Like, for examples of religious causing segregation that wouldn't exist without religion, the current civil war in Iraq is fought on Sunni / Shi'ite lines. I totally see why the religious deny the obvious fact that religion causes conflict, and then blame me for imagining it does so I can masturbate over a couple of burnt Bible pages, but it's sooooo obvious that it happens - many many world conflicts are about religion.

and if atheist confronted them about telling them that religion is wrong they'll deny it and refuse to resign their religion. Then the rest of the assholes in their religion will get pissed at us about it and that'll start a whole other religious conflict.

that's the beauty of atheism we never get into any wars because we usually don't go around and randomly tell people their religion is wrong, because simply we don't care... and sometime people feel bad for atheists because "our souls are damned for eternity" but to us it doesn't mean anyhting

Just want to say, I think some of the basic teachings of religion are fine. Don't steal, be good, stone the gays, all that. But it's fucking ridiculous that people still believe the other shit. It's honestly pathetic in my opinion, I don't care if I sound like an asshole. A giant invisible man in the sky snapped and the Earth was created? It's the fucking 21st century, people have become more intelligent. The only reason humans believed all that magic shit was because we didn't have the technology and explanations we do now. People couldn't explain the Sun, so they said it was a god. Couldn't explain lightning, a god did it. Kids can't explain how presents magically appear under the tree, Santa does it. That's right, kids. Some guy that died over a thousand years ago uses deer to fly around Christmas night and gives you presents. We all grow out of that shit, we know it's retarded and fake. There's as much evidence that the Bible is true as the Lord of the Rings or any other fictional book, except the Bible was written thousands of years ago. The fact that we even need to debate this makes me sick.

That said, I don't give a shit if you want to believe in magic, just make sure it doesn't affect other people. Keep it to yourself. I won't preach to you if you don't preach to me.

Also, I don't speak for all Atheists here. Not all of us are assholes like me.

At 9/4/07 04:04 PM, That-Is-Bull wrote: Also, I don't speak for all Atheists here. Not all of us are assholes like me.

I'm an asshole like you. It is very dumb. Harry Potter is about as realistic as the Bible.

At 9/4/07 11:31 AM, Earfetish wrote: The Irish kids aren't being racist, they're segregated due to religion - I could go there as an English Catholic and I'd be on the side of the Catholics. There are loads of Protestants and Catholics who get randomly killed there, and they don't even check their political standings before they do.

No, see in most caes the religion is the case for the political standing. There's a reason the Catholic Church has supported a unified Ireland and thats why Orange Order Members assume, much like Sinn Fien against Anglicans.

At 9/4/07 11:24 AM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

There are quite a few deaths attributed to religion in Europe, mainly pissed off Muslims who hate free speech. And I betcha America wouldn't have gone to Iraq if Iraq was a Christian nation.

How does Iraq being a fucking hellhole of two religous sect make a case for us invading it.

I mean, honestly I've hear the oil stories, I've hear the finish a Bush legacy stories, but this is the first time I've ever heard of, well we just hate Muslims, duh.

At 9/4/07 03:56 PM, SkuggaEld wrote: that's the beauty of atheism we never get into any wars because we usually don't go around and randomly tell people their religion is wrong, because simply we don't care... and sometime people feel bad for atheists because "our souls are damned for eternity" but to us it doesn't mean anyhting

Didn't Stalin purge millions of people out of his country for many reasons, including being active members of an organised religion and then wage a symbolic war against the Orthodox church.

Or what has happened to religous people in China, or hell even to a lesser amount Cuba.

At 9/4/07 05:49 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: No, see in most caes the religion is the case for the political standing. There's a reason the Catholic Church has supported a unified Ireland and thats why Orange Order Members assume, much like Sinn Fien against Anglicans.

I don't think that answers the point, nor do I think that's the reason for the conflict (it's because of ancient British imperialism). If there was no religion then the segregation would be far less. They have walls between Catholic and Protestant areas, because religion is the segregating factor, and they have violence between Catholic and Protestant areas, because of religion. The word 'sectarian' comes from 'sect,' and the problem is religious sects, not political sects.

