What is the purpose of the universe?

[Mudda]

The Catholic government of the Vatican mean anything to you? With the pope as its head? Laying down the law not only for their own sovereign territory, but also for real Catholics worldwide, not fakers like dingbat.

That's because you're not a real Catholic, just a faker. And that your beliefs don't line up with anyone else's, that's a given.

I never claimed to be a good Catholic or a saint, dumbass.

You can't get into heaven if you're an admitted sinner. You have to clean up your act first. Good luck with that.

Sure I can. Did you forget my hall pass?

If you get into heaven, then the standard must be so low as to render hell completely empty.

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

 

[ding]

I never claimed to be a good Catholic or a saint, dumbass.

You can't get into heaven if you're an admitted sinner. You have to clean up your act first. Good luck with that.

Sure I can. Did you forget my hall pass?

If you get into heaven, then the standard must be so low as to render hell completely empty.

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

 

[Czernobog]

Since history has recorded that communism is naturalized humanism and since the founding father of communism stated that communism is naturalized humanism and since Solzhenitsyn actually lived through those times and spent fifty years working on the history of the Revolution, read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and contributed eight volumes of on this subject... I am going to have to go with him on this over a dumbfuck who knows next to nothing about this and is biased against religion and condemns respect for anyone who believes in God because he is a militant atheist.

Wow...dumbfuck? Quite a mouth you have you for a Christian. You pray to your God with that mouth? LOL

Yep, everyday. Isn't this what you wanted? Because when you condemn respect for people for no other reason than they don't believe the same things as you do, you shouldn't really be surprised when you get a fight. Now I know that you want to fight over theology, but that will never shut your dumbass up. So I am going to shove history down your throat because that sure does seem to do the trick.

History? Let's talk about history.

Spanish Inquisition:

Between 1492 to 1502, hundreds of thousands of Spanish citizens were forced from their homes as the Christian Queen dictated that all Jews convert to Christianity, or leave the country. During the inquisition 150,000 people were accused of heresy, and other "crimes" against the church, and 3,000 were put to death.

The Crusades:

In 1095 European soldiers, by the order of Pope Urban II, invaded the "Holy Lands" (note this was not a pushback against Myuslim aggression; this was an aggressive attack) with the goal of seizing control of Jerusalem. After the First Crusade achieved its goal with the capture of Jerusalem in 1099, the invading Christians set up several Latin Christian states, and most of the crusaders went home, even as Muslims in the region vowed to wage holy war (jihad) to regain control over the region, which they finally began to achieve, around 1130. With the retaking of Eddessa, which, while in what is now Greece, was originally in Macedonia, and was Muslim land until the Christians took it from them, Eupoeans began shitting themselves that they were losing their hold in the "HJoly Land. Again, note that this was not concern that Muslims intended to invade Westerm Europe, but that Christians were losing control of what they considered sites important to their religion. So, they suited up, and invaded Muslim lands, again. At this point they decided to attack Demascus in Syria - a nation that had always been supportive of Europeans - with 50,000 troops. Unfortunately for the Christian soldiers, the Muslim forces roundly kicked their asses, forced them to retreat, and ended the Second Crusade.

After numerous attempts by the Crusaders of Jerusalem to capture Egypt, Nur al-Din’s forces seized Cairo in 1169 and forced the Crusader army to evacuate. Upon Shirkuh’s subsequent death, Saladin assumed control and began a campaign of conquests that accelerated after Nur al-Din’s death in 1174. In 1187, Saladin began a major campaign against the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. His troops virtually destroyed the Christian army at the battle of Hattin, taking the city along with a large amount of territory.

Shall we keep talking about history? Because I could go on, and on about the atrocities that Christians have visited on humanity, all in the name of their religion. I haven't even gotten to the missionaries who put Native Americans to death, if they refused to convert, slave owners who literally beat submission to Christianity into their slaves, or the treatment of Aztecs at the hands of Christian Conquistadors.

You wanna talk about history/ Let's talk about history.

 

[Czernobog]

You can't get into heaven if you're an admitted sinner. You have to clean up your act first. Good luck with that.

Sure I can. Did you forget my hall pass?

If you get into heaven, then the standard must be so low as to render hell completely empty.

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

 

[ding]

Since history has recorded that communism is naturalized humanism and since the founding father of communism stated that communism is naturalized humanism and since Solzhenitsyn actually lived through those times and spent fifty years working on the history of the Revolution, read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and contributed eight volumes of on this subject... I am going to have to go with him on this over a dumbfuck who knows next to nothing about this and is biased against religion and condemns respect for anyone who believes in God because he is a militant atheist.

