||
zachmorris
United States106 Posts
This is a hormone of the body made in our pancreas naturally. She could have been saved rather easily, but her parents made the decision to try and pray to save her. I just feel sorry for her to be honest. Her parents are obviously pretty ignorant. My guess is a lack of education, or they are just crazy. There is a reason the life expectancy of the average person was only about 60 till the 1960s. All a person has to do is realize sometimes we need more than prayer. Its just rather unfortunate. I also think this should not be a reflection upon Christianity being bad. There are stupid people everywhere including atheists and religious practitioners. It usually depends upon the individual. This is coming from an atheist. | ||
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
| ||
ilj.psa
Peru3081 Posts
On March 27 2008 08:48 zachmorris wrote: I think the main point here is that this girl died of something that could be treated by giving her insulin. This is a hormone of the body made in our pancreas naturally. She could have been saved rather easily, but her parents made the decision to try and pray to save her. I just feel sorry for her to be honest. Her parents are obviously pretty ignorant. My guess is a lack of education, or they are just crazy. There is a reason the life expectancy of the average person was only about 60 till the 1960s. All a person has to do is realize sometimes we need more than prayer. Its just rather unfortunate. I also think this should not be a reflection upon Christianity being bad. There are stupid people everywhere including atheists and religious practitioners. It usually depends upon the individual. This is coming from an atheist. agreed im a christian and i think what the parents did is pretty stupid -,.- | ||
Apathy
United States141 Posts
LifeGem "The LifeGem creation process begins by capturing carbon from the existing remains of any standard cremation...." Anyone else finds this disturbing ? | ||
draeger
United States3256 Posts
| ||
zizou21
United States3683 Posts
| ||
wurm
Philippines2296 Posts
*cue MC Hammer* That's why we pray! praaaaaaay! praaaaaaay! | ||
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:16 illmatic wrote: What could a doctor do? Give her drugs........... A shot of insulin (Something millions of diabetics around the world self administer multiple times a day) would have saved this girls life. A test that would have taken mere seconds could have been used to accurately diagnose her. As far as this goes medically, this is a very simple problem. Which is why it annoys me soo much. See people turn to religion when they do not understand something. Back thousands of years ago, people created gods because they did not understand how bolts of electricity could come down from the sky. This is a similar situation, the parents did not understand why their daughter was sick, and stupidly did the religious thing to do. Prayed to god. What I find extremely annoying, is that had that girl severed an artery and started bleeding. I can garrentee you without a doubt in my mind that they would have taken her to the hospital instead of praying, while she bled to death. Medically, a severed artery is much harder to fix than diabetes, but because the parents for some fucking retarded reason didnt know that sickness is caused by biological abnormalities and not god, an innocent person died. Now I have no problems with people that believe in a relgion. It has many helpful uses in peoples lives. However religion should step the fuck back and not get in the way of science. | ||
zizou21
United States3683 Posts
On March 27 2008 16:20 Fen wrote: This is extremely sad. Under our law, the parents would be charged with neglect (failure to provide medical treatment) and put in jail. The other children would be taken away and put into foster homes. I do hope this does happen to this family, because they are soley responsible for that child's death and should be punished for it. A shot of insulin (Something millions of diabetics around the world self administer multiple times a day) would have saved this girls life. A test that would have taken mere seconds could have been used to accurately diagnose her. As far as this goes medically, this is a very simple problem. Which is why it annoys me soo much. See people turn to religion when they do not understand something. Back thousands of years ago, people created gods because they did not understand how bolts of electricity could come down from the sky. This is a similar situation, the parents did not understand why their daughter was sick, and stupidly did the religious thing to do. Prayed to god. What I find extremely annoying, is that had that girl severed an artery and started bleeding. I can garrentee you without a doubt in my mind that they would have taken her to the hospital instead of praying, while she bled to death. Medically, a severed artery is much harder to fix than diabetes, but because the parents for some fucking retarded reason didnt know that sickness is caused by biological abnormalities and not god, an innocent person died. Now I have no problems with people that believe in a relgion. It has many helpful uses in peoples lives. However religion should step the fuck back and not get in the way of science. ![]() | ||
QuanticHawk
United States32051 Posts
And I was wrong on my prediction ._. | ||
L!MP
Australia2067 Posts
| ||
Boblion
France8043 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Seriously i feel really sad for this poor girl ... ![]() | ||
Meta
United States6225 Posts
just kidding, sad story. fuck fox news. | ||
