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
I'm reluctant to enter this conversation, given its very low standards for mutual respect, but I can't let this common, but to me incorrect, argument pass. How can we know how things would be without religion? That's just an initial logical fillip.
But how about all the pain that religion HAS caused? Europe was at war of Catholicism versus Protestantism for several hundred years. Islam and Christianity have been at war for longer than that. Granted, there were side issues of imperialism. But how about the
And how about the pain the stomping our religion has caused? Or how much suffering has resulting from a society without religion firmly rooted?
I need to look no further than such fine 20th century atheist leaders as Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong. Can we people give the religion bashing a break because it's old and tiresome.
Good old lust for power and greed cause most of these problems. It's that simple. Religion merely because of a vehicle for our baboon-like behaviors when particularly clever monkeys learn to utilize it. Wiping out the native Americans was not religiously motivated, for instance. It was motivated by the fact that one group wanted another group's land. Even the Spanish Inquisition was rooted in stealing the property Jews and others not favorable to the Catholics.
PEOPLE have caused this pain and they manage to do it just fine with or without religion.
"And they should sure as hell keep their meddling little fingers out my government and schools."
YOUR government and YOUR schools? Oh that's right, religious people don't pay any of the taxes or participate in any way. Yeah, those fuckers need to keep out and just chill with their congregations.
Mind you, I'm not making a case for religion either. However, I find that atheists are entirely too comfortable in turning religion into a scapegoat for the natural evils of our species and think themselves blissfully immune to vile acts perpetrated by their religious cousins. History makes is very clear then no religion or lack thereof is free of atrocity.
Always with the Stalin and Mao. Neither Stalin nor Mao was an atheist. However, they both felt the need to force atheism on the populace because they didn't want the churches to have a power structure that competed with the state.
But you knew that and lied anyway. Because your religion commands you to lie in the service of your God.
Religion merely [becomes?] a vehicle for our baboon-like behaviors...
Exactly. Religion gives tyrants, in addition to all of the tools that they already have, the threat of eternal damnation, the faux-moral divine right of kings, and a reason for the opressed to ignore their oppression (all will be set right in the afterlife). Think of how much more horrid Stalin an Mao could have been if they had not just modern technology and their own evil intent, but the cloak of religion as well.
I find that athe
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: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Still doing that? (Score:2)
And how about the pain the stomping our religion has caused? Or how much suffering has resulting from a society without religion firmly rooted?
I need to look no further than such fine 20th century atheist leaders as Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong. Can we people give the religion bashing a break because it's old and tiresome.
Good old lust for power and greed cause most of these problems. It's that simple. Religion merely because of a vehicle for our baboon-like behaviors when particularly clever monkeys learn to utilize it. Wiping out the native Americans was not religiously motivated, for instance. It was motivated by the fact that one group wanted another group's land. Even the Spanish Inquisition was rooted in stealing the property Jews and others not favorable to the Catholics.
PEOPLE have caused this pain and they manage to do it just fine with or without religion.
"And they should sure as hell keep their meddling little fingers out my government and schools."
YOUR government and YOUR schools? Oh that's right, religious people don't pay any of the taxes or participate in any way. Yeah, those fuckers need to keep out and just chill with their congregations.
Mind you, I'm not making a case for religion either. However, I find that atheists are entirely too comfortable in turning religion into a scapegoat for the natural evils of our species and think themselves blissfully immune to vile acts perpetrated by their religious cousins. History makes is very clear then no religion or lack thereof is free of atrocity.
Re: (Score:2)
Always with the Stalin and Mao. Neither Stalin nor Mao was an atheist. However, they both felt the need to force atheism on the populace because they didn't want the churches to have a power structure that competed with the state.
But you knew that and lied anyway. Because your religion commands you to lie in the service of your God.
Re: (Score:2)
Religion merely [becomes?] a vehicle for our baboon-like behaviors...
Exactly. Religion gives tyrants, in addition to all of the tools that they already have, the threat of eternal damnation, the faux-moral divine right of kings, and a reason for the opressed to ignore their oppression (all will be set right in the afterlife). Think of how much more horrid Stalin an Mao could have been if they had not just modern technology and their own evil intent, but the cloak of religion as well.
I find that athe