How does Iraq being a fucking hellhole of two religous sect make a case for us invading it.
I mean, honestly I've hear the oil stories, I've hear the finish a Bush legacy stories, but this is the first time I've ever heard of, well we just hate Muslims, duh.

I didn't say 'we just hate Muslims', but a Christian nation would need a fucking good reason to attack another Christian nation. Because they're different and we can say their beliefs are evil, it's a wee bit easier to attack. Because religion causes segregation.

At 9/4/07 05:52 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: Didn't Stalin purge millions of people out of his country for many reasons, including being active members of an organised religion and then wage a symbolic war against the Orthodox church.

For nationalist reasons, not for atheistic reasons. The State was his religion, and he didn't want religions opposing his power. He didn't do it to establish secularism, he did it to ensure nationalism.

Or what has happened to religous people in China, or hell even to a lesser amount Cuba.

Again, that's to preserve nationalism, not to establish secularism. Communism, or a misunderstanding of Marx's theory of religion (that it is to control the proletariat, opium of the masses, unnecessary in Communism) and Nationalism is more to blame for that than Atheism. Point out a non-communist secular country that persecutes people for religious beliefs.

At 9/4/07 05:49 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: How does Iraq being a fucking hellhole of two religous sect make a case for us invading it.

And is that statement there not an admission that it is religious sectarianism that is causing conflict in Iraq, therefore religion does have the power to cause conflict?

The British Empire was justified in the minds of the empire builders (who were doing it for greed) in that they were spreading Christianity to all these savage lands, they were different and we're right, so it's ok to kill them.

At 9/4/07 06:00 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 9/4/07 05:49 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

:The word 'sectarian' comes from 'sect,' and the problem is religious sects, not political sects.

But to base it solely on the act of religion is ludacris. Really, religion has just become the symbol for al these things; nationalism, history, fucking genetics into one more easier to understand symbol.

I didn't say 'we just hate Muslims', but a Christian nation would need a fucking good reason to attack another Christian nation. Because they're different and we can say their beliefs are evil, it's a wee bit easier to attack. Because religion causes segregation.

Not really, you've forgotten that we've been attacking Christian nations since my countries inception and them some.

At 9/4/07 05:52 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

For nationalist reasons, not for atheistic reasons. The State was his religion, and he didn't want religions opposing his power. He didn't do it to establish secularism, he did it to ensure nationalism.

So wait, he used a symbol and an act of faith to mask his other intentions and powers, interesting.( Please notice the sarcasm in the post and how I've been trying to lead the entire argument to this point)

Again, that's to preserve nationalism, not to establish secularism. Communism, or a misunderstanding of Marx's theory of religion (that it is to control the proletariat, opium of the masses, unnecessary in Communism) and Nationalism is more to blame for that than Atheism. Point out a non-communist secular country that persecutes people for religious beliefs.

Well, I could point to the history of the UK intolerance to Catholics or secular Germany's drives against the Jews, but that is no longer needed. You, in essence (not the communist part, regardless) answered the basic question I've been trying to lead to.

People use religion, much like political ideologies, to mask thier own power hungry intentions and hopes. It isn't really the relgions problem, jus the people in it.

At 9/4/07 08:21 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: People use religion, much like political ideologies, to mask thier own power hungry intentions and hopes. It isn't really the relgions problem, jus the people in it.

In Communist societies, people weren't desperate to shut down the churches, people weren't shooting the religious, a corrupt elite were. In Northern Ireland, it's the common man. There's a difference between religious wars and communism man. I'm not blaming religion for all wars, again, I'm saying that it contributes to secularisation and that sects fight each other, without an elite telling them to.

You never commented on Sunnis and Shi'ites, either. Is that because one single ideological bastard is telling them to?

I stand by my point. Bringing up what Stalin did has proven nothing. The Russians weren't all doing it, it was just Stalin's men.

