Wtf is with this religious crap??
-
There_will_be_cake — 13 years ago(December 10, 2012 07:35 AM)
lol, ah okay, so we'll avoid all the improvements that people do get when they become religious. the amount of people who find happiness, who find peace, or who go out and do good int he world because they are religious, we should just avoid them, and let people like you who probably just sit on their ass insulting religious people and not doing anything to actually improve the life of others. Get off your ass and do some good.
-
Obaminableshowman — 14 years ago(March 18, 2012 11:34 PM)
Religious indoctrination trough movies in 2012 ???? wtf?
Yea, i don't get it either, i mean so what if the part where he finds God is integral to the story and so what if his finding God led him to humanitarian efforts far braver than what most people can possibly conceive?
I mean WTF? this religion stuff is really scary. We have to insist that producers start censoring this kind of over zealous talk of God and Scripture. If we don't cut this out of movies, more people might become predisposed to helping others and to making brave sacrifices that benefit hundreds if not thousands of people.
We gotta get this God stuff out of the press. It's an infringement on your civil ignorancesi mean liberties.
Another village is missing it's idiot! They must have your face on a milk carton somewhere. -
petey0707 — 12 years ago(January 27, 2014 03:03 PM)
Please get over yourself, religion is a disease, it has hindered critical thought, scientific study and social evolution while people like you pretentiously claim it to somehow better the world through selfish, blind ignorance. Yes religion can bring some good, but the bad outweighs it in heinous ways you don't even seem to be aware of. Keep drinking the kool-aid though.
-
Jnbfwc — 11 years ago(May 02, 2014 11:45 AM)
Don't like any religion? Don't believe there's a god? That's cool! You are totally entitled to your opinion and it is your prerogative to believe whatever you want, irrespective of whether it is silly or mundane.
The problem, however, is your logic; specifically, the informal fallacy of a "false dichotomy," which means that your give only two options, when a third is possible, and since your entire argument hitherto seems based upon the notion that there are only two options, then perhaps the revelation that there is at least one other option will alter your opinion.
The options you presented are:- Religion is evil, or will inevitably lead to evil.
- Atheism is good, or will inevitably lead to good.
I suspect that merely reading the above will cause you to realize your error, but I will continue for the sake of completeness:
The third option is that there have been horrible atheists (as far as I know, Carl Marx and Hitler were not religious, although Hitler did pretend to be a Christian to get the religious folks' support).
Furthermore, some of the greatest medical institutions in the world are run by not only multi- cultural persons, but some even by Young Earth Creationists!
Now, your opinion could still be correct, but it cannot be correct for the reason you stated.
-
petey0707 — 11 years ago(May 04, 2014 12:47 AM)
Don't like any religion? Don't believe there's a god? That's cool! You are totally entitled to your opinion and it is your prerogative to believe whatever you want, irrespective of whether it is silly or mundane.
There's nothing silly about not believing in a supposed primeval deity that we cannot sense in any way, shape or form. The only form of "proof" is faith-based, which is essentially defined as believing in something without any empirical evidence.
While I readily admit reality is far stranger than fiction, and there's much for us to learn and discover, I cannot help but think a pretentious godlike being whose motives reflect that of misogynistic males during the brutal bronze age is all but an invention to control the masses of archaic human societies, as well as keep the wealthy in power while giving the poor false hope without them resorting to extreme actions, such as a class-based revolution.
The problem, however, is your logic; specifically, the informal fallacy of a "false dichotomy," which means that your give only two options, when a third is possible, and since your entire argument hitherto seems based upon the notion that there are only two options, then perhaps the revelation that there is at least one other option will alter your opinion.
I believe my logic is sound and anyone who is a professional in the field of such a genre would agree. There is nothing logical about believing in something that we cannot detect, or see the effects of. To believe in a mere concept is foolish.
The options you presented are:- Religion is evil, or will inevitably lead to evil.
- Hmm. I never once said religion to be evil. It seems you exaggerated my claims then insinuated allegations of which are completely false. I merely stated religion has hindered critical thinking and scientific study, which it has and still does to this very day.
- Atheism is good, or will inevitably lead to good.
