Reason and Experience tell us that there is Evidence for a Creator

[Czernobog]

The fact that you see zero good from religion proves that you are not objective. In fact, the logical conclusion of your belief would be to ban and abolish all religion, right? Checkmate.

The fact that you have yet to demonstrate one good thing that religion has done, proves that you know I'm right. Ban religion? Nope. No need. Religion is self-defeating. As man becomes more enlightened - thanks to science - and continues to learn the damage that religion does, man will simply outgrow religion. No legal remedies necessary. Which is why atheism is actually growing in Western Civilisation, while Christianity is shrinking.

Hey, moron, I don't need to demonstrate the good that religion has done. The fact that you see zero good from religion is what proves you are not objective. Are you too stupid to understand this concept?

And since you do not believe religion has done anything good whatsoever and because you believe religion is only responsible for evil, then you must believe religion should be abolished. Are you that stupid that you can't see the logical conclusion of your argument?

Wow...you are an angry little man, aren't you?

 

[ding]

You have no concept of locus of control is or how to identify either one. I do. We use it when we interview prospective new hires. I suspect you had never even heard of it until I brought it up.

You can suspect whatever you would like. it makes no difference to me.

...a dumbfuck...a dumbfuck...

Sorry. That was all I got. You really seem to be taking my unwillingness to buy into your delusion personally. Maybe you should take a break, and pray about it. LOL

...You are a dumbfuck...You are a dumbfuck...You are a dumbfuck...You are a dumbfuck...

There's that rage again. I think you need some Jesus time. LOL

Hey, moron, I don't need to demonstrate the good that religion has done. The fact that you see zero good from religion is what proves you are not objective. Are you too stupid to understand this concept?

And since you do not believe religion has done anything good whatsoever and because you believe religion is only responsible for evil, then you must believe religion should be abolished. Are you that stupid that you can't see the logical conclusion of your argument?

 

[Czernobog]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

 

[ding]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

It means I have won.

 

[ding]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

Let's recap.

1. You argued against the beliefs of the founding fathers of liberty and freedom (biased).
2. You then trashed America's Founding Fathers because you disagreed with them (biased).
3. You agreed with the beliefs of the founding fathers of communism (insane).
4. You blamed the evil that men did on religion (external locus of control).
5. You see great evil because of religion (biased).
6. You see zero good that has come from religion (biased).
7. But you don't want to abolish religion although that is the logical conclusion of your argument (illogical).
8. You ignore the history of atheistic nations (delusional).
9. You believe that you are objective but you find that there is zero good that has come from religion (biased).
10. You want me to prove religion has done good so that you can prove you are objective (illogical).

 

[Czernobog]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

It means I have won.

I'm happy you believe so.

 

[ding]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

It means I have won.

I'm happy you believe so.

Thank you. I am happy to have taken you to school. Do you want to abolish religion?

 

[Czernobog]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

Let's recap.

1. You argued against the beliefs of the founding fathers of liberty and freedom (biased).

Yes. Your claim is biased.

2. You then trashed America's Founding Fathers because you disagreed with them (biased).

Yes. Your claim is biased.

3. You agreed with the beliefs of the founding fathers of communism (insane).

Yes. Your claim is insane.

4. You blamed the evil that men did on religion (external locus of control).

You really do need to learn what that means.

5. You see great evil because of religion (biased).

Yes, your claim is biased

6. You see zero good that has come from religion (biased).

Yes. Your claim is biased.

7. But you don't want to abolish religion although that is the logical conclusion of your argument (illogical).

You are free to think that.

8. You ignore the history of atheistic nations (delusional).

yes. We have already established that you are delusional.

9. You believe that you are objective but you find that there is zero good that has come from religion (biased).

yup, you sure do demonstyrate a lot of bias.

10. You want me to prove religion has done good so that you can prove you are objective (illogical).

It is illogical of you to be angry that you can't name a single good thing that religion has done, isn't it?

View attachment 100657

You should drop the mic, before making more of a fool of yourself.

 

[Czernobog]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

It means I have won.

I'm happy you believe so.

Thank you. I am happy to have taken you to school. Do you want to abolish religion?

It's adorable that you think you "took me to school". Why try to abolish something that is destroying itself?

 

[ding]

View attachment 100654

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

It means I have won.

I'm happy you believe so.

Thank you. I am happy to have taken you to school. Do you want to abolish religion?

It's adorable that you think you "took me to school". Why try to abolish something that is destroying itself?

But you would if you could, right?

 

[Czernobog]

Does this mean you're taking my advice, and going to cool down a bit?

It means I have won.

I'm happy you believe so.

Thank you. I am happy to have taken you to school. Do you want to abolish religion?

It's adorable that you think you "took me to school". Why try to abolish something that is destroying itself?

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

 

[ding]

It means I have won.

I'm happy you believe so.

Thank you. I am happy to have taken you to school. Do you want to abolish religion?

It's adorable that you think you "took me to school". Why try to abolish something that is destroying itself?

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

 

[Czernobog]

I'm happy you believe so.

Thank you. I am happy to have taken you to school. Do you want to abolish religion?