And if people use religion, then would there still not be fewer wars if they couldn't?

Loads of people bring up Stalin as a refutement to the point that religion causes strife, but religion still causes strife, just because some strife was non-religious means nothing. Power hungry people might still be evil bastards, but the populace aren't. It's not a refuting argument, mate. That the Troubles in Ireland are ongoing is nothing to do with people being power hungry, it's because there's a massive split based on religion. Power hungry people will have great difficulty organising the people against another group if they're all secular, but it's a piece of piss otherwise. Which is why I said, America wouldn't have invaded Iraq, were they all Christians. And all my points still stand, seriously.

Nazi Germany wasn't secular but was catholic (and they hated atheists), anyway, that's a big ol' myth.

Another few points; sharia law, the Salem Witch Trials (still happens nowadays (link) and that ruined loads of people's lives, I live in a town still recovering), stem cells, suicide bombers (only nationalism and religion have ever convinced people to give up their lives in battle, kamikaze Japanese bombers and all the current suicide bombers we see nowadays), the State of Israel wouldn't exist....

et cetera. It's not just power hungry people, that's apologism. And even if it is, the power hungry need a powerful ideology, which, 75 times out of 100, is religion, and the rest of the time it's nationalism, which is quickly dying and is also mixed up with religion. And so often it's not just the power hungry, it's the populace. Israel / Lebanon. Sunnis / Shi'ites. Protestants / Catholics. 'Stalin' does not save religion.

To finalse my point, Muslim / Jewish violence, IN MANCHESTER, thousands of miles from Israel, is DIRECTLY RELATED to how bad shit is in the Middle East. Nothing to do with people looking for power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_rel igion

I feel so very out of the circle.

At 9/4/07 09:29 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 9/4/07 08:21 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

You never commented on Sunnis and Shi'ites, either. Is that because one single ideological bastard is telling them to?

I didn't see it in time, so please forgive me.
Unfortunatley for the middle east, it never had an enligtenment. So to them, religion and government are one and the same. So, in essence it is a double edged sword.

I stand by my point. Bringing up what Stalin did has proven nothing. The Russians weren't all doing it, it was just Stalin's men.

Who happened to be Russian.

I mean, say that they were an extremely small minority, it's still pretty unprobable that this small little minority could kill over 40 million people in Stalin's 30 year (yes a rough estimate) riegn. And as we saw from the trials after WW2, following orders wasn't an excuse anymore for any actions commited.

But the point wasn't about how Athiest were evil because of what the USSR or PRC did in the past, I wasn't trying to make it that simple. It was simply an example you would respond well with, that people can use ideologies, as well as organised religions as front's for thier own power hungry plans.

At 9/4/07 11:15 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: It was simply an example you would respond well with, that people can use ideologies, as well as organised religions as front's for thier own power hungry plans.

They can, and that doesn't refute my point. Not only is religion the best ideology to use, but the segregation caused by religion causes strife even when people aren't being power hungry.

At 9/4/07 11:52 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 9/4/07 11:15 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

They can, and that doesn't refute my point. Not only is religion the best ideology to use, but the segregation caused by religion causes strife even when people aren't being power hungry.

Actually, no religion is essence isn't the best idealogy to use compared to active political ideas.

I mean, with religion you can only go so far before you beyond the bounds of that religions laws and basic teachings before people question you.

Unlike political ideas, these can evolve with the time and can, in essence never be wrong.

At 9/5/07 12:22 AM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: I mean, with religion you can only go so far before you beyond the bounds of that religions laws and basic teachings before people question you.

Not really. The Jihadis and Crusaders had no problems.

Unlike political ideas, these can evolve with the time and can, in essence never be wrong.

Like religion; you can find whatever words you like to justify atrocity, there's nothing nice about unbelievers anywhere.

Anyway, it looks like you agree really. Religion is an ideology, it can be used for war, and segregation occurs because of it. Like Muslims fighting Jews in Manchester, because of Israel. That's evidence of segregation causing conflict, right there. "Your people are in Israel, so fuck you."