Rev0lution
United States1805 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:13 Funchucks wrote: I actually think it's a reasonable philosophical position to refuse medical treatment for yourself or your children under all circumstances, just as it's a reasonable position to refuse to steal food rather than starve. For most of the time humanity was around, about a quarter to a half of children died before reaching adulthood. Generally speaking, the ones who died were weaker than the ones who survived. What happens to the genetics of a population when you go from filtering out the quarter or half weakest in every generation, to keeping 99+%? After about five or ten generations, don't you end up with a population of people full of allergies, and attention disorders, and diabetes, and social dysfunction, and depression, and weak eyes needing glasses, and laziness, and stupidity, and fatness, and clumsiness, and other low-grade inferiorities? What do the people look like after a hundred or a thousand generations? how is depression, laziness, fatness and clumsiness hereditary? | ||
pyrogenetix
China5094 Posts
im just really sorry for the girl. | ||
Rev0lution
United States1805 Posts
| ||
Freakz19
United States54 Posts
| ||
Skew
United States1019 Posts
On March 27 2008 23:47 Rev0lution wrote: at least we can agree that if god exists (and im sure he doesn't) then he was too GOD DAMN busy to cure that poor little girl. lmao. If god existed, we wouldn't. "we didn't have enough faith I guess"... that's almost better than the museum video (hopefully I'm not the only one who saw that). | ||
OhThatDang
United States4685 Posts
| ||
MoRe_mInErAls
Canada1210 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:57 Scorpion wrote: God is dead - Friedrich Nietzsche Friedrich Nietzsche is dead - MoRe_mInErAls | ||
MrOwMrOw
New Zealand48 Posts
but anyway...that's just plain horrible...religious EXTREMISTS caused this...not god...lol... | ||
BaDayOri
Korea (South)469 Posts
On March 27 2008 04:55 Fumanchu wrote: This is not the fault of God, nor the fault of the religion of Christianity. IMO this is more of the problem of not enough research. These parents should have read and studied the Bible in greater detail before coming to the decision that prayer was the only way to heal a child if you are Christian. The Bible does have countless stories of people who have been healed by prayer, but in most of these stories, you will find out that while these people were praying, they were doing everything physically possible to help the indivdual in need. A lot of Christians stand out in faith trying to declare their dedication and their love for Jesus, but unfortunately most of these people are not equipped with the knowledge to back up their declarementions. As for why God did not save this girl, I can't say. I don't think we will ever know why God puts diseases in countries or allows for floods and hurricanes to destroy cities and wreck lives. However, I have personally seen the works of God firsthand and know that he is real and active in the world today. I have literally seen someones chopped off arm grow back right in front of my face. No joke. And what kind of a God would he be if everytime we asked for something he gave it to us? That's not a God, that's a genie. Although this girl's death is tragic and could have been avoided, we cannot comprehend the ripple effect that it will have on people. Quite possibly this death could lead to something far greater than we can forsee. God moves in mysterious ways, and although trusting Him even after something like this is difficult, it's never the wrong choice. i see where your coming from.. but wouldnt christians, with me coming from a christian family and background, believe that if people had 100% true faith, they wouldn't need to do anything except pray? just simply allow god to do his work? If they took the daughter to the hospital it seems like they aren't completely trusting only on god.. im completely neutral just trying to look at both sides | ||
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
Poor girl ![]() | ||
KaasZerg
Netherlands927 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
They are being charged. Also what kind of church teaches against medical care? Weird. | ||
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
On March 28 2008 09:49 BaDayOri wrote: i see where your coming from.. but wouldnt christians, with me coming from a christian family and background, believe that if people had 100% true faith, they wouldn't need to do anything except pray? just simply allow god to do his work? If they took the daughter to the hospital it seems like they aren't completely trusting only on god.. im completely neutral just trying to look at both sides You dont come to earth so god can pull a david copperfield every now and then, you should have faith, while doing everything in your power to accomplish the healing, drugs are there for a reason, and it isnt to prove god doesnt exist because people get better using it. | ||
MyLostTemple
![]()
United States2921 Posts
On March 28 2008 09:48 MrOwMrOw wrote: he died a psycho...not a good example lol... but anyway...that's just plain horrible...religious EXTREMISTS caused this...not god...lol... Fredrick Nietzsche died because cyphilus infected his brain driving him into an awful mental state. not a good critisizm. | ||
Unforgiven_ve
Venezuela1232 Posts
| ||
CDRdude
United States5625 Posts
On April 03 2008 03:17 Unforgiven_ve wrote: obvious april fools joke from god..."pray and i'll save her!!......NOT" *laughs* The OP was well before April 1st. | ||
