Atheism is a Fringe Kook Theory Cult

[JimBowie1958]

The First Amendments guarantee of freedom of religious speech has been turned upside down by absurd claims that putting a cross on a graveyard memorial

Why would you consider a Jew, or Muslim, or Hindu, or Atheist objecting to a Christian symbol over their loved ones' graves an absurd claim?

Because Jews have their own cemeteries and the corss is a long known symbol of greif for passed loved ones. Anyone that objects to the symbol of a fallen poersons religion over a graveyard is an ass.

or allowing graduating seniors to mention God in a speech

Freedom of religion does not mean you get a captive audience...it's definitely not freedom of religion if one is required to listen to a proselytizing speech or sermon as part of a graduation. And that lawsuit was not brought by atheists but by a Jewish family.

That does not change a damned thing, as these atheist orgs try to carefully pick the best test case they can use. If they could have found a Christian family then they would have represented them.

or saying prayers at a high school football game are some kind of partial establishment of religion.

Perhaps you should read up on things first...or does that advice only apply to others? Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000) was case brought by Catholic and Mormon families because the predominantly Baptist school set up a system where only Baptist students would be allowed to give the prayer. When only one denomination gets a voice, that's an establishment of religion.

Yes, only allowing one denomination is wrong, BANNNING ALL PRAYER is worse as it further limits freedom of speech.

Using the First Amendment to rationalize the ban is just brain dead.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So maybe then when a Christian is arguing with atheists you should either state your position or butt out?




They were communists, dude, not Christians.

Shit, you are a stupid ignoramus.

What about the stupid Catholic sheep Germans who went along with Hitler? What about the dummy American christians who let Bush lie them into a holy war with the muslims? Hell even I fell for that one after 9-11 but then again I was a believer in 2001. Not anymore.

Well since I said 'Communist China and the Soviet Union had the highest totals of all other nations combined' Catholic Germans and other groups don't really add in to that, do they dumbass?

And as bad as Hitler was, his twelve million is not even one tenth that of Red China and the USSR. You atheists are without peer in at least one thing; mass murder.

And yet they all were raised as Christians!

[url=http://hollowverse.com/joseph-stalin/]Joseph Stalin's Religion and Political Views | Hollowverse[/URL]

Were Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot atheists?

Theists hold up Communism and Nazism, along with the regime of the Cambodian tyrant Pol Pot, as evidence of murderous “atheist” tyrannies that have caused the deaths of tens of millions. While it may be true that Communism portrayed itself as “godless,” it did not wage war in the name of atheism, nor were its founders and leaders raised as atheists. They were, in fact, preponderantly Jewish and Christian. Communist Manifesto writer Karl Marx was born a Jew, the grandson of two rabbis, and was converted to Christianity at age 6. Leon Trotsky, whose real name was Lev Bronstein, was born and raised a Jew but later declared himself “an internationalist.”

Josef Stalin’s “very religious” mother named him after St. Joseph, and wanted him to become a priest. Stalin himself supposedly claimed that his father had been a priest, and he was purportedly “damaged by violence” while being “raised in a poor priest-ridden household.” As a youth, Stalin spent five years in a Greek Orthodox seminary, after which he purportedly renounced his religion. In his later years, Stalin apparently embraced Christianity once more. As Stalin biographer Edvard Radinsky remarks, “During his mysterious retreat [of June 1941] the ex-seminarist had decided to involve the aid of the God he had rejected.” Radinsky likewise chronicles a number of religious comrades in Stalin’s immediate circle. It is evident that, whether for good or bad, religion played a significant role in Stalin’s life.

Adolf Hitler was raised a Catholic, and in a speech in 1922 he remarked, “My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter…” In his autobiography Mein Kampf (1.2), Hitler stated:

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.

Throughout his life, Hitler invoked God and “the Lord,” demonstrating his religious, not atheistic, nature.

