Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 7/22/07 04:52 PM, Centurion-Ryan wrote:

At 7/22/07 04:37 PM, Mourits wrote: atheists are smarter than you mere theists

You know, since mentally ill people can have no perception of religion, or so I think, there are definately exceptions, they can be identified as atheists.

Uhm... I'm mentally ill, and while I'm atheistic/agnostic I have no problem understanding the concept. My girlfriend is in some way religious, or at least somewhat theistic, (although I don't think it's the christian god, she rarely speaks of it) and she's mentally ill too.
Why couldn't mentally ill people be religious?

I'm an explicit atheist.
But I'm not bitching around to religious people; I respect the concept of religion, I understand it. And yes, I even envy it. You get my respect when you can devote yourself to something of which there is no proof. What I DO hate is religious extremism and/or (ab)using religion for evil things such as War or Terrorism. I do think that Church and State should be COMPLETELY separated. Presidential candidates who win elections because of their religious beliefs; that's not correct. That's called populism.

Opium of da peoplez :)

At 6/10/07 10:20 PM, slackerzac wrote: Well when it come down to it most atheists are idiots who dont like god for some stubid reason.

This was posted by an idiot for a stupid reason.

Engage in intelligent conversation. This doesn't help either side of the religious field.

Because people who think and question want to encourage others to think and question. Religion is in the majority and someone needs to question the opinion held as the truth by the majority. Different examples of dissent against public opinion have happened throughout history.

At 5/15/08 01:29 PM, waw460 wrote:

At 6/10/07 10:20 PM, slackerzac wrote: Well when it come down to it most atheists are idiots who dont like god for some stubid reason.

Statistically atheists score higher on all types of proficiency test and have overwhelmingly proved in various different studies to be more intelligent. To say otherwise is to speak out of pure ignorance.

Plx eveyone, imagine a world without religion. This world would be so much greater.
I'm a pantheist (pantheist is an atheist who may call the nature god) My god would be nature but still I'm unsure of callin nature god because many people say that god is a higher power so to say
and I don't belive in a higher power because if god would exist he would not be a higher power
but as natural as the universe, as me and you, as nature itself.
If you take a look at the humans today and back when Jesus was born. Now an avarage human has IQ between 90-110, and back then even less then 80, so the results are that people back then were not smart as today. Back then when Jesus was born he was the smartes person on earth and talked in metaforz what people understood totally wrong. They say Jesus preformed miracles, well walked on morning frost or ice (it was alot colder back then) and a human today can do that too. He said to those who where out fishing to throw the net on the other side, plx if you throw the net towards the shore you wont get fishes or they just didn't have the intelligance to throw the net on the other sida which Jesus told them to do, and they cought fish. I think every religion is just stupid that has something with god to do. I'm not trying to make people go against their religion (well most of the time, when I see this kind of conversation) because I'm not so stupid to care about their stupidity, their blindness.
I'm not making you (eveyone who belives in god) convert into antireligionists but I let you to think and choose otherwise I would be just as stupid as any other idiotic human. I think chrisianity is just brainwash these days and missunderstood from the beginning. Religion has made the society a big pile of crap, period. I just came to see that more and more younger people are thinking kinda like me, not so brainwashed as the 98% of the humanity, brainwashed that is (most of them say, no we are not brainwashed, yes they are and they didn't notice). A brainwashed human is: fanatic, follows the rule of trying to fit in a society (style, clothing and so on... my theory is that in a society there should be maximum 200 persons. 200 comes along better with eachother then over a thousand, and if you wanna dress like you want then do so, if eveybody does that everybody is saticefied and if they are saticefied they are happy and if they are happy then there is no reason for war) a few more elements of a brainwashed human is the following: the constand following of the rules of morality and ethics..and on and on. Atheists should understand this, if they don't they will in time. People with religion is to upset by this, what is blindning them, making them protect their religion, they become more fanatic, and now they would kill for their religion what would make them hypocrits, and hypocrits made this damned world this damned. So think strongly and wisely about you and your surrounding. Think twice or more to slightly know the consequences and then act and please don't be a stupid human wich overpopulates the planet with small chilren becoming the worst spiece in the universe, only thinking about themselves. This is all I have to say, and you decide, I'm not making you.
javascript:MakeSmileySelection(12);
Goofy

/Shadowmind/

I myself am an athiest but i respect peaceful religions just as much, but sometimes i find religion trajic how so many people have died in mass-geonocide lik hitler and the jews that could possibly have been averted without religion, there may be a god but if thier is he/she/entity must be the cause for most wars, it's the people who manipulate the beliefs into hate, but if religion weren't there it could cause peace to replace war and for me life is worth more than the belief life holds, p.sorry for spelling and grammer.

