Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 12/18/07 07:35 PM, MickTheChampion wrote: Stalin: Responsible for the deaths of countless millions.

You're comparing me to the Westboro Baptist Church, so by your logic I can compare you to Stalin.

We both call ourselves Christians, you call yourself an atheist as he did.

Catholic church: Tortured and burnt and killed hundreds of thousands of heretics for 5 centuries.

You missed the point of my post.

At 12/18/07 07:56 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote: You missed the point of my post.

And you missed the point of his.

At 12/18/07 05:38 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Any idea sombody can be fanatic about, so dont make religion out to be so special, people can be fanatics about anything like democracy or nationalism.

Democracy, nationalism, they're not all-encompassing belief systems. Religion is the only belief system we can't discuss and try to convince people, the only one you don't need evidence for, and the only one that deals with life and death.

If someone's fanatic about democracy, tell me their justification for blowing themselves up at a bus-stop. The only comparable thing to religious violence from an atheistic viewpoint is nihilists going on shooting sprees.

But does taking away guns take away the problems that cause the gun crimes? You make it seem like if religion was gone so would any problems assosiated with it.

does taking away religion take away the thing that causes religious sectarianism?

Yes.

And for every example of non-religious sectarianism you can find, I can find a hundred religious examples.

Does that happen in your area?

Yes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manch ester/4674554.stm
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/l eedsbradford/2004/08/295962.html

Whenever shit happens in Palestine and Israel, increases of sectarian violence THOUSANDS OF MILES AWAY increases. Non-religious example of this happening please.

Religious conflict isnt as widespread as you may think. And if we fix the problems economicly in the middle east than religious conflict would go away.

Might take a while, with the anti-Zionist anti-Jew teachings in the Muslim countries. In this particular area as well, they raise their kids to hate their political enemy based on their religious viewpoint. In fact, that happens all the bloody time.

So do politics, are you gonna blame government and call for it to be abolished? Besides diversity is a good thing, or should we all think like you?

I think it's retarded for you to call 'conforming to different holy books' diversity, and I think the world would be better if everyone took on a secular humanist standpoint, yes, of course. Why would I not? But of course I like diversity, culturally, I just don't like diversity of opinions on what to do with gays, women, and evolution.

And let's switch the roles to religion. "I believe in Christianity, but I like diversity so everyone should burn in Hell for the sake of diversity." Doesn't make sense.

Picture this; a country has a problem; Britain invaded and pillaged, and then eventually retreated to a small corner. The Brits were Protestant, and the natives were Catholic.

Your right, Ireland should never have gained its independance and just become english like they should had. (true fact, Ireland wouldnt have suffered so much from the potatoe famine if the english haddent kept taking away the wheat grown there)

Yeah I said we suck, I said it was our fault, nice way to avoid the point. Kids are raised to be religiously sectarian, for ancient political reasons.

I blame colonialism for the problem in the middle east, we should had done better in making shur the new countries could stand up right once they got independance. You dont here much trouble with religious conflict in Turkey (secular government) do you?

Turkey has been in a tricky situation a few decades ago. And even if colonialism was the cause for the problems in the Middle East, is religion helping? Would the sectarianism still be there without religion?

"I'm going to blow you up because you're a democrat and I'm a republican and this country should be republican..." No. FFS.

Give back Northern ireland and then talk, by the way hows things going with 'The Troubles' latly?

You have fantastically ignored my point.

Its a warning, your grup can be next, things can go the way of the communists cant they?

You are aware that there are like 1.5 billion irreligious people? And some places in Europe have irreligious majorities? obviously not.

Make the country able to stand economicly and religioun will not cause more segregation. Howells do you explain there being almoast no terrorest attacks by Americans on Americans?

The 7/7 bombings in Britain were done by British-born Muslims, so again an invalid point.

If you think about it scientificly as an experiment, religion is not the variable its the constant, location and money is the variable argo religion is not the problem or the source of conflits.

Again, skirting the issue; even if a conflict starts for secular reasons, it continues for religious ones.

It means that horrible people dont get off scott free if they dont get punished.

I'm afraid that's what actually happens.

At 12/18/07 07:21 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

At 12/18/07 06:32 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

I remember hearing about a Atheist that was going around burning down old and historic churches, I think he was in a heavy metal band, I remember hearing about it on VH1, the guy also aledegedly ate another band member who commited suicide. It was in scandinavia.

They were Pagans, learn your black metal trivia. Mayhem and Burzum are the bands you're talking about. They were pissed off because Christianity is not the natural religion of Norway and was imposed.