Pol Pot was raised a Buddhist and Catholic. In this regard, Dr. Ian Harris, a Reader in Religious Studies at the University College of St. Martin, relates: “In one of his early writings Pol Pot wrote approvingly that the ‘democratic regime will bring back the Buddhist moralism because our great leader Buddha was the first to have taught [democracy].’” Although in comparison to the Abrahamic religions its history is far less violent, Buddhism has not been entirely devoid of atrocity in its spread and practice.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Yeah, cause you saying stupid things is really meaningless when you don't give a fuck.



But that is not what the lawsuits or Seelybooboos statement was about; they want all mention of God silenced, dumbass.



People voting their beliefs is part of the democratic process.

Don't like it perhaps you should move to Outer Slobovia.

You DO know the difference between law makers (government) from voters (the people) right? Laws cannot be based on religious beliefs............i.e. lawmakers cannot construct bills on any religious position. The voter, can vote based on whatever they want.

Sure, laws can be based on religious beliefs, why not? I want murder to be illegal and that is because of my religious beliefs.

Are you saying I cant vote for my congresscritter because I want him to keep murder illegal?

My values are what motivate me to do what I do, and a huge chunk of those beliefs are founded on religious beliefs. I cannot yank the religious ones out and just ignore them, nor am I obligated to.

I do have a test I do use and that is to see if there is a secular rational for the religious belief being put into law. If I have any then I vote my religious beliefs, if not then I don't. So I vote to end and/or restrict abortion and do not vote to make church attendance mandatory.

You really don't understand any of this do you?

Lol, I explain and explain things but you cant be convinced I understand anything because I disagree with you? roflmao

Your opinion is GOD did it...................GOD is right..................don't question GOD.

If you atheist libtards didn't have straw men you wouldn't ever win an argument.

lol

Those "religious values" of yours motivate you to call other posters vulgar names?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Right!
And correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't 9/11 a faith based initiative? Religious fanatics martyred themselves, by killing themselves along with 3000 others because they believed god would reward them for it?

Only on the surface. Religion is not a cause of violence and neither is Atheism. People don't need a cause to kill each other, we just like having an excuse.

Atheism is a 'removing-the-block cause' of mass murder.

Next you will be claiming that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder!

 

[Rationalist1016]

Only on the surface. Religion is not a cause of violence and neither is Atheism. People don't need a cause to kill each other, we just like having an excuse.

I partially disagree.
Many religious beliefs influence separation. Just creating an "us" and "them" is enough to spark conflict.
Would you agree with that?

I would agree that us vs them is a very human trait. I would disagree that religion is anything but a reflection of that. It is not a source. Humans kill because we like to kill.

I had an experience a number of years back I think might illustrate what I mean. This goes back to the days when you rented VCR tapes in local stores, before even Blockbuster came out. I was in renting some movie. In the back of the store was a door with a sign that said adults only. In that room you could rent videos of people having sex. This was closed off so no innocent children would be warped by images of people giving each other pleasure. At the same time, on the monitor above the register where any child could see it, was playing the latest hit - "Commando" with Arnold Schwartzeneger. I stood at the register and calmly watched Arnie kill dozens of people as he fought his way to save his daughter and it struck me that this was good family fun, while those nasty videos in the back were to be hidden away.

A fairly elegant tale of human nature. Don't you think?

I agree that we find it very entertaining. And I agree that there is a part of human nature that supports violence to opposition. The fact that I believe that all our religious writings are written by man, not inspired by a higher power, would agree with your statement that religion is a reflection of man. But that was "man" at the time of the writings. Those ideas and mindsets being taught and "interpreted" through different religions to a much more civilized man, I think causes problems and confusion.

I just wonder if there would be as MUCH separation amongst people, if it weren't for some religious teachings. Would slavery ever have been the atrocity it was into the 20th century, if it wasn't for people referencing these ancient writings? Would gay equality be an issue now, if it weren't for the same thing.
I can't blame religion solely for these problems, but I do think they have been more apart of the problem, not the solution.

 

[PratchettFan]

Only on the surface. Religion is not a cause of violence and neither is Atheism. People don't need a cause to kill each other, we just like having an excuse.