At 5/15/08 03:24 PM, A-s-h-t-o-n wrote: I myself am an athiest but i respect peaceful religions just as much, but sometimes i find religion trajic how so many people have died in mass-geonocide lik hitler and the jews that could possibly have been averted without religion

Um... you might have missed this section in your history book but um... Hitler wasn't a Christian. He believed that belief in God was a weakness and that it degraded society. So, that makes him an atheist. Not that all atheists are as evil or completely psycho as Hitler, but, yeah. That genocide didn't come from any Christian source.

So it's quite the opposite, that genocide could have been averted WITH religion.

At 5/15/08 03:38 PM, Dre-Man wrote: So it's quite the opposite, that genocide could have been averted WITH religion.

Hitler's religious beliefs are a massive bone of contention. He certainly used religion to control the masses, and disliked atheists (who he recognised as hard to control). His personal thoughts on the matter don't lead me to believe he was an atheist - I still reckon he was some form of Christian. And his widely publicised thoughts and speeches are full of Christian rhetoric and anti-atheism.

So maybe you missed out a few history chapters.

At 5/15/08 03:46 PM, Earfetish wrote: So maybe you missed out a few history chapters.

"National Socialism and religion cannot exist together....
"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity....
"Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things." - Night of 11th-12th July, 1941

"Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure." - 10th October, 1941, midday

"The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity....
"Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse....
"...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little....
"Christianity is the liar....
"We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State." - 14th October, 1941, midday

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/misched j/ca_hitler.html

----------------

I'm not going on because if you had a point to rebut this already, then me posting all of his anti-Christianity quotes wouldn't make a bit of difference.

It's not far-fetched to to assume Hitler used Christianity to help get himself elected and then abandoned it once he had that whole, fascist dictatorship thing going on.

At 5/15/08 03:38 PM, Dre-Man wrote:

At 5/15/08 03:24 PM, A-s-h-t-o-n wrote: I myself am an athiest but i respect peaceful religions just as much, but sometimes i find religion trajic how so many people have died in mass-geonocide lik hitler and the jews that could possibly have been averted without religion

Um... you might have missed this section in your history book but um... Hitler wasn't a Christian. He believed that belief in God was a weakness and that it degraded society. So, that makes him an atheist. Not that all atheists are as evil or completely psycho as Hitler, but, yeah. That genocide didn't come from any Christian source.

So it's quite the opposite, that genocide could have been averted WITH religion.

I'd like to know where you got that info from. I've seen a lot of quotes by Hitler picturing real Christianity as a religion of fighting the Jews, and quotes saying that todays Christianity is worthless. But, I've never seen ANY quotes making him an atheist, ever. Well, unless you assume that Christianity and atheism is the only two positions that exists.

And tell me, how exactly would religion stop the genocide? Like it stopped 9/11?

At 5/15/08 04:26 PM, Grammer wrote: I'm not going on because if you had a point to rebut this already, then me posting all of his anti-Christianity quotes wouldn't make a bit of difference.

It's not far-fetched to to assume Hitler used Christianity to help get himself elected and then abandoned it once he had that whole, fascist dictatorship thing going on.

I would agree with that, despite that it disagrees with something I said half an hour ago. I think saying 'atheism is to blame for the holocaust' or 'religion would have prevented the holocaust' is incorrect.

As far as religion + genocide goes, I have always thought it worth pointing out that Hitler killed a religious group, and maybe if there was no religion he would've at least have had to chose another bunch of people.