MeriaDoKk
Chile1726 Posts
| ||
Fumanchu
Canada669 Posts
| ||
[X]Ken_D
United States4650 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:42 baal wrote: Natural selection at its finest ![]() Yeah. She'll mate a lot that's for sure | ||
Quesadilla
United States1814 Posts
| ||
iNcontroL
![]()
USA29055 Posts
| ||
MyLostTemple
![]()
United States2921 Posts
Romanian? | ||
toopham
United States551 Posts
On March 27 2008 03:42 baal wrote: Natural selection at its finest ![]() i've never shoot from a gun or even hold a gun before... but.. from what I see.. wouldnt that gun just go straight back and poke her eye out? | ||
BluzMan
Russian Federation4235 Posts
On April 03 2008 07:24 toopham wrote: i've never shoot from a gun or even hold a gun before... but.. from what I see.. wouldnt that gun just go straight back and poke her eye out? We have a winner, someone give him a medal! | ||
Future_sc
United States783 Posts
| ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
On March 27 2008 21:41 Hawk wrote: I still can't believe that the police aren't charging the parents, or at the very least, removing the other kids from the home. Personally, I don't believe in protecting children from their parents. In the first place, a government bureaucracy isn't qualified to decide what is and isn't abuse. The stiff way bureaucracies work, it will always tend to evolve toward zero-tolerance policies on things which might be involved in abuse, but which do not constitute abuse in and of themselves. Right now, for example, we have a whole generation of spoiled brats because people are terrified to spank their kids, or show any sign of depriving them. Parents have become like slaves to their children, and people are reluctant to even have children, because it is now considered normal for third parties to judge and interfere with their decisions. Do I want to have kids someday? Certainly. Do I want to raise children in an environment where I'm under constant scrutiny and suspicion, with an expectation that my life should revolve around their care, and my wife is given the power to take them away and have me pay to raise them however she wants, regardless of my wishes? Hell no. That is no bargain. The way the average parent raised their kid a hundred years ago would today at least get their children taken away, and most likely also land them in jail. In fact, if everything the average parent today did with their kids was made public, they would probably be subject to some kind of government interference. A few cases of serious child abuse are being stopped. Some children's lives are being saved. But what is happening to our overall society? In the second place, what about genetic considerations? In the span of decades, we are a society of individuals, but in the span of centuries we are an ecology of bloodlines. If idiots can't destroy their children, then selection won't act on the relevant genetic factors. This is also a problem with charity and welfare. You don't need much more than a brainstem and a functioning reproductive system to fuck constantly and produce children at an alarming rate. Simple darwinian principles tell you that if society dedicates itself to protecting and raising all of the children, no matter how their parents are behaving, a subpopulation that is genetically programmed to breed at the maximum biologically possible rate without regard for the demands of caring for its own offspring, and genetically incapable of understanding or caring why it should not do so, is going to expand exponentially until it displaces all others. Now, you can say, "But people can be educated!" and so forth, but genetic differences can make education futile. Intelligence can be lowered. Suspicion of authority can be increased. Sex drive can be increased. Direct desire to have children can be increased. Aside from that, there will be other optimizations. Twins. Triplets. Litters. Total male indiscriminacy. Whatever causes people to reduce their rate of reproduction will be bred out, while whatever causes people to increase their rate of reproduction will be bred in. This pressure has always existed, but it has always been counterbalanced by a pressure to ensure children are properly raised, so they can survive in the harsh world to successfully reproduce themselves. With no harsh world, there is no counterpressure. Right now, we're seeing mass extinction of responsibility and ambition in the developed world. If we keep this "every child is precious" mentality, we're going to breed right down to subhumanity before the inability to maintain our automated industry allows the world to become a selective pressure again. | ||
xmShake
United States1100 Posts
On April 03 2008 07:24 toopham wrote: i've never shoot from a gun or even hold a gun before... but.. from what I see.. wouldnt that gun just go straight back and poke her eye out? ..haha | ||
Meta
United States6225 Posts
On March 27 2008 06:31 WhatisProtoss wrote: Wait, I thought atheism was the unbelief of religion. The anti-religion. Isn't it pretty anti-religion for a government to be anti-religion? Haha. Communism fits the bill. If a government wants to banish religion, doesn't it mean that the government is atheist? It certainly cannot mean that the government holds any religious belief, of course.... china's government does a lot of fucked up things that nobody else would do, however similar they are | ||
Danger_Duck
Burkina Faso571 Posts
The family does not attend an organized church or participate in an organized religion, Vergin said. "They have a little Bible study of a few people." | ||
| ||