Atheism is a 'removing-the-block cause' of mass murder.

Next you be claiming that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder!

It is. There is not a single case in which someone has been executed and then committed another crime.

 

[PratchettFan]

I partially disagree.
Many religious beliefs influence separation. Just creating an "us" and "them" is enough to spark conflict.
Would you agree with that?

I would agree that us vs them is a very human trait. I would disagree that religion is anything but a reflection of that. It is not a source. Humans kill because we like to kill.

I had an experience a number of years back I think might illustrate what I mean. This goes back to the days when you rented VCR tapes in local stores, before even Blockbuster came out. I was in renting some movie. In the back of the store was a door with a sign that said adults only. In that room you could rent videos of people having sex. This was closed off so no innocent children would be warped by images of people giving each other pleasure. At the same time, on the monitor above the register where any child could see it, was playing the latest hit - "Commando" with Arnold Schwartzeneger. I stood at the register and calmly watched Arnie kill dozens of people as he fought his way to save his daughter and it struck me that this was good family fun, while those nasty videos in the back were to be hidden away.

A fairly elegant tale of human nature. Don't you think?

I agree that we find it very entertaining. And I agree that there is a part of human nature that supports violence to opposition. The fact that I believe that all our religious writings are written by man, not inspired by a higher power, would agree with your statement that religion is a reflection of man. But that was "man" at the time of the writings. Those ideas and mindsets being taught and "interpreted" through different religions to a much more civilized man, I think causes problems and confusion.

I just wonder if there would be as MUCH separation amongst people, if it weren't for some religious teachings. Would slavery ever have been the atrocity it was into the 20th century, if it wasn't for people referencing these ancient writings? Would gay equality be an issue now, if it weren't for the same thing.
I can't blame religion solely for these problems, but I do think they have been more apart of the problem, not the solution.

You might as well ask the same questions about government. Religion is not some separate entity, it is us. We cause it, it does not cause us. Everything done in the name of religion is done by us, and we do exactly the same thing in the name of other stuff. We kill each other over who wins soccer games.

Killing is entertaining because we like to kill. It isn't religion, or atheism, or government, or sports, or any of the seemingly limitless reasons we use to justify it. It is simply that we like it.

 

[PostmodernProph]

- 7% of voters think the moon landing was faked

I don't think the landing was faked, but I believe the pictures were faked.....somebody forgot to put film in the camera and they didn't realize it until they landed on the moon.....rather than admit how stupid they were, they faked the pics......

 

[Derideo_Te]

Atheism is a 'removing-the-block cause' of mass murder.

Next you be claiming that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder!

It is. There is not a single case in which someone has been executed and then committed another crime.

That is post facto.

The allegation was 'removing-the-block cause' of 'murder' which is before the fact.

So are you saying that all murderers are atheists?

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population

Religious fundamentalists often proclaim that if atheists don’t like their Christian America they can leave. It's worth reminding them that if every atheist left, America would lose 85 percent of its scientists (not that the fundamentalists love science) and a fraction of one percent of its federal prison population. That's a tricky one for the self-proclaimed righteous ones, because godlessness supposedly leads to sinful behavior. But the facts are the facts.

We have this statistic thanks to a 2013 report released by the United States Federal Bureau of Prisons obtained by blogger Hemant Mehta. The report looks at all the federally run prisons in the U.S. — that makes up about 218,000 prisoners — and the inmates’ religious affiliations. When they say that less than one percent identify as atheist, they actually mean 0.07 percent. That’s right, 0.07 percent. That is way less than one percent.

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population, Threatening Fact for Christian Fundamentalists | Alternet

 

[Rationalist1016]

I would agree that us vs them is a very human trait. I would disagree that religion is anything but a reflection of that. It is not a source. Humans kill because we like to kill.