At 5/15/08 05:04 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 5/15/08 04:26 PM, Grammer wrote: It's not far-fetched to to assume Hitler used Christianity to help get himself elected and then abandoned it once he had that whole, fascist dictatorship thing going on.

I would agree with that, despite that it disagrees with something I said half an hour ago. I think saying 'atheism is to blame for the holocaust' or 'religion would have prevented the holocaust' is incorrect.

Well, you know, you can have it both ways. I mean, let's just say, for discussion's sake, he was an atheist. He didn't kill in the name of atheism. He didn't kill persons just for believing in a God like Stalin did, and as far as I know he didn't specifically target Christians in his systematic destruction of persons he viewed inferior. Maybe I'm contradicting an argument made in an earlier thread, but I don't think it's fair to say atheism was behind the Holocaust, just because Hitler was an atheist.

I do believe it would be fair though, in all due respect, to say atheism at least had an influence in Stalin's murderous tyranny. I do believe that Stalin, and I could be wrong, exterminated persons on the sole basis of their religious convictions. I mean sure, blame the fact he was bat shit insane, not that he was an atheist, but ya know, he did seek to destroy religion, didn't he?

At 5/15/08 06:27 PM, Grammer wrote:

At 5/15/08 05:04 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 5/15/08 04:26 PM, Grammer wrote: It's not far-fetched to to assume Hitler used Christianity to help get himself elected and then abandoned it once he had that whole, fascist dictatorship thing going on.

I would agree with that, despite that it disagrees with something I said half an hour ago. I think saying 'atheism is to blame for the holocaust' or 'religion would have prevented the holocaust' is incorrect.

Well, you know, you can have it both ways. I mean, let's just say, for discussion's sake, he was an atheist. He didn't kill in the name of atheism. He didn't kill persons just for believing in a God like Stalin did, and as far as I know he didn't specifically target Christians in his systematic destruction of persons he viewed inferior. Maybe I'm contradicting an argument made in an earlier thread, but I don't think it's fair to say atheism was behind the Holocaust, just because Hitler was an atheist.

True, he was a vegetarian, but nobody seems to blame that. :(

I do believe it would be fair though, in all due respect, to say atheism at least had an influence in Stalin's murderous tyranny. I do believe that Stalin, and I could be wrong, exterminated persons on the sole basis of their religious convictions. I mean sure, blame the fact he was bat shit insane, not that he was an atheist, but ya know, he did seek to destroy religion, didn't he?

Well, as I understood it, he killed anybody in a group. Obviously, if you want total rule, you can't allow people to gather in any kinds of numbers and under a banner that might group against you.

Secondly, the world isn't simple. Atheism didn't make Starlin do those things, a large number of things did. You can't think a simple X therefore Y in situations like that. If so, I could simply kill people for eating meat and we could blame vegetarians because "Drakim definitely killed because he believed meat was wrong to eat", completely ignoring that vegetarianism isn't enough to make somebody kill, unless you have other factors such as already being unstable. Same goes with religion. Religion alone cannot make you murder, as seen in that we have billions of believers who do not murder despite their holy scripture instructing it here and there.

At 5/15/08 06:36 PM, Drakim wrote: completely ignoring that vegetarianism isn't enough to make somebody kill, unless you have other factors such as already being unstable. Same goes with religion. Religion alone cannot make you murder, as seen in that we have billions of believers who do not murder despite their holy scripture instructing it here and there.

Ya I agree with that. I guess the proposition is, does atheism lead to a propensity towards killing people? Or, is an atheist leader more likely to be genocidal and intolerant?

I don't want an atheist state anyway, just a secular state. And I can't weld my version of atheist morality on to Stalin's. Like, if I complain that religion is like mind control, then I can't really propose having a government that longs to control its populace's mind. And if I think human life is the most awesome thing about, then I don't want a country that is genocidal. They don't go together.

I think state power is bad, and I think religion is an extension of it. And pluralism is better than the state dogmatically enforcing one belief, even if that happens to be atheism, and suppressing dissent.

There have been far better responses to 'the Stalin problem' written but that's just my feelings on the matter.