Hey, would you look at that; they were Pagans, burning down Christian churches! Lol, and you thought they were atheists, confirming your point, and they were actually religious, confirming mine!

Ive heard of people do damn crazy thing not in the name of religion.

Have you heard of people do crazy things in the name of secularism?

You're under the misunderstanding that there aren't enough irreligious people to cause violent conflict, if they wanted. But they see writing books and debating people on TV as the better way to go about doing it.

Convert to islam before you are all consumed by Goatman.

I feel better now. <3 bai Atheist doodz.

At 12/19/07 07:40 AM, MickTheChampion wrote: You missed the point of MY post. If you're going to idiotically compare moderate Christians in contemporary society to lunatics and extremists from the Inquisition and the Westboro Baptist Church -

Do you think extremism and cults and religious intolerance and the like is an inevitable side-effect of religion?

In fact, screw the 'inevitable' bit, do you even think it's a side effect of religion?

At 12/19/07 07:51 AM, Earfetish wrote: Do you think extremism and cults and religious intolerance and the like is an inevitable side-effect of religion?

In fact, screw the 'inevitable' bit, do you even think it's a side effect of religion?

I guess what I would call the key difference between Westboro and Stalin is, Westboro-style intolerance and thick-headedness seems to me a side effect of the black-and-white text of religion that is somewhat inevitable in a world of billions, whereas Stalinist atrocities seems like a side-effect of state control and communism.

Which is why I hate the 'Stalin' argument - I disagree with state control almost as much as I disagree with religion.

And to continue a point I was making to Zoraxe, it appears you reckon Atheists want a cold world with only one belief system, and that's incorrect. What's far more likely to make that happen is theocracy or religious war; it's the religious who blow up Shia mosques and Buddha statues and marginalise Zoroastrians. There should still be religious study, and if someone reads the Qu'ran and decides wearing a burqa is what they want to do, and maybe mix it up by meditating and drinking wine, then that's completely fine. I'm not asking for everyone to become a boring Westerner. Even when religions have ecumenical discussions, their sole interest is promoting their belief. The Wahhabis are the worst for this.

It's the pious that are the threat to your multicultural and diverse world. Maybe atheists don't make this point enough, but it's definitely true.

At 12/16/07 08:55 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Um, win, maybe?

You can see both hours of this on Dawkins' Website:

http://richarddawkins.net/

and it was amazing

I had $210 in wallet this morning. Some quick Christmas shopping and I'm down to about $45. And I've got a disco and pupping on Friday and Saturday.

At 12/19/07 11:15 AM, Brick-top wrote: I had $210 in wallet this morning. Some quick Christmas shopping and I'm down to about $45. And I've got a disco and pupping on Friday and Saturday.

I went to Cash Converters and bought 6 DVDs and a CD for £11. I bought my brother a book off Amazon for like another £6. Not got my old man anything yet, and I should get something on top of these DVDs for my mum. It's not that I'm cheap, it's just, why would I not buy stuff from the pound shop and Cash Converters?

At 12/19/07 11:24 AM, Earfetish wrote:

I went to Cash Converters and bought 6 DVDs and a CD for £11.

I must say I do love the currency of pounds.
My English Aunty always sends me around £100 for my Christmas/Birthday, which equals to about $240 AU, what with the nice conversion rate and all ^_^

At 12/19/07 07:09 AM, Earfetish wrote: Democracy, nationalism, they're not all-encompassing belief systems. Religion is the only belief system we can't discuss and try to convince people, the only one you don't need evidence for, and the only one that deals with life and death.

So?

If someone's fanatic about democracy, tell me their justification for blowing themselves up at a bus-stop. The only comparable thing to religious violence from an atheistic viewpoint is nihilists going on shooting sprees.

Religion does motivate someone to do that, but if it wasnt religiously mmotivated than the guy would instead use a AK-47 and coe back and do it again and again till he is taken out. which is worse?

Yes.

If you took away religion then would the kurds still consider themselvs kurds or will they go 'fuck that, lets just be Turkish"?

No, they would still want to have a free homeland.

And for every example of non-religious sectarianism you can find, I can find a hundred religious examples.

All with other causes im sure, even the crusades. Its not religions fault that people pick fights with each other.

Yes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manch ester/4674554.stm
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/l eedsbradford/2004/08/295962.html

Good thing your government and people are so excepting of muslims (sarcasm).
Seriously, if you people werent so xenophobic then the muslims born in our country would have fit in and become english muslims instead of being 'others' in your society. I blame your countrie for those anti-semmetic attacks.