I had an experience a number of years back I think might illustrate what I mean. This goes back to the days when you rented VCR tapes in local stores, before even Blockbuster came out. I was in renting some movie. In the back of the store was a door with a sign that said adults only. In that room you could rent videos of people having sex. This was closed off so no innocent children would be warped by images of people giving each other pleasure. At the same time, on the monitor above the register where any child could see it, was playing the latest hit - "Commando" with Arnold Schwartzeneger. I stood at the register and calmly watched Arnie kill dozens of people as he fought his way to save his daughter and it struck me that this was good family fun, while those nasty videos in the back were to be hidden away.

A fairly elegant tale of human nature. Don't you think?

I agree that we find it very entertaining. And I agree that there is a part of human nature that supports violence to opposition. The fact that I believe that all our religious writings are written by man, not inspired by a higher power, would agree with your statement that religion is a reflection of man. But that was "man" at the time of the writings. Those ideas and mindsets being taught and "interpreted" through different religions to a much more civilized man, I think causes problems and confusion.

I just wonder if there would be as MUCH separation amongst people, if it weren't for some religious teachings. Would slavery ever have been the atrocity it was into the 20th century, if it wasn't for people referencing these ancient writings? Would gay equality be an issue now, if it weren't for the same thing.
I can't blame religion solely for these problems, but I do think they have been more apart of the problem, not the solution.

You might as well ask the same questions about government. Religion is not some separate entity, it is us. We cause it, it does not cause us. Everything done in the name of religion is done by us, and we do exactly the same thing in the name of other stuff. We kill each other over who wins soccer games.

Killing is entertaining because we like to kill. It isn't religion, or atheism, or government, or sports, or any of the seemingly limitless reasons we use to justify it. It is simply that we like it.

No, religion is not an entity, it is the collective thoughts of people. I agree. The fact that most religions hold ancient writings as there basis for their teachings, is where I see the issue. Yes, this is all done by us. But we (people) are not going to move forward, towards more civilized ways of living by worshiping ancient writings.
I don't believe we will ever come to a period where there is no such thing as murder, assault, bigotry, etc.. Like you said, it is part of our nature. But we are, collectively, more likely to learn how to live and cooperate together with people that have different points of view, without the dogma of religion.

 

[rdean]

His 'question' was a rhetorical one, a tossed out guess for spin.

But to answer the question seriously, no, I do not want a theocracy like they have in England, Israel or Sweden.

Then why force religion down our throats?

Christians expressing their beliefs does not equate to 'forcing religion down your throat', you cock-sucking cretin.

I never learned that in Catholic School. But apparently you did.

 

[PratchettFan]

Next you be claiming that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder!

It is. There is not a single case in which someone has been executed and then committed another crime.

That is post facto.

The allegation was 'removing-the-block cause' of 'murder' which is before the fact.

So are you saying that all murderers are atheists?

I have no idea where that last question came from. Of course I am not saying that. I am only saying that the death penalty is the only method we have that actually does deter crime. It has a zero recidivism rate.

 

[PratchettFan]

I agree that we find it very entertaining. And I agree that there is a part of human nature that supports violence to opposition. The fact that I believe that all our religious writings are written by man, not inspired by a higher power, would agree with your statement that religion is a reflection of man. But that was "man" at the time of the writings. Those ideas and mindsets being taught and "interpreted" through different religions to a much more civilized man, I think causes problems and confusion.

I just wonder if there would be as MUCH separation amongst people, if it weren't for some religious teachings. Would slavery ever have been the atrocity it was into the 20th century, if it wasn't for people referencing these ancient writings? Would gay equality be an issue now, if it weren't for the same thing.
I can't blame religion solely for these problems, but I do think they have been more apart of the problem, not the solution.

You might as well ask the same questions about government. Religion is not some separate entity, it is us. We cause it, it does not cause us. Everything done in the name of religion is done by us, and we do exactly the same thing in the name of other stuff. We kill each other over who wins soccer games.

Killing is entertaining because we like to kill. It isn't religion, or atheism, or government, or sports, or any of the seemingly limitless reasons we use to justify it. It is simply that we like it.