At 5/15/08 02:51 PM, real-Shadowmind wrote: Plx eveyone, imagine a world without religion. This world would be so much greater.

A world with religion is why Humans survived for so long. The only reason Aetheists don't kill people now is because they know the greatness in life, and study alot of things. But back then, without technology, God was the only thing that kept order in soiciety, The laws of the world are mostly based on the 10 Commandments. The hebrew religion was ahead of its time by centuries, and had aspects that couldn't just be made up by soem random thinker. Most intellectual studies had inspiration from God, and then gave inspiration to future scientists.

Had it not been for God, we'd probably be extinct.

Also everything Jesus preached was preformed by earlier Hebrew prophets, therefore His actions weren't "misunderstood" to be holy, they WERE holy, though that can be debated, most of the things in the old tesament can't which is why its so widely believed. King solomon was real, Moses was real, Mount sinai was real, Ur was real, Abram was real, The flood was real, The hebrews being enslaved was real, Ramases was real, and alot more accounts are historically accurate. Everything that can't be proved today though is dubbed mythoogical though all the mundane stuff is. Its a one sided view, you need to think outside the box.

For example, Science doesn't disprove God in anyway. If Go0d had little pixies that made people float, If scientists discovered them, they'd call them Chatarzones, and say it doesn't prove that there is God. Basically what I'm saying is that Science only proves how god's creations work, not if there is a God or not.

At 6/10/07 10:14 PM, Truth wrote: Why do they try to prove religion wrong?

Religious people, have to teach others about their beliefs.
This isn't true for atheists.

I know some atheists don't even bother unless someone is pressing beliefs toward them, but some atheists try so hard to prove it wrong anyways.
Why?

Not all do. I have a few atheist friends (ones outside my computer, lol) and they are all pretty nice, and they never try to disprove any religion, they just believe there is no God.

However, there a few assholes out there who jump the gun and disprove ANYTHING they think is wrong. With those people, if he/she though gravity didn't exist, you could have a whole 3 hour argument on how it does exist, but they still won't give up.

Besides, its fun to get into a good, controlled debate, which isn't fueled by anger.

Like I said, most are nice, and just wanna have a good discussion. People like JackPhantasm, Sajberhippien, and Drakim are guys I've talked with who are all really damn good at debating, and they are pretty good people.

At 5/15/08 06:27 PM, Grammer wrote:

I do believe it would be fair though, in all due respect, to say atheism at least had an influence in Stalin's murderous tyranny. I do believe that Stalin, and I could be wrong, exterminated persons on the sole basis of their religious convictions. I mean sure, blame the fact he was bat shit insane, not that he was an atheist, but ya know, he did seek to destroy religion, didn't he?

To say that atheism had a hand in Stalin's dealings is like saying knowledge of nuclear reactions was to blame for hiroshima.

Atheism does not say anything about how you should act. Nothing. Hence, it cannot be blamed as a set of beliefs for inspiring behavior in people since it doesn't say anything about what you should do in the first place.

But you can easily use the argument that religion is to blame since religion specifically tries to tell people how to act, hence someone doing something that is talked about in a religious document can indeed blame the text, especially if he thought it was written by God.

An atheist could never use "divine influence" as a reason to commit any act, he'd have to reason it out and whatever conclusion he comes down to have nothing to do with atheism but more to do with the information he was fed to reach any conclusion that he reached and acted on.
So in that way, every religious person who ever did anything bad that could be infered from a religious text puts the blame on religion, but no matter how many atheists do horrible things, even claiming those things are "in the name of atheism", you will never be able to blame atheism itself for it.

I know it sounds really unfair right off the bat, but it's not. Atheism has nothing to do with morals, laws, or whatever else. Whatever conclusions one atheist reaches ( like, killing religious people is ok ) could be directly opposed to a conclusion another atheist would reach since neither of them used "atheism" to figure out their conclusion, even if they are both under the idea that they did.