Whenever shit happens in Palestine and Israel, increases of sectarian violence THOUSANDS OF MILES AWAY increases. Non-religious example of this happening please.

Not were I live because I got a more accepting culture than yours.

"Unlike many Muslims in Europe, American Muslims do not tend to feel marginalized or isolated from political participation. Several organizations were formed by the American Muslim community to serve as 'critical consultants' on U.S. policy regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. Other groups have worked with law enforcement agencies to point out Muslims within the United States that they suspect of fostering 'intolerant attitudes'. Still others have worked to invite interfaith dialogue and improved relations between Muslim and non-Muslim Americans"- wikipedia

Might take a while, with the anti-Zionist anti-Jew teachings in the Muslim countries. In this particular area as well, they raise their kids to hate their political enemy based on their religious viewpoint. In fact, that happens all the bloody time.

You and them nead better, more tolerant societies like 'most' of the US is.
Fix your own damn countrie first, Dont get me wrong, I like England, its just not the way it should be now.

I think it's retarded for you to call 'conforming to different holy books' diversity, and I think the world would be better if everyone took on a secular humanist standpoint, yes, of course. Why would I not?

Thank God we do live in a secular society were we can chose our own religion. I say fix the countrie and you fix the problem, dont be so simplistic.

But of course I like diversity, culturally, I just don't like diversity of opinions on what to do with gays, women, and evolution.

Thats sosiety your thinking of, not religion.
People like this do exsist.

And let's switch the roles to religion. "I believe in Christianity, but I like diversity so everyone should burn in Hell for the sake of diversity." Doesn't make sense.

Your putting words into my mouth?

Yeah I said we suck, I said it was our fault, nice way to avoid the point. Kids are raised to be religiously sectarian, for ancient political reasons.

Give Northern Ireland back then. Unless you live there, then its way in the past and we should just forget about it.

Turkey has been in a tricky situation a few decades ago. And even if colonialism was the cause for the problems in the Middle East, is religion helping? Would the sectarianism still be there without religion?

The kurds will just go away if there was no religion right? Just assimilate like they should right?
And the Armenians are just Turkish but they dont know it.

You have fantastically ignored my point.

You had no point.

You are aware that there are like 1.5 billion irreligious people? And some places in Europe have irreligious majorities? obviously not.

So?!

The 7/7 bombings in Britain were done by British-born Muslims, so again an invalid point.

Because your countrie sucks currently.

At 12/19/07 05:23 PM, MickTheChampion wrote: No. It's a side effect of money & power.

Well that's funny, how you reckon extremism and cults like the Westboro Baptist Church are a side effect of money and power. I'd reckon they're a side effect of religion - if you're quoting the Bible every 20 seconds and everyone in your commune is poor, don't see how it's anything to do with money and power.

At 12/19/07 05:25 PM, MickTheChampion wrote: Marxist State Control and repression of Religion isn't far off what alot of you call for on here, infact I daresay many of you would be cheering on Lenin's call to bulldose the Churches.

Hmmm. I don't think so in the slightest. Maybe you should quote us on that.

I love going to historic churches when I'm on holiday - beautiful buildings.

And I'm not asking for more state control, I'm asking for less social control. Being told how to behave and what to believe by your pastor is social control. If you insist upon believing in the Bible, go for it, but society should critically examine religion.

Does anyone here support the eradication of religion through violence if necessary?

And yet you call for repressing Religions like Islam. Explain?

I call for the repression of Islamic politics, a massive state-control mechanism. That's like saying 'you disagree with state control, but you call for the abolition of Communism' - the two ideas go hand in hand. Maybe you need to explain.

If you want to read the bloody Qu'ran, then go nuts.

At 12/19/07 05:27 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: So?

More likely to cause fanaticisam. Most belief systems are benign and not all-encompassing. Religion, is.

Religion does motivate someone to do that, but if it wasnt religiously mmotivated than the guy would instead use a AK-47 and coe back and do it again and again till he is taken out. which is worse?

BULLSHIT. Every suicide bomber in the Middle East isn't a Columbine Kid. They're deeply devout Muslims. You're talking crap, bro.

If you took away religion then would the kurds still consider themselvs kurds or will they go 'fuck that, lets just be Turkish"?

If you took away religion, would the Sunnis and the Shi'ites immediately find another segregating factor? Hmm. No.

All with other causes im sure, even the crusades. Its not religions fault that people pick fights with each other.

Like I've said before, religion continues the fight.

Good thing your government and people are so excepting of muslims (sarcasm).