- I never once claimed atheism is good. Please quote anywhere where I claimed that a stance of nonbelief is somehow related to morality? Once again, you go out on a limb and assume nonsense that even I, an atheist, does not believe. I believe that secularism cannot be inherently good or evil, it's merely a nonbelief. Tantamount to one not believing in the tooth fairy, elves or Santa Clause.
I suspect that merely reading the above will cause you to realize your error, but I will continue for the sake of completeness:
The irony is that the error in your ways aren't even realized, due entirely to your presumptions. Wonderful. By all means, please proceed.
The third option is that there have been horrible atheists (as far as I know, Carl Marx and Hitler were not religious, although Hitler did pretend to be a Christian to get the religious folks' support).
I don't know nearly enough about Carl Marx to make a sound argument, but to call the man "horrible" is ridiculous.
Hitler was a baptized a Catholic. While he did indeed doubt organized religion, he very much believed in a God, or an "almighty creator" as he called it. Want proof? And I quote,
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
Hitler justified his fight for the German people against the Jews by using God and biblical reasoning. He truly believed his fight was divine in nature. I highly doubt he "pretended" to be a Christian to persuade the Germans. The quote above makes it crystal clear he believed in something. Keep in mind, as intelligent as he was, he had many hysterical ideas floating around in his mind. Belief in a Christian God seems rather tame in comparison to his other more radical philosophies.
Furthermore, some of the greatest medical institutions in the world are run by not only multi- cultural persons, but some even by Young Earth Creationists!
What does multiculturalism have to do with anything? I'm curious. Oh, and I have heard of folk in the medical field who are indeed creationists. I certainly wouldn't want them to be my doctor, or nurse, or whathaveyou, being that what they believe in is ridiculously idiotic and entirely nonsensical. It makes me question whether they're truly capable of making informative, educated decisions when it comes to mine, or my loved ones, health or condition. While it isn't my business what their private beliefs are, I can't help but think it still makes in impact on their social and professional lives in some fashion.
Now, your opinion could still be correct, but it cannot be correct for the reason you stated.
Thankfully the reasons you claimed I stated are reasons I never claimed or stated. Ironic, eh?
-
salimy3k — 14 years ago(March 22, 2012 11:51 PM)
It wasn't the religious indoctrination that bothered me, it was the fact that this man who was violent and had supposedly 'changed' had no qualms using violence to achieve his means after his 'big' change of heart
I always find it amusing when the big white saviour will preach the gospel of non-violence to the natives he's trying to 'save' while arming himself to the teeth with the latest weapons and committing acts of violence that would give him the death penalty back home. Hypocrisy much? -
Melon_Smasher — 13 years ago(April 29, 2012 08:43 AM)
LOL. People like you are pathetic. As far as I'm concerned, people who try infringe on MY rights, or the rights of others (like the right to you know not be murdered or mugged. Or in this case, be forced as a child soldier), automatically forfeit any and all rights they may have had in my eyes.
Things like "non violence" and "good acts" do not APPLY to the people I have just mentioned. Once they cross that line, the fact that they're human is secondary to the fact that they're trying to harm me or others. And I advocate non-violence, so long as that only applies to people not trying commit acts of violence on me. -
Melon_Smasher — 13 years ago(May 19, 2012 02:04 AM)
I'm agnostic. Violence against men like Kony is a necessary evil, negotiating does not work, you can ask the many villages in Africa. Killing, in and its self is always regrettable, but it is not always morally reprehensible.
For example, someone breaks into your house in the dead of night to murder you and your family. Do you
A: let him murder you and your family because killing him would be "hypocritical"
B:do what it takes to protect your family, even as far as killing the intruder (notice that I say "kill" not "murder").
It's okay though, you clearly have no interest in rational discussion, you're just being intellectually dishonest to try rationalize your bigoted hatred of religion. -
salimy3k — 13 years ago(May 19, 2012 10:13 PM)
"Violence against men like Kony is a necessary evil, negotiating does not work, you can ask the many villages in Africa."