No, religion is not an entity, it is the collective thoughts of people. I agree. The fact that most religions hold ancient writings as there basis for their teachings, is where I see the issue. Yes, this is all done by us. But we (people) are not going to move forward, towards more civilized ways of living by worshiping ancient writings.
I don't believe we will ever come to a period where there is no such thing as murder, assault, bigotry, etc.. Like you said, it is part of our nature. But we are, collectively, more likely to learn how to live and cooperate together with people that have different points of view, without the dogma of religion.

Since I doubt you can point to a single human society in which people are not or have not worshiped ancient writings, I consider your conclusion to be suspect at best. We have seen some fairly rapid moving forward of late and we still worship ancient writings for the most part. I think you are believing your own dogma.

Taking religion as a purely human activity, we must consider that it is universal in human society. All human societies have had it as far back as we have any way of investigating. There are no exceptions. To argue that a particular species would develop a behavior in such a universal manner and that behavior has no beneficial aspect to it is, to me, an absurd claim. It is an unsupported belief which flies in the face of objective evidence.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Next you be claiming that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder!

It is. There is not a single case in which someone has been executed and then committed another crime.

That is post facto.

The allegation was 'removing-the-block cause' of 'murder' which is before the fact.

So are you saying that all murderers are atheists?

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population

Religious fundamentalists often proclaim that if atheists don’t like their Christian America they can leave. It's worth reminding them that if every atheist left, America would lose 85 percent of its scientists (not that the fundamentalists love science) and a fraction of one percent of its federal prison population. That's a tricky one for the self-proclaimed righteous ones, because godlessness supposedly leads to sinful behavior. But the facts are the facts.

We have this statistic thanks to a 2013 report released by the United States Federal Bureau of Prisons obtained by blogger Hemant Mehta. The report looks at all the federally run prisons in the U.S. — that makes up about 218,000 prisoners — and the inmates’ religious affiliations. When they say that less than one percent identify as atheist, they actually mean 0.07 percent. That’s right, 0.07 percent. That is way less than one percent.

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population, Threatening Fact for Christian Fundamentalists | Alternet

I wonder if anyone ever converted to atheism while in prison.......

 

[JakeStarkey]

So maybe then when a Christian is arguing with atheists you should either state your position or butt out?




They were communists, dude, not Christians.

Shit, you are a stupid ignoramus.

What about the stupid Catholic sheep Germans who went along with Hitler? What about the dummy American christians who let Bush lie them into a holy war with the muslims? Hell even I fell for that one after 9-11 but then again I was a believer in 2001. Not anymore.

Well since I said 'Communist China and the Soviet Union had the highest totals of all other nations combined' Catholic Germans and other groups don't really add in to that, do they dumbass?

And as bad as Hitler was, his twelve million is not even one tenth that of Red China and the USSR. You atheists are without peer in at least one thing; mass murder.

You tried to dodge and fell on your face.

The great majority of Russians and Chinese were deists of some sort.

JB argument fails.

 

[JakeStarkey]

JB is flat crazy: organized religion cannot be incorporated into our government.

 

[JimBowie1958]

What about the stupid Catholic sheep Germans who went along with Hitler? What about the dummy American christians who let Bush lie them into a holy war with the muslims? Hell even I fell for that one after 9-11 but then again I was a believer in 2001. Not anymore.

Well since I said 'Communist China and the Soviet Union had the highest totals of all other nations combined' Catholic Germans and other groups don't really add in to that, do they dumbass?

And as bad as Hitler was, his twelve million is not even one tenth that of Red China and the USSR. You atheists are without peer in at least one thing; mass murder.

And yet they all were raised as Christians!

[url=http://hollowverse.com/joseph-stalin/]Joseph Stalin's Religion and Political Views | Hollowverse[/URL]

Were Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot atheists?