How can you say that? Have you ever even fucking been to this country? Jesus Christ.

Seriously, if you people werent so xenophobic then the muslims born in our country would have fit in and become english muslims instead of being 'others' in your society. I blame your countrie for those anti-semmetic attacks.

You don't know shit. I blame violence in Israel for the increase in Muslim-on-Jew violence when shit happens in Israel and I can't believe you're denying it when the facts are right there.

Might take a while, with the anti-Zionist anti-Jew teachings in the Muslim countries. In this particular area as well, they raise their kids to hate their political enemy based on their religious viewpoint. In fact, that happens all the bloody time.

You and them nead better, more tolerant societies like 'most' of the US is.

Who exactly are the Middle East being brought up to be intolerant to? Jews, perhaps?

Fix your own damn countrie first, Dont get me wrong, I like England, its just not the way it should be now.

We're not some racist country you muppet.

Thank God we do live in a secular society were we can chose our own religion. I say fix the countrie and you fix the problem, dont be so simplistic.

I'm not being simplistic, you are. In a global sense, religion and friction go hand-in-hand.

Thats sosiety your thinking of, not religion.
People like this do exsist.

Why would anyone be anti-evolution without religion? Or why would they stone the adultress, and feel it was justified? BECAUSE GOD TOLD THEM IT WAS.

And let's switch the roles to religion. "I believe in Christianity, but I like diversity so everyone should burn in Hell for the sake of diversity." Doesn't make sense.

Your putting words into my mouth?

I'm saying, religion doesn't promote diversity in the slightest. Good argument-following bro.

Give Northern Ireland back then. Unless you live there, then its way in the past and we should just forget about it.

Missing the point.....

The kurds will just go away if there was no religion right? Just assimilate like they should right?
And the Armenians are just Turkish but they dont know it.

Racial boundaries will still exist, clap clap clap, who denied that, no-one.

You had no point.

It's easy to raise your kids to hate people based on religious persuasion. It's easy to have a segregated society based on religious persuasion. Race can do it too, but no belief systems can.

You are aware that there are like 1.5 billion irreligious people? And some places in Europe have irreligious majorities? obviously not.

So?!

So we could cause strife if we wanted - you keep saying 'when there's more of you' - there's about as many irreligious people as there are Muslims.

The 7/7 bombings in Britain were done by British-born Muslims, so again an invalid point.

Because your countrie sucks currently.

Brilliant refuting.

Very crappy this time, sir.

Btw Zoraxe7, very tolerant of gays your society is.

O wait.

And who is it who are intolerant of gays? Could it be.... Christians?

At 12/19/07 05:27 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:
Unless you live there, then its way in the past and we should just forget about it.

Then why bring up Stalin?

At 12/19/07 05:44 PM, Earfetish wrote: More likely to cause fanaticisam. Most belief systems are benign and not all-encompassing. Religion, is.

I still dont see your point, fix society and you wouldnt get fanaticisam.

BULLSHIT. Every suicide bomber in the Middle East isn't a Columbine Kid. They're deeply devout Muslims. You're talking crap, bro.

OK, terrorests dont kill people unless motivated by religion is a bullshit argument.

If you took away religion, would the Sunnis and the Shi'ites immediately find another segregating factor? Hmm. No.

Tribal warfare? then it becomes a free for all or some other grouping ethnic idea.

Like I've said before, religion continues the fight.

Not realy.

How can you say that? Have you ever even fucking been to this country? Jesus Christ.

I know that your countrie produces terrorests and mine doesnt and we have more muslims than you do as well.

You don't know shit. I blame violence for the increase in violence when shit...blah,blah,blah...

Obviously you cant put 2 and 2 together because your so simplistic in thought.

Who exactly are the Middle East being brought up to be intolerant to? Jews, perhaps?

Iranians are brought up to hate america, whats my point? I have no point because my point is void just like yours.

We're not some racist country you muppet.

I never said you were a racist countrie, I said your countrie diddnt accept muslims as you would other groups.

I'm not being simplistic, you are. In a global sense, religion and friction go hand-in-hand.

Your the one thats blaming religion, Im blaming the actual causes.

Why would anyone be anti-evolution without religion? Or why would they stone the adultress, and feel it was justified? BECAUSE GOD TOLD THEM IT WAS.

Society, again why must I repeat myself?

I'm saying, religion doesn't promote diversity in the slightest. Good argument-following bro.

Whatever...

Missing the point.....

No, you are!

So we could cause strife if we wanted - you keep saying 'when there's more of you' - there's about as many irreligious people as there are Muslims.

