I'm a Christian, and am not embarrassed to admit it. I'm embarrassed by these assholes, though. (Atheists often think that Christian == fundamentalist, which simply isn't true.)
I'm not sure it's more logical to say that the universe created itself than it was created by someone, but to each his own, I guess.
I actually saw them today at the con, holding up a Jesus Is Lord sign, as a bunch of cosplaying executioners paraded around. I didn't know it was the Westborough asshats, or I'd have had words with them,
And you also get upset when theists call you asshats, am I right? (Do you never wonder why?)
Honestly, I think the arguments for the existence of God are more compelling than the opposite, but doing your dickwad atheist bit isn't a good counterargument.
Dawkins has made being-an-asshole-to-theists his raison d'etre, but it neither makes him right, nor even sound particularly smart. His arguments are laughably bad when he strays outside the area he knows (evo
Better to be considered an asshat by someone who is clearly delusional, than being delusional yourself - or enabling their delusions at the cost to society as a whole. Religion needs put down, hard.
The best single argument for me against faith has been one posited by Hitchens in part 2 of a debate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYaQpRZJl18&feature=related [youtube.com] (part1) and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkHuvErbpd0&NR=1 [youtube.com] (part 2). The idea that existence of this sort of god being "compelling" is more ab
Religion has, historically speaking, been the greatest force for good our planet has ever seen.
Hitchens is a frothing moron who doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about - his sole tactic is to sound British and snotty when talking about religion. I've watched several dozens of his debates online, especially with Dinesh D'Souza (who doesn't do an especially good job defending Christianity), and I've yet to see him put together a single cogent argument.
>>Religion has, historically speaking, been the greatest force for good our planet has ever seen. [citation needed]
>>Hitchens is a frothing moron who doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about - his sole tactic is to sound British and snotty when talking about religion. Ad hominem isn't a real argument.
>>I've yet to see him put together a single cogent argument. What's not cogent about the arguments put forth in the videos linked just now?
>>>>Religion has, historically speaking, been the greatest force for good our planet has ever seen. >>[citation needed]
Yay, the ignorant are coming out of the woodwork.
If you haven't ever studied history, and just listened to your fellow atheists bitch about how religion hates sciences and is holding the world back, then you have an excuse for that. Otherwise, sorry. You're an ignoramus.
Pretty much our entire system of natural rights is based on being endowed by their creator (sound familia
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Sunday July 25, 2010 @08:28AM (#33020436)
Yay, the ignorant are coming out of the woodwork.
Insulting your opponent may win debates from where you come, but most of the intelligent world prefers real arguments.
If you haven't ever studied history, and just listened to your fellow atheists bitch about how religion hates sciences and is holding the world back, then you have an excuse for that. Otherwise, sorry. You're an ignoramus.
Pretty much our entire system of natural rights is based on being endowed by their creator (sound familiar), so not even a government can take them away. Contrast this with countries that did not develop with a Christian heritage, and see how far your civil rights go there.
Hammurabi would beg the differ. Christians didn't invent morals and moralistic laws, and they certainly weren't the first to implement them. If you would open a neutral history book, you will realise that the entire moral system in Christianity is a mix-and-match rip off from older ancient texts. Isn't it baffling how people had laws against murder before the son of god came down to tell us it's a bad thing?
The notion of Universal Charity was really Jesus' revolutionary message, and it really did transform the world, causing more good as a result of it than any other single idea.
Once again, the argument is that nobody, save for Christians is capable of any notion of humanism. Oh, except all the people who did it before mid-renaissance where some Christians finally figured out that the bible's "do not kill" was not a metaphor for slaughtering everyone who dared sneer at them. But you are absolutely right, religion has changed for a better and... (^TFA^)...
Hitchens, by contrast, think that it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. This is (in part) why I said he's a frothing moron. He speaks and writes books that are at complete odds with history.
You really like insulting, don't you? I haven't read his books, but I don't see how his arguments are at "odds with history". Perhaps you would care to elaborate?
>>Hammurabi would beg the differ. Christians didn't invent morals and moralistic laws
Didn't claim they did. It would be a very silly claim to make.
I was specifically talking about the notion of Universal Charity. Pretty much all human societies have a concept of Charity, which (besides being one of Glen Beck's three favorite words) basically means being nice to people, taking care of the needy, and so forth. Jesus said you should do all that, sure, but do it to *everyone*. This is the key and radical
I find it somewhat amusing that you're talking about how being nice to everyone is a Christian value, yet in the same breath, you're admitting you really like admitting people.
You don't see the contradiction?