It's adorable that you think you "took me to school". Why try to abolish something that is destroying itself?

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[ding]

P.S. I am still taking you to school. The school of logic.

Thank you. I am happy to have taken you to school. Do you want to abolish religion?

It's adorable that you think you "took me to school". Why try to abolish something that is destroying itself?

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I see. Did you have to check back at the home office for that? Never mind. How has that strategy been working for you? Let's say that all efforts fail to fix religion. Let's say it doesn't get any better than it is right now. What then? Would you abolish religion then?

 

[Czernobog]

P.S. I am still taking you to school. The school of logic.

It's adorable that you think you "took me to school". Why try to abolish something that is destroying itself?

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I see. Did you have to check back at the home office for that? Never mind. How has that strategy been working for you? Let's say that all efforts fail to fix religion. Let's say it doesn't get any better than it is right now. What then? Would you abolish religion then?

It's working out pretty well. Atheism is the fastest growing theological position in the US, while Christianity is actually losing ground. No laws necessary. Just exposing religion for what it is.

 

[ding]

P.S. I am still taking you to school. The school of logic.

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I see. Did you have to check back at the home office for that? Never mind. How has that strategy been working for you? Let's say that all efforts fail to fix religion. Let's say it doesn't get any better than it is right now. What then? Would you abolish religion then?

It's working out pretty well. Atheism is the fastest growing theological position in the US, while Christianity is actually losing ground. No laws necessary. Just exposing religion for what it is.

So basically what you are trying not to say is that you would like to abolish religion. Sort of like the Ministry of Peace is the Ministry of War thingee.

 

[ding]

P.S. I am still taking you to school. The school of logic.

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I see. Did you have to check back at the home office for that? Never mind. How has that strategy been working for you? Let's say that all efforts fail to fix religion. Let's say it doesn't get any better than it is right now. What then? Would you abolish religion then?

It's working out pretty well. Atheism is the fastest growing theological position in the US, while Christianity is actually losing ground. No laws necessary. Just exposing religion for what it is.

Let's move on to your objectivity or lack of.

Do I understand you correctly that you blame religion for doing evil and give zero credit to religion for doing good. Please feel free to put that in your own words.

 

[Czernobog]

P.S. I am still taking you to school. The school of logic.

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I see. Did you have to check back at the home office for that? Never mind. How has that strategy been working for you? Let's say that all efforts fail to fix religion. Let's say it doesn't get any better than it is right now. What then? Would you abolish religion then?

It's working out pretty well. Atheism is the fastest growing theological position in the US, while Christianity is actually losing ground. No laws necessary. Just exposing religion for what it is.

Let's move on to your objectivity or lack of.

Do I understand you correctly that you blame religion for doing evil and give zero credit to religion for doing good. Please feel free to put that in your own words.

Tired of getting your ass kicked on your irrational accusation that I want to pass legislation to abolish religion, are you?

 

[ding]

P.S. I am still taking you to school. The school of logic.

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I see. Did you have to check back at the home office for that? Never mind. How has that strategy been working for you? Let's say that all efforts fail to fix religion. Let's say it doesn't get any better than it is right now. What then? Would you abolish religion then?

It's working out pretty well. Atheism is the fastest growing theological position in the US, while Christianity is actually losing ground. No laws necessary. Just exposing religion for what it is.

Let's move on to your objectivity or lack of.

Do I understand you correctly that you blame religion for doing evil and give zero credit to religion for doing good. Please feel free to put that in your own words.

Tired of getting your ass kicked on your irrational accusation that I want to pass legislation to abolish religion, are you?

No. We both know you would do it in a heartbeat if you could. You aren't fooling anyone.

 

[ding]

P.S. I am still taking you to school. The school of logic.

But you would if you could, right?

Why would I waste my time on unnecessary actions?

Because if it were the great evil that you say it is, then that would be the logical conclusion. Besides there is no action. It is just a hypothetical question. The only action required is to type yes or no. You have already exceeded that by taking the unecessary actions of typing unnecessary actions.

So.. hypothetically speaking... if it did not require any unnecessary actions on your part.... and if alI you had to do was type in the word "yes"... would you abolish religion? A simple yes or no will do.

See, this is the shortsightedness of religious zealots, like yourself. They think the only way to be rid of what they perceive to be unhealthy influences is to legislate them out of existence. How'd that work out with homosexuality?

We atheists have learned a secret that you have yet to learn. It is not necessary to criminalize unhealthy behaviour. Mockery works just fine. As one exposes all of the flaws, and damage inherent to magical thinking, rational people just choose to stop subjecting themselves to it.

See, my goal isn't to "abolish" religion. I just want to limit the ability of religious zealots to inflict their influence on the non-religious.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

I see. Did you have to check back at the home office for that? Never mind. How has that strategy been working for you? Let's say that all efforts fail to fix religion. Let's say it doesn't get any better than it is right now. What then? Would you abolish religion then?

It's working out pretty well. Atheism is the fastest growing theological position in the US, while Christianity is actually losing ground. No laws necessary. Just exposing religion for what it is.

Is this consistent with the strategy of militant atheism?