Well, I'd say Earfetish won this arguement, not? lol

At 9/5/07 11:23 PM, GoldOps018 wrote: Well, I'd say Earfetish won this arguement, not? lol

Yeah, my mind kinda crapped out on this one.

O yeah, i've been thinking lately, are you all familiar with the 7 deadly sins? If you are dont you think some of them are a little ridiculous to be a "deadly" sin? One of them is having pride in yourself, i cant believe that religious people think thats a bad thing, there's nothing wrong with having pride in yourself (of course). Its like someone commits the sin of pride and they go to confession "Father i commited one of the seven deadly sins and that was having pride in myself, the other day i actually decided to dress decently instead of going around looking like a dirty slob like i always do b/c i know that if i dress good it'll be a sin." i mean come on, i cant believe that shit. Without pride there wouldnt be confidence and without confidence people wouldnt get anything done or do anything for themselves or others if you think about it.

At 9/6/07 08:18 PM, GoldOps018 wrote: O yeah, i've been thinking lately, are you all familiar with the 7 deadly sins? If you are dont you think some of them are a little ridiculous to be a "deadly" sin?

I don't get what's so bad about lust.

At 9/7/07 02:14 AM, fetusdoctor wrote:
Anyone else see what I'm trying to say?

Yeah, sort of. But at least the chain mail, well, people realize it's a joke.
Religion on the other hand.............

At 9/6/07 09:12 PM, alicetheDroog wrote: I don't get what's so bad about lust.

Yeah me either, we all have wants, its apart of consumor life, everybodies going to want something. Its like a fucking religious guy walks into a bar and sees a really hot chick that he wants, but just before he walks up to her to flirt he thinks to himself, "Oh wait, cant do it, deadly sin." lol, so i guess religious people sin when they marry or have a relationship with one another b/c if it wernt for lust they wouldnt marry or have a relationship in the first place.

Oh yeah and about the chainmails that have been getting through the portal i think its bullshit, i've blamed everyone of them but apparently most people are voting 2-5 on them. I cant believe that shit, apparently the NG Polive Headquarters and the Elite Guard Barracks arnt doing a good job of keeping them out, but hopefully now they're more aware of the situation.

At 9/5/07 08:20 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 9/5/07 12:22 AM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

Not really. The Jihadis and Crusaders had no problems.

Actually, the Jihadi's have various groups calling on them being traitors to the religion and so forth. While it was more difficult in Medieval times, there were groups of monks that felt that some of the stuff the Crusaders were doing was unethical.

Like religion; you can find whatever words you like to justify atrocity, there's nothing nice about unbelievers anywhere.

Eh, depens on the religion in essence. Some take a violent view(Old Testament), some take more a misguided view(New Testament)
I think it depends on the culture in question.

Anyway, it looks like you agree really. Religion is an ideology, it can be used for war, and segregation occurs because of it. Like Muslims fighting Jews in Manchester, because of Israel. That's evidence of segregation causing conflict, right there. "Your people are in Israel, so fuck you."

I've always agreed on that, I just put the blame on the people, not the religion.

At 9/8/07 05:09 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote: You technically have to put the blame on both, mostly because, the people created the religion itself and use it as a scapegoat to protect their inhumane actions, i haven't been keeping up with the topic so can anyone explain what earfetish and MP are talking about?

Basically MP thinks that its the people that cause religious wars and Earfetish thinks it's religion itself that causes wars, but I think it's both too.

At 9/8/07 05:09 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

You technically have to put the blame on both, mostly because, the people created the religion itself and use it as a scapegoat to protect their inhumane actions, i haven't been keeping up with the topic so can anyone explain what earfetish and MP are talking about?

No, see my religion was made by my God.

But, one cannot argue on faith, so this would be an impass.

"Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.... by their fruit you will recognize them" (Matthew 7:17-20)

At 9/9/07 09:24 PM, Earfetish wrote: "Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.... by their fruit you will recognize them" (Matthew 7:17-20)

So good people can do no wrong?