At 6/10/07 10:20 PM, slackerzac wrote: Well when it come down to it most atheists are idiots who dont like god for some stupid reason.

to say most atheists are idiots, is not true. a lot of atheists are realists[i assume so, since i am one] while, there is a lot of idiots out there, who call themselves atheists. i'm an atheist due to the fact i'm more of a realist and i live by, "see it, believe it". though i am open-minded and won't cast things out like that.

also, if ya'll are casting out atheism just like that, then the same could be said for every religion, anyone, especially yours. rome killed christians. hitler killed jews[nothing to even do with it]. hell, europe sent crusades to islam just to take back what they felt was the holy land and over what they felt that the muslims, did not deserve. don't cast atheists out as idiots, not all of us are.

And what is "reality"?

At 5/15/08 09:43 PM, MattBlackguard wrote: And what is "reality"?

what other people are perceiving too in an identical manner

y'know testable stuff

At 5/15/08 10:09 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 5/15/08 09:43 PM, MattBlackguard wrote: And what is "reality"?

what other people are perceiving too in an identical manner

So truth is all a matter of perspective?

y'know testable stuff

And what if something can't be tested?

Does that automatically mean it doesn't exist?

At 5/15/08 10:27 PM, MattBlackguard wrote:

At 5/15/08 10:09 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 5/15/08 09:43 PM, MattBlackguard wrote: And what is "reality"?

what other people are perceiving too in an identical manner

So truth is all a matter of perspective?

No. Our combined perceptions reach reality. There are loads of humans walking around and what they're all experiencing together is this thing called reality.

y'know testable stuff

And what if something can't be tested?

Does that automatically mean it doesn't exist?

What can't be tested, that exists? The only answers I can possibly imagine you giving are emotional ones, like love or sorrow or some shit, but I would reckon we could understand the neurology behind this stuff after a million years. And it would therefore be testable.

At 5/15/08 10:30 PM, Earfetish wrote: What can't be tested, that exists?

I'm sure there are some things but I'm too tired and lazy to go into detail.

The only answers I can possibly imagine you giving are emotional ones, like love or sorrow or some shit, but I would reckon we could understand the neurology behind this stuff after a million years. And it would therefore be testable.

It's possible.

But I do agree with you: emotions such as love and sorrow are shit.

At 5/15/08 08:55 PM, poxpower wrote: To say that atheism had a hand in Stalin's dealings is like saying knowledge of nuclear reactions was to blame for hiroshima.

I know that was just a metaphor, but what you just said is true. Knowledge of nuclear reactions was to blame for Hiroshima.

Atheism does not say anything about how you should act.

It doesn't have to. If you kill someone because they believe in a God, and you hate that, then you just killed in the name of atheism. This is quite different from Christianity, which actually says don't kill in my name.

Of course, I'm not blaming atheism for Stalin, just like I wouldn't blame Islam for the 9/11, but I am saying that his atheism was a factor in why he targeted religious persons. Sure, you could argue he would kill people either way, fair point, but he specifically targeted people for their religion. If Stalin was not an atheist he wouldn't have sought the extermination of religion.

Nothing. Hence, it cannot be blamed as a set of beliefs for inspiring behavior in people since it doesn't say anything about what you should do in the first place.

Does that mean you will never blame Christianity for any wars? Christ did say don't kill, after all~

But you can easily use the argument that religion is to blame since religion specifically tries to tell people how to act,

Okay, show me the passage of The Bible that says go kill people you don't like.

So in that way, every religious person who ever did anything bad that could be infered from a religious text puts the blame on religion,

Well they would be wrong to do so.

I know it sounds really unfair right off the bat, but it's not.

I honestly don't care because I'm not arguing that atheism tells you to do bad things.

Okay, let me put it this way. This is going to sound ridiculous, but fuck it, I might as well. You're a smart guy, so indulge me with this

Lemmy is a ploppleist. Ploppleism is a set of beliefs that says money is really really good, and you should always strive to acquire more. Lemmy is so dedicated to his faith, he starts hating people who don't have money. Acting on his anger, he steals a cup of coins from a beggar woman because hey, if she's not going to strive to earn money, she doesn't deserve the coins she begged for. Ploppleism doesn't say to steal, in fact it says the opposite, but Lemmy doesn't want to get into details when it comes to doing his divine work.