Wow...dumbfuck? Quite a mouth you have you for a Christian. You pray to your God with that mouth? LOL

Yep, everyday. Isn't this what you wanted? Because when you condemn respect for people for no other reason than they don't believe the same things as you do, you shouldn't really be surprised when you get a fight. Now I know that you want to fight over theology, but that will never shut your dumbass up. So I am going to shove history down your throat because that sure does seem to do the trick.

History? Let's talk about history.

Spanish Inquisition:

Between 1492 to 1502, hundreds of thousands of Spanish citizens were forced from their homes as the Christian Queen dictated that all Jews convert to Christianity, or leave the country. During the inquisition 150,000 people were accused of heresy, and other "crimes" against the church, and 3,000 were put to death.

The Crusades:

In 1095 European soldiers, by the order of Pope Urban II, invaded the "Holy Lands" (note this was not a pushback against Myuslim aggression; this was an aggressive attack) with the goal of seizing control of Jerusalem. After the First Crusade achieved its goal with the capture of Jerusalem in 1099, the invading Christians set up several Latin Christian states, and most of the crusaders went home, even as Muslims in the region vowed to wage holy war (jihad) to regain control over the region, which they finally began to achieve, around 1130. With the retaking of Eddessa, which, while in what is now Greece, was originally in Macedonia, and was Muslim land until the Christians took it from them, Eupoeans began shitting themselves that they were losing their hold in the "HJoly Land. Again, note that this was not concern that Muslims intended to invade Westerm Europe, but that Christians were losing control of what they considered sites important to their religion. So, they suited up, and invaded Muslim lands, again. At this point they decided to attack Demascus in Syria - a nation that had always been supportive of Europeans - with 50,000 troops. Unfortunately for the Christian soldiers, the Muslim forces roundly kicked their asses, forced them to retreat, and ended the Second Crusade.

After numerous attempts by the Crusaders of Jerusalem to capture Egypt, Nur al-Din’s forces seized Cairo in 1169 and forced the Crusader army to evacuate. Upon Shirkuh’s subsequent death, Saladin assumed control and began a campaign of conquests that accelerated after Nur al-Din’s death in 1174. In 1187, Saladin began a major campaign against the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. His troops virtually destroyed the Christian army at the battle of Hattin, taking the city along with a large amount of territory.

Shall we keep talking about history? Because I could go on, and on about the atrocities that Christians have visited on humanity, all in the name of their religion. I haven't even gotten to the missionaries who put Native Americans to death, if they refused to convert, slave owners who literally beat submission to Christianity into their slaves, or the treatment of Aztecs at the hands of Christian Conquistadors.

You wanna talk about history/ Let's talk about history.

lol, I pretty sure we have already established that you blame religion for the evil that men have done. My argument is that you don't recognize any good that men have done because of religion. It is that omission which proves you are not objective, fat boy.

 

[ding]

Sure I can. Did you forget my hall pass?

If you get into heaven, then the standard must be so low as to render hell completely empty.

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

These are my references for how socialism is a religion based on atheism.

Michail Bakunins sozial-politischer Briefwechsel mit Alexander Ivanovitsch Herzen. Stuttgart, 1895.

G. Le Bon. Psychologie du socialisme. (Quotations refer to Russian translation, Psikhologiia sotsializma, St. Petersburg, 1908.)

S. Frank. "Etika nigilizma" ("The Ethics of Nihilism," in Russian). In: Vekhi (Landmarks), Moscow, 1909.

S. Bulgakov. Pervokhristianstvo i noveishii sotsializm (Early Christianity and Modern Socialism, in Russian). Moscow, 1911.

S. Bulgakov. Khristianstvo i sotsializm (Christianity and Socialism, in Russian). Moscow, 1917

W. Gurian. Der Bolschewismus. Freiburg, 1931 giia sotsializma, St. Petersburg, 1908.)

H. Marcuse. Eros and Civilization. A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. Boston, 1955

I. Shafarevich. The Socialist Phenomeon, 1980 by Harper & Row

 

[ding]

Sure I can. Did you forget my hall pass?

If you get into heaven, then the standard must be so low as to render hell completely empty.

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

It is not one single nation, you dumbfuck.

 

[Czernobog]

If you get into heaven, then the standard must be so low as to render hell completely empty.

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

These are my references for how socialism is a religion based on atheism.

Michail Bakunins sozial-politischer Briefwechsel mit Alexander Ivanovitsch Herzen. Stuttgart, 1895.

G. Le Bon. Psychologie du socialisme. (Quotations refer to Russian translation, Psikhologiia sotsializma, St. Petersburg, 1908.)

S. Frank. "Etika nigilizma" ("The Ethics of Nihilism," in Russian). In: Vekhi (Landmarks), Moscow, 1909.

S. Bulgakov. Pervokhristianstvo i noveishii sotsializm (Early Christianity and Modern Socialism, in Russian). Moscow, 1911.