It's not an optical illusion, it just looks like one.
-- Phil White
Still doing that? (Score:0, Troll)
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm a Christian, and am not embarrassed to admit it. I'm embarrassed by these assholes, though. (Atheists often think that Christian == fundamentalist, which simply isn't true.)
I'm not sure it's more logical to say that the universe created itself than it was created by someone, but to each his own, I guess.
I actually saw them today at the con, holding up a Jesus Is Lord sign, as a bunch of cosplaying executioners paraded around. I didn't know it was the Westborough asshats, or I'd have had words with them,
Re: (Score:-1, Flamebait)
No, no, we do not think all of you are fundamentalists, However, we do think you are all delusional.
Re: (Score:4, Insightful)
>>However, we do think you are all delusional.
And you also get upset when theists call you asshats, am I right? (Do you never wonder why?)
Honestly, I think the arguments for the existence of God are more compelling than the opposite, but doing your dickwad atheist bit isn't a good counterargument.
Dawkins has made being-an-asshole-to-theists his raison d'etre, but it neither makes him right, nor even sound particularly smart. His arguments are laughably bad when he strays outside the area he knows (evo
Re: (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:0, Flamebait)
>>Religion needs put down, hard.
Religion has, historically speaking, been the greatest force for good our planet has ever seen.
Hitchens is a frothing moron who doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about - his sole tactic is to sound British and snotty when talking about religion. I've watched several dozens of his debates online, especially with Dinesh D'Souza (who doesn't do an especially good job defending Christianity), and I've yet to see him put together a single cogent argument.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
>>Religion has, historically speaking, been the greatest force for good our planet has ever seen.
[citation needed]
>>Hitchens is a frothing moron who doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about - his sole tactic is to sound British and snotty when talking about religion.
Ad hominem isn't a real argument.
>>I've yet to see him put together a single cogent argument.
What's not cogent about the arguments put forth in the videos linked just now?
Re: (Score:-1, Flamebait)
>>>>Religion has, historically speaking, been the greatest force for good our planet has ever seen.
>>[citation needed]
Yay, the ignorant are coming out of the woodwork.
If you haven't ever studied history, and just listened to your fellow atheists bitch about how religion hates sciences and is holding the world back, then you have an excuse for that. Otherwise, sorry. You're an ignoramus.
Pretty much our entire system of natural rights is based on being endowed by their creator (sound familia
Re:Still doing that? (Score:0)
Yay, the ignorant are coming out of the woodwork.
Insulting your opponent may win debates from where you come, but most of the intelligent world prefers real arguments.
If you haven't ever studied history, and just listened to your fellow atheists bitch about how religion hates sciences and is holding the world back, then you have an excuse for that. Otherwise, sorry. You're an ignoramus.
Pretty much our entire system of natural rights is based on being endowed by their creator (sound familiar), so not even a government can take them away. Contrast this with countries that did not develop with a Christian heritage, and see how far your civil rights go there.
Hammurabi would beg the differ. Christians didn't invent morals and moralistic laws, and they certainly weren't the first to implement them. If you would open a neutral history book, you will realise that the entire moral system in Christianity is a mix-and-match rip off from older ancient texts. Isn't it baffling how people had laws against murder before the son of god came down to tell us it's a bad thing?
The notion of Universal Charity was really Jesus' revolutionary message, and it really did transform the world, causing more good as a result of it than any other single idea.
Once again, the argument is that nobody, save for Christians is capable of any notion of humanism. Oh, except all the people who did it before mid-renaissance where some Christians finally figured out that the bible's "do not kill" was not a metaphor for slaughtering everyone who dared sneer at them. But you are absolutely right, religion has changed for a better and... (^TFA^)...
Hitchens, by contrast, think that it is the worst thing that has ever happened to the world. This is (in part) why I said he's a frothing moron. He speaks and writes books that are at complete odds with history.
You really like insulting, don't you? I haven't read his books, but I don't see how his arguments are at "odds with history". Perhaps you would care to elaborate?
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
>>Hammurabi would beg the differ. Christians didn't invent morals and moralistic laws
Didn't claim they did. It would be a very silly claim to make.
I was specifically talking about the notion of Universal Charity. Pretty much all human societies have a concept of Charity, which (besides being one of Glen Beck's three favorite words) basically means being nice to people, taking care of the needy, and so forth. Jesus said you should do all that, sure, but do it to *everyone*. This is the key and radical
Re: (Score:2)
I find it somewhat amusing that you're talking about how being nice to everyone is a Christian value, yet in the same breath, you're admitting you really like admitting people.
You don't see the contradiction?