Greg isn't a ploppleist, he just really, really, hates poor people. While the beggar woman is chasing after Lemmy, Greg steals her cloak while she isn't looking. Greg doesn't have a faith that motivates him to steal her cloak, but he did, because fuck it, he hates poor people.

In the end, everyone died of AIDs

Oh, and:

Ploppleism = Christianity
Stealing = Killing

I'm not going to proofread my post because it's getting late and I'm getting lazy. I'm sure you'll survive.

Well, let me ask you this, Why to christians try so hard to prove and force their beliefs on others? Not all, just the asshole ones.

Athiesm is a belief, its the belief that there is nothing else after death. That we are just living pieces of meat.

At 5/15/08 10:56 PM, Grammer wrote:

I know that was just a metaphor, but what you just said is true. Knowledge of nuclear reactions was to blame for Hiroshima.

Well if that's the kind of definition you want for "blame"

It doesn't have to. If you kill someone because they believe in a God, and you hate that, then you just killed in the name of atheism.

Maybe you think you did. But you didn't. Atheism is nothing. There's no "atheist authorities" or "atheist books" or "important atheist documents" or whatever. Every action that any atheist does can only be accounted for by himself. The same would be said for pantheism, deism, agnostism and even a theism if you don't get into it too much.
But the minute that you have a book where "god's laws" are written, then you can blame that book for giving people the wrong ideas and you can blame the belief system for bringing up people to believe they should do what the book says.

Don't know if that makes more sense now.

Does that mean you will never blame Christianity for any wars?

You can certainly blame the bible since there are passages in it that instruct you to kill others.

Okay, show me the passage of The Bible that says go kill people you don't like.

law this site is so biased: http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm
But I imagine you have a bible, so you can go check if it's there. And lots of it is from the old testament, but I never once saw any bible quotes in the new testament that say "don't use the old testament anymore".
Maybe they do exist, if so I'd like to see them :o

Ploppleism = Christianity

I don't see the point you were making here. Are you like agreeing with me?

At 5/15/08 11:16 PM, poxpower wrote: law this site is so biased: http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm
But I imagine you have a bible, so you can go check if it's there. And lots of it is from the old testament, but I never once saw any bible quotes in the new testament that say "don't use the old testament anymore".

Here's Jesus saying 'use the OT':
Matthew 5:17-20
17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Maybe there are different interpretations, I dunno. Seems basic to me.

Like, Christians might ignore this bit, but that doesn't speak much for Christianity.

If most Christians admitted how weakly they believe in the Bible, they'd probably sound like they were Christians for no particular reason. Like "let's all just get along and do what we like and go to Heaven because Jesus died for our sins." Which doesn't speak much for it being 'the only source of morality'. It just seems like it's fulfilling the tiniest amount of functions organised religion could possibly fulfil, and it's these people who get pissed off when you cuss religion for promoting bad morality.

At 5/15/08 10:56 PM, Grammer wrote:

At 5/15/08 08:55 PM, poxpower wrote: To say that atheism had a hand in Stalin's dealings is like saying knowledge of nuclear reactions was to blame for hiroshima.

I know that was just a metaphor, but what you just said is true. Knowledge of nuclear reactions was to blame for Hiroshima.

Atheism does not say anything about how you should act.

It doesn't have to. If you kill someone because they believe in a God, and you hate that, then you just killed in the name of atheism. This is quite different from Christianity, which actually says don't kill in my name.

Of course, I'm not blaming atheism for Stalin, just like I wouldn't blame Islam for the 9/11, but I am saying that his atheism was a factor in why he targeted religious persons. Sure, you could argue he would kill people either way, fair point, but he specifically targeted people for their religion. If Stalin was not an atheist he wouldn't have sought the extermination of religion.

Nothing. Hence, it cannot be blamed as a set of beliefs for inspiring behavior in people since it doesn't say anything about what you should do in the first place.

Does that mean you will never blame Christianity for any wars? Christ did say don't kill, after all~

But you can easily use the argument that religion is to blame since religion specifically tries to tell people how to act,

Okay, show me the passage of The Bible that says go kill people you don't like.

So in that way, every religious person who ever did anything bad that could be infered from a religious text puts the blame on religion,

Well they would be wrong to do so.