That's funny. Kony is by all intents and purposes dead - just like your CIA-funded double agent Osama - who was killed by Mujahideen remnants back in 2002 who realized that it was Osama who was sabotaging their weapons dumps in an effort to prolong the Afghan Civil War - Osama only became a 'big' player after US negotiations to build an oil pipeline in Afghanistan stalled and those 'fake' tapes where Osama confesses to bombing The Twin Towers (even though there is NO way a bunch of guys who were failing to learn how to pilot a light aircraft would ever be able to pilot a big airliner - much less bring down a building built to withstand a Jumbo Jet crashing into it) - same as Kony was a non-entity when Sudanese forces were buying arms from the US (heck, the US even made The Sudanese government get public support - which was fast eroding - when they bombed a milk factory in the late 90s and then claimed it to be a 'weapons dump' - this was a significant development as there was a Coalition that was opposing the government that would have won the coming elections had the US not bombed the factory) - the minute they stopped buying arms, suddenly they were the 'bad guys'.
Listen, every credible African historian has stated that Kony has been dead since 2006. Even The ICC has dropped all charges against him after certification of his death was issued. This is nothing but a scam to grab African resources because China (and lately The USSR) have been making a play for Africa and have been forging partnerships with local governments. They have MASSIVE deposits of black gold in the mountains - hmm, gee, yet ANOTHER war for oil again?
"For example, someone breaks into your house in the dead of night to murder you and your family. Do you
A: let him murder you and your family because killing him would be "hypocritical"
B:do what it takes to protect your family, even as far as killing the intruder (notice that I say "kill" not "murder")."
Excellent analogy! I sincerely hope you remember this when YOUR troops invade another country to steal their oil or for other spurious reasons and the natives fight back and massacre your imperialist forces. After all, it's not 'murder', it's 'just killing' right? Say, isn't there a commandment that says 'Thou shalt not kill'?
"It's okay though, you clearly have no interest in rational discussion, you're just being intellectually dishonest to try rationalize your bigoted hatred of religion."
Rational discussion? You're kidding right? I just raise the issue of hypocrisy and you start playing the victim amounts to a 'rational discussion'?! Intellectual Dishonesty? Isn't that a bit like claiming that killing in self-defense is alright if you are invaded yet labelling any foreigner who does as you say against US forces a 'terrorist'? And lastly, 'bigoted hatred of religion' - what a joke! I have ZERO hatred for religion as a whole, I Do view the hypocrisy that exists in religion in a dim light taht's all. Your victim complex shines through! -
Melon_Smasher — 13 years ago(May 20, 2012 12:21 AM)
Wait what? Last time I checked, Sam Childers was NOT the American government. Look, I get what you're saying and I agree with a majority of it. I'm also aware Kony is probably dead, but my point still stands, if you're defending a bunch of innocent children from a mad man, killing to defend them is not morally reprehensible. It does not matter if violence was the tool used to defend them. Even if Sam Childers is a Christian, killing senselessly, or out of hatred or malice is what "thou shalt not kill" applies to, not defending the innocent.
-
RightersBloc — 13 years ago(May 23, 2012 10:14 PM)
That's funny. Kony is by all intents and purposes dead - just like your CIA-funded double agent Osama - who was killed by Mujahideen remnants back in 2002 who realized that it was Osama who was sabotaging their weapons dumps in an effort to prolong the Afghan Civil War - Osama only became a 'big' player after US negotiations to build an oil pipeline in Afghanistan stalled and those 'fake' tapes where Osama confesses to bombing The Twin Towers (even though there is NO way a bunch of guys who were failing to learn how to pilot a light aircraft would ever be able to pilot a big airliner - much less bring down a building built to withstand a Jumbo Jet crashing into it) - same as Kony was a non-entity when Sudanese forces were buying arms from the US (heck, the US even made The Sudanese government get public support - which was fast eroding - when they bombed a milk factory in the late 90s and then claimed it to be a 'weapons dump' - this was a significant development as there was a Coalition that was opposing the government that would have won the coming elections had the US not bombed the factory) - the minute they stopped buying arms, suddenly they were the 'bad guys'.
yet another conspiracy theorist.
Bypassing all of the other delusional rants, please enlighten me, since i thought i stood there and watched the second plane crash into the World Trade Centerwhat actually happened???
i am anxiously awaiting any salient response you might muster while hiding behind your computer in pathetic anonymity.