The atheist gods of 'Lack', the only true religion?

[KokomoJojo]

Oh? so you think that you can walk right on up to a newborn and hey kid do you belief in God, when they cant even talk and have no clue wth you are talking about?

You make my point for me...newborns do not have a belief in god.

You seem confused: not believing in something is not the same as believing it to be untrue.

No confusion here, this is your problem. if newborns do not have belief in God then neither can they 'disbelieve' in God which 'is' the definition of an atheist.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What an absurd thing to say... scientists have described exactly what can be done about it. You sound ignorant.

Oh? so you think that you can walk right on up to a newborn and hey kid do you belief in God, when they cant even talk and have no clue wth you are talking about?

You make my point for me...newborns do not have a belief in god.

You seem confused: not believing in something is not the same as believing it to be untrue.

No confusion here, this is your problem. if newborns do not have belief in God then neither can they 'disbelieve' in God which 'is' the definition of an atheist.

I clearly said not believing in god is not the same as believing there is no god. More than once. Pay attention.

And that is not how I define atheist. I define atheist as one who does not accept or hold a belief in god. The special case of atheist is "gnostic atheist", i.e., one who knows there are no gods. I would be an agnostic atheist, as any rational person should be.

 

[KokomoJojo]

What an absurd thing to say... scientists have described exactly what can be done about it. You sound ignorant.

Oh? so you think that you can walk right on up to a newborn and hey kid do you belief in God, when they cant even talk and have no clue wth you are talking about?

You make my point for me...newborns do not have a belief in god.

You seem confused: not believing in something is not the same as believing it to be untrue.

No confusion here, this is your problem. if newborns do not have belief in God then neither can they 'disbelieve' in God which 'is' the definition of an atheist.

I clearly said not believing in god is not the same as believing there is no god. More than once. Pay attention.

And that is not how I define atheist. I define atheist as one who does not accept or hold a belief in god. The special case of atheist is "gnostic atheist", i.e., one who knows there are no gods. I would be an agnostic atheist, as any rational person should be.

there is no special case of gnostic atheist who invented that garbage?

Because someone does not believe in God does not automatically make them an atheist, it makes them an agnostic like the baby who believes in neither, and the adult who does not have the proof of either therefore believe in neither. Where do you come up with this stuff? Next you will be telling me about agnostic-atheist-theists right?

You dont see that accepting or holding a belief or disbelief in God is a 'conscious' choice not some sort of default? Who said default anyway?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

there is no special case of gnostic atheist who invented that garbage?

Of course there is. A gnostic atheist knows there is no god, while an agnostic atheist does not accept belief in god, but does not claim to be certain they is no god. These not new terms, step outside once in a while.

Because someone does not believe in God does not automatically make them an atheist,

It does, in the definitions I prefer. That's fine, we don't have to use the same definitions.

The default setting is not to accept a belief in magical spirits and fairies.

 

[KokomoJojo]

The default setting is not to accept a belief in magical spirits and fairies.

WHAT?
Since when is the default 'setting' not to accept? You must have made that up because I never heard of that before?

Babies arent born not believing (which is a conscious decision) they are born with out knowledge or is that another special case just for atheists?

It does, in the definitions I prefer. That's fine, we don't have to use the same definitions.

Obviously you are not too particular about the accuracy of your definitions.

Of course there is. A gnostic atheist knows there is no god, while an agnostic atheist does not accept belief in god, but does not claim to be certain they is no god. These not new terms, step outside once in a while.

Well then dont you think with all that knowledge it should be childs play for them to prove that no Gods exist? Where is it?

I can tell you precisely what an agnostic believes. Agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve the existence of God, until such time there is conclusively sufficient evidence to support either side.

You cant combine words any way but loose because you simply feel like it. There is no overlap what so ever between agnostic, atheist, or theist, though its pretty clear self proclaimed atheists have a problem with that.

 

[ding]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

 

[BreezeWood]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

.

Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

and liars are a dime a dozen ... 4th century christians.

 

[KokomoJojo]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

.

Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

and liars are a dime a dozen ... 4th century christians.

Not the first lie nero spun to cover his ass LOL

 

[Disir]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

No.

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

No. It was communism. Communism can have no competing ideology. Now, the reason that you would see Communism stifle the dominant religion is due to the lengthy timeline of interference of the Catholic Church into state affairs.

 

[ding]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

No.

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

No. It was communism. Communism can have no competing ideology. Now, the reason that you would see Communism stifle the dominant religion is due to the lengthy timeline of interference of the Catholic Church into state affairs.

Reason and experience show that militant atheism leads to communism.

 

[Disir]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

No.

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

No. It was communism. Communism can have no competing ideology. Now, the reason that you would see Communism stifle the dominant religion is due to the lengthy timeline of interference of the Catholic Church into state affairs.

Reason and experience show that militant atheism leads to communism.

No. You don't get to make up your own facts, Ding.

 

[ding]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

No.