Theists hold up Communism and Nazism, along with the regime of the Cambodian tyrant Pol Pot, as evidence of murderous “atheist” tyrannies that have caused the deaths of tens of millions. While it may be true that Communism portrayed itself as “godless,” it did not wage war in the name of atheism, nor were its founders and leaders raised as atheists. They were, in fact, preponderantly Jewish and Christian. Communist Manifesto writer Karl Marx was born a Jew, the grandson of two rabbis, and was converted to Christianity at age 6. Leon Trotsky, whose real name was Lev Bronstein, was born and raised a Jew but later declared himself “an internationalist.”

Josef Stalin’s “very religious” mother named him after St. Joseph, and wanted him to become a priest. Stalin himself supposedly claimed that his father had been a priest, and he was purportedly “damaged by violence” while being “raised in a poor priest-ridden household.” As a youth, Stalin spent five years in a Greek Orthodox seminary, after which he purportedly renounced his religion. In his later years, Stalin apparently embraced Christianity once more. As Stalin biographer Edvard Radinsky remarks, “During his mysterious retreat [of June 1941] the ex-seminarist had decided to involve the aid of the God he had rejected.” Radinsky likewise chronicles a number of religious comrades in Stalin’s immediate circle. It is evident that, whether for good or bad, religion played a significant role in Stalin’s life.

Adolf Hitler was raised a Catholic, and in a speech in 1922 he remarked, “My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter…” In his autobiography Mein Kampf (1.2), Hitler stated:

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.

Throughout his life, Hitler invoked God and “the Lord,” demonstrating his religious, not atheistic, nature.

Pol Pot was raised a Buddhist and Catholic. In this regard, Dr. Ian Harris, a Reader in Religious Studies at the University College of St. Martin, relates: “In one of his early writings Pol Pot wrote approvingly that the ‘democratic regime will bring back the Buddhist moralism because our great leader Buddha was the first to have taught [democracy].’” Although in comparison to the Abrahamic religions its history is far less violent, Buddhism has not been entirely devoid of atrocity in its spread and practice.

And yet, they weren't Christians at all as adults! roflmao

 

[JimBowie1958]

You DO know the difference between law makers (government) from voters (the people) right? Laws cannot be based on religious beliefs............i.e. lawmakers cannot construct bills on any religious position. The voter, can vote based on whatever they want.

Sure, laws can be based on religious beliefs, why not? I want murder to be illegal and that is because of my religious beliefs.

Are you saying I cant vote for my congresscritter because I want him to keep murder illegal?

My values are what motivate me to do what I do, and a huge chunk of those beliefs are founded on religious beliefs. I cannot yank the religious ones out and just ignore them, nor am I obligated to.

I do have a test I do use and that is to see if there is a secular rational for the religious belief being put into law. If I have any then I vote my religious beliefs, if not then I don't. So I vote to end and/or restrict abortion and do not vote to make church attendance mandatory.




Lol, I explain and explain things but you cant be convinced I understand anything because I disagree with you? roflmao

Your opinion is GOD did it...................GOD is right..................don't question GOD.

If you atheist libtards didn't have straw men you wouldn't ever win an argument.

lol

Those "religious values" of yours motivate you to call other posters vulgar names?

No the stupidity of posters like you motivates me to point out that you are stupid.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Only on the surface. Religion is not a cause of violence and neither is Atheism. People don't need a cause to kill each other, we just like having an excuse.

Atheism is a 'removing-the-block cause' of mass murder.

Next you be claiming that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder!

Next you be claiming that the death penalty is NOT a deterrent to murder!

So why have any punishments at all if executing people as the ultimate punjishment doesn't even work?

Your assertion is asinine, obviously the fear of punishment does motivate the lower IQ ranges to obey the law. IF it didn't things would be like the all power went out 24/7.

For you libtards that is a hard thing to grasp, but yes, punishment works and absolute punishment works absolutely.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your assertion is asinine, obviously the fear of punishment does motivate the lower IQ ranges to obey the law. IF it didn't things would be like the all power went out 24/7.

(1) The statement has been rebuked repeatedly by those who know better.

(2) The country continues to execute fewer and fewer folks every year, yet the death row numbers are up.

No deterrence at all, even if just.