S. Bulgakov. Khristianstvo i sotsializm (Christianity and Socialism, in Russian). Moscow, 1917

W. Gurian. Der Bolschewismus. Freiburg, 1931 giia sotsializma, St. Petersburg, 1908.)

H. Marcuse. Eros and Civilization. A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. Boston, 1955

I. Shafarevich. The Socialist Phenomeon, 1980 by Harper & Row

Gee...you can copy, and paste a bibliography. Good for you. Now, letme know when you have actually read any of those books.

 

[Czernobog]

If you get into heaven, then the standard must be so low as to render hell completely empty.

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

It is not one single nation, you dumbfuck.

"You dumbfuck". LOL There you go again, demonstrating how useless religion is.

 

[ding]

For all I know it is. But as I have already told you at least 5 times, hell is being separated from God.

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

It is not one single nation, you dumbfuck.

"You dumbfuck". LOL There you go again, demonstrating how useless religion is.

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

 

[Czernobog]

No it's not, it's a place where you roast for eternity. Now you know.

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

It is not one single nation, you dumbfuck.

"You dumbfuck". LOL There you go again, demonstrating how useless religion is.

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

 

[ding]

Hell would be what you want in this world. A world without God or religion.

Here is how I imagine a world without God or religion would look like... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

It is not one single nation, you dumbfuck.

"You dumbfuck". LOL There you go again, demonstrating how useless religion is.

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

 

[Czernobog]

You know you keep repeating that delusion about an atheist society, based on the experience of one nation that was an authoritarian Totalitarian government first, and atheist, second. No one shares your opinion of how monstrous humanity is. I'm sorry that you hate your fellow man so much, but you really don't need to keep cut and pasting your silly "I imagine..." post. We've all read it. We all get it. You hate your fellow humans.

It is not one single nation, you dumbfuck.

"You dumbfuck". LOL There you go again, demonstrating how useless religion is.

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

 

[ding]

It is not one single nation, you dumbfuck.

"You dumbfuck". LOL There you go again, demonstrating how useless religion is.

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

Well... no, you haven't. I mean after all if religion is the great evil that you think it is and if religion has added zero good, then the logical thing to do would be to ban all religions. It's not like it hasn't been done before, right? Besides I'm just asking a hypothetical question anyway. 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]

"You dumbfuck". LOL There you go again, demonstrating how useless religion is.

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

Well... no, you haven't. I mean after all if religion is the great evil that you think it is and if religion has added zero good, then the logical thing to do would be to ban all religions.

No, it wouldn't. Authoritarian thinking concludes that the only way to eliminate unhealthy behaviour is to legislate it out of existence. Logical thinking recognises that rational people respond rationally to reason. Therefore, the goal of atheists is not to "abolish" religion. It is to expose the irrational nature of magical thinking, allowing rational people to conclude, on their own, that such thinking is irrational, and unproductive. In the meantime, it is the goal of atheists to limit the ability of the religious to influence the lives, and choices of the non-religious. This is why we oppose so aggressively any legislation that forces the non-religious to behave in accordance with the dictates of the religious.

 

[ding]

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

Well... no, you haven't. I mean after all if religion is the great evil that you think it is and if religion has added zero good, then the logical thing to do would be to ban all religions.

No, it wouldn't. Authoritarian thinking concludes that the only way to eliminate unhealthy behaviour is to legislate it out of existence. Logical thinking recognises that rational people respond rationally to reason. Therefore, the goal of atheists is not to "abolish" religion. It is to expose the irrational nature of magical thinking, allowing rational people to conclude, on their own, that such thinking is irrational, and unproductive. In the meantime, it is the goal of atheists to limit the ability of the religious to influence the lives, and choices of the non-religious. This is why we oppose so aggressively any legislation that forces the non-religious to behave in accordance with the dictates of the religious.

Oh... so you are going to abolish religion through ridicule, right? You are going to subordinate religion by making it your ***** or so to speak.

 

[ding]

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

Well... no, you haven't. I mean after all if religion is the great evil that you think it is and if religion has added zero good, then the logical thing to do would be to ban all religions.

No, it wouldn't. Authoritarian thinking concludes that the only way to eliminate unhealthy behaviour is to legislate it out of existence. Logical thinking recognises that rational people respond rationally to reason. Therefore, the goal of atheists is not to "abolish" religion. It is to expose the irrational nature of magical thinking, allowing rational people to conclude, on their own, that such thinking is irrational, and unproductive. In the meantime, it is the goal of atheists to limit the ability of the religious to influence the lives, and choices of