I know it sounds really unfair right off the bat, but it's not.

I honestly don't care because I'm not arguing that atheism tells you to do bad things.

Okay, let me put it this way. This is going to sound ridiculous, but fuck it, I might as well. You're a smart guy, so indulge me with this

Lemmy is a ploppleist. Ploppleism is a set of beliefs that says money is really really good, and you should always strive to acquire more. Lemmy is so dedicated to his faith, he starts hating people who don't have money. Acting on his anger, he steals a cup of coins from a beggar woman because hey, if she's not going to strive to earn money, she doesn't deserve the coins she begged for. Ploppleism doesn't say to steal, in fact it says the opposite, but Lemmy doesn't want to get into details when it comes to doing his divine work.

Greg isn't a ploppleist, he just really, really, hates poor people. While the beggar woman is chasing after Lemmy, Greg steals her cloak while she isn't looking. Greg doesn't have a faith that motivates him to steal her cloak, but he did, because fuck it, he hates poor people.

In the end, everyone died of AIDs

Oh, and:

Ploppleism = Christianity
Stealing = Killing

I'm not going to proofread my post because it's getting late and I'm getting lazy. I'm sure you'll survive.

what are you going to do? assume that just cause a certain atheist kills a christian, he did it over not believing in god? and thus, it must be satan himself! sure! christians put everything on satan, anything bad, but that isn't my point. christianity is a good religion, but that doesn't mean atheists are bad, in any way, no. they just have no beliefs, meaning that if they kill anyone, they are either psychologically insane or the person they have killed has put them through shit that they can't handle.

besides, it isn't like that atheists have some sort of personal bible.

At 5/15/08 11:16 PM, poxpower wrote: Well if that's the kind of definition you want for "blame"

Would Hiroshima have happened if we didn't have knowledge of nuclear reactions?

It doesn't have to. If you kill someone because they believe in a God, and you hate that, then you just killed in the name of atheism.

Maybe you think you did. But you didn't.

WTFYESITDOES ASDRCGVTYHIKO

If I'm an atheist, and I kill you because you're not atheist, well what the fuck do you think just happened?

Atheism is nothing. There's no "atheist authorities" or "atheist books" or "important atheist documents" or whatever.

It's funny, because The Bible doesn't say kill innocent people either, but that doesn't stop you from thinking it does.

Every action that any atheist does can only be accounted for by himself.

Every action that any Christian does can only be accounted for by himself

I literally copypasta'd your sentence and replaced "atheist" with "Christian". And guess what? The sentence still makes sense.

But the minute that you have a book where "god's laws" are written,

God's laws, such as "Don't kill", amirite?

then you can blame that book for giving people the wrong ideas and you can blame the belief system for bringing up people to believe they should do what the book says.

You can't blame the religion because some retard is going to look at it in the completely wrong way.

Jesus: "Don't kill people"

Faggot: "Okay Jesus. *kills atheists*"

No. It doesn't work that way. Christianity says do not kill innocents.

Does that mean you will never blame Christianity for any wars?

You can certainly blame the bible since there are passages in it that instruct you to kill others.

Such as the ones you've never read.

Okay, show me the passage of The Bible that says go kill people you don't like.

law this site is so biased: http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm

Hehe, that site is so cute, it cites The Old Testament

But I imagine you have a bible, so you can go check if it's there.

I read The Bible cover-to-cover, kthx

And lots of it is from the old testament, but I never once saw any bible quotes in the new testament that say "don't use the old testament anymore".

Jesus taught his disciples to respect the Ten Commandments, that never changed.

Ploppleism = Christianity

I don't see the point you were making here. Are you like agreeing with me?

Do you blame Ploppleism? All it did was say earn money. Is it ploppleism's fault that Lemmy disobeyed his religion's teachings and stole? Ploppleism never said steal, it said the opposite. Greg isn't a ploppleist, but he still holds the basic principle of hating poor people. Perhaps if Greg had been a ploppleist (a good one), he would have followed his religion's teachings and not stole. Not really the best metaphor, I didn't factor in a few things, but you get the basic gist.