So? I still dont get your point.

Brilliant refuting.

Very crappy this time, sir.

Haha, your countrie produces terrorests.

At 12/19/07 06:28 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

At 12/19/07 05:44 PM, Earfetish wrote: So we could cause strife if we wanted - you keep saying 'when there's more of you' - there's about as many irreligious people as there are Muslims.

So? I still dont get your point.

Are you an idiot?

You keep saying that the only reason Atheism is dangerous is because there isn't enough of us, yet there's roughly the same number as the most dangerous religion in the world.

At 12/19/07 06:45 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
You keep saying that the only reason Atheism is dangerous is because there isn't enough of us,

Sorry, isn't.

At 12/19/07 05:50 PM, Earfetish wrote: Btw Zoraxe7, very tolerant of gays your society is.

O wait.

And who is it who are intolerant of gays? Could it be.... Christians?

The Muslims reject gay people.

Which is ridiculous, because being gay is genetics and in every society.

At 12/19/07 06:56 PM, 0peth wrote:
Which is ridiculous, because being gay is genetics and in every society.

Yeah, we know, but don't bother mate.

At 12/19/07 06:56 PM, 0peth wrote:

because being gay is genetics

^ poorly phrased

Anyway, I strongly believe the Chinese have had the most accurate medical and world philosophies out of any other civilization. In Chinese medicine, the youngest child is usually gay, because it receives the least amount of male chi.

GUYS LOOK AT THIS MOTHERFUCKING POST!!!

I just found this. It's so awesome. The music is perfect for it.

In the last 3 months, 45 women have been killed in Basra alone for being un-Islamic.

At 12/19/07 07:46 PM, Earfetish wrote: In the last 3 months, 45 women have been killed in Basra alone for being un-Islamic.

that's flagrant social control btw

At 12/19/07 07:46 PM, Earfetish wrote: In the last 3 months, 45 women have been killed in Basra alone for being un-Islamic.

You think that's something :/

At 12/19/07 07:51 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 12/19/07 07:46 PM, Earfetish wrote: In the last 3 months, 45 women have been killed in Basra alone for being un-Islamic.

You think that's something :/

That's terrible.

I did think, when you called Islam 'the most dangerous religion', do religious people, like Mick and Zoraxe, who deny religion does any harm - well, what do they think of Islam? Do they think it's a dangerous religion, or do they blame it all on some unnamed people and think the Middle East would be just as dangerous if it was secular?

Also, I would've replied to Mick but I didn't see the argument, and I would have replied to Zoraxe but I didn't see any decent argument there either (and a lot of point-ignoring).

At 12/19/07 07:57 PM, Earfetish wrote: I did think, when you called Islam 'the most dangerous religion', do religious people, like Mick and Zoraxe, who deny religion does any harm - well, what do they think of Islam? Do they think it's a dangerous religion, or do they blame it all on some unnamed people and think the Middle East would be just as dangerous if it was secular?

Furthermore, don't just address 'tribalism' but also Sharia Law, enforced Burqa-wearing, stoning adultresses, the death penalty for apostates, and so on. Y'know, imagine that I was picking you apart on every point; don't say anything lazy.

At 12/19/07 07:57 PM, Earfetish wrote: I did think, when you called Islam 'the most dangerous religion', do religious people, like Mick and Zoraxe, who deny religion does any harm - well, what do they think of Islam? Do they think it's a dangerous religion, or do they blame it all on some unnamed people and think the Middle East would be just as dangerous if it was secular?

I like Islam, I blame the problems in the middle east on the actual causes. If the middle east was no longer so poor or had so many corrupt governments the religion would reflect that. As for the secular thing there would be no point in being secular if the countries were still poor and corrupt.

Also, I would've replied to Mick but I didn't see the argument, and I would have replied to Zoraxe but I didn't see any decent argument there either (and a lot of point-ignoring).

Is there a better way to say 'fuck you' during a debate than to say that?

Let me simpify it for you, Its Englands fault for religious conflict in england because England diddnt accept Muslims like the United States did. Its the government and society that create religious problems, and that aplies to Europe and the Middle east.

When did America become more tolerant than Europe? Id say sometime after WW2 when the number of atheists in england jumped to 20%, a couple of generations who heard about attacks in the middle east and made muslims feel like they were not apart of the countrie they were born in.
When Europe forsakened their tolerance ideals (perhaps not on purpose) is when English citizens bombed England, as you said before "The 7/7 bombings in Britain were done by British-born Muslims" how ells do you explain that?

You should blame Briton for the 7/7 bombings, not religion.