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

No. It was communism. Communism can have no competing ideology. Now, the reason that you would see Communism stifle the dominant religion is due to the lengthy timeline of interference of the Catholic Church into state affairs.

Reason and experience show that militant atheism leads to communism.

No. You don't get to make up your own facts, Ding.

There has never in the history of the world been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheist state. Fact.

 

[Disir]

It's early. Could you expand on this? I don't want to take your comment out of context.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.

Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.

Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

No.

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.
Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

No. It was communism. Communism can have no competing ideology. Now, the reason that you would see Communism stifle the dominant religion is due to the lengthy timeline of interference of the Catholic Church into state affairs.

Reason and experience show that militant atheism leads to communism.

No. You don't get to make up your own facts, Ding.

There has never in the history of the world been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheist state. Fact.

For the reasons I just gave you. Atheism didn't lead to Communism. That was any of the nation-states response to interference and colonialism (Vietnam).

 

[ding]

ding actually covered it quite nicely below.
Sounds like the run of the mill democracy delusion. That is an excellent read and compares quite nicely with the atheist agenda I have seen evangelized out here. The bolded is brilliant, to who ever composed it!

No.

You can almost literally replace socialism with militant atheism. It isn't atheism that is the problem per se, it is militant atheism which is the problem. Unfortunately, those are the ones who predominantly post here. Throughout history, socialism attacked the dominant religion. It's no different today.

Feel free to use any part of it as you see fit. You'd be surprised how well it covers the spectrum. In almost all conversations I have had, I could find their behavior described somewhere in this summary.

No. It was communism. Communism can have no competing ideology. Now, the reason that you would see Communism stifle the dominant religion is due to the lengthy timeline of interference of the Catholic Church into state affairs.

Reason and experience show that militant atheism leads to communism.

No. You don't get to make up your own facts, Ding.

There has never in the history of the world been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheist state. Fact.

For the reasons I just gave you. Atheism didn't lead to Communism. That was any of the nation-states response to interference and colonialism (Vietnam).

The founding fathers of communism disagree with you. According to them communism is naturalized humanism and atheism is needed for their programs to work.

 

[Disir]

No.
No. It was communism. Communism can have no competing ideology. Now, the reason that you would see Communism stifle the dominant religion is due to the lengthy timeline of interference of the Catholic Church into state affairs.

Reason and experience show that militant atheism leads to communism.

No. You don't get to make up your own facts, Ding.

There has never in the history of the world been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheist state. Fact.

For the reasons I just gave you. Atheism didn't lead to Communism. That was any of the nation-states response to interference and colonialism (Vietnam).

The founding fathers of communism disagree with you. According to them communism is naturalized humanism and atheism is needed for their programs to work.

Try again.

 

[ding]

Reason and experience show that militant atheism leads to communism.

No. You don't get to make up your own facts, Ding.

There has never in the history of the world been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheist state. Fact.

For the reasons I just gave you. Atheism didn't lead to Communism. That was any of the nation-states response to interference and colonialism (Vietnam).

The founding fathers of communism disagree with you. According to them communism is naturalized humanism and atheism is needed for their programs to work.

Try again.

You mean because history shows militant atheism has led to communism ever single time and the founding fathers of communism said it would?

 

[Disir]

No. You don't get to make up your own facts, Ding.

There has never in the history of the world been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheist state. Fact.

For the reasons I just gave you. Atheism didn't lead to Communism. That was any of the nation-states response to interference and colonialism (Vietnam).

The founding fathers of communism disagree with you. According to them communism is naturalized humanism and atheism is needed for their programs to work.

Try again.

You mean because history shows militant atheism has led to communism ever single time and the founding fathers of communism said it would?

Try again.

 

[ding]

There has never in the history of the world been a communist state that wasn't a militant atheist state. Fact.

For the reasons I just gave you. Atheism didn't lead to Communism. That was any of the nation-states response to interference and colonialism (Vietnam).

The founding fathers of communism disagree with you. According to them communism is naturalized humanism and atheism is needed for their programs to work.

Try again.

You mean because history shows militant atheism has led to communism ever single time and the founding fathers of communism said it would?

Try again.

I don't need to reason and experience back up that militant atheism leads to communism.

 

[Disir]

For the reasons I just gave you. Atheism didn't lead to Communism. That was any of the nation-states response to interference and colonialism (Vietnam).

The founding fathers of communism disagree with you. According to them communism is naturalized humanism and atheism is needed for their programs to work.

Try again.

You mean because history shows militant atheism has led to communism ever single time and the founding fathers of communism said it would?

Try again.

I don't need to reason and experience back up that militant atheism leads to communism.

You don't have a case.

 

[ding]

The founding fathers of communism disagree with you. According to them communism is naturalized humanism and atheism is needed for their programs to work.

Try again.

You mean because history shows militant atheism has led to communism ever single time and the founding fathers of communism said it would?

Try again.

I don't need to reason and experience back up that militant atheism leads to communism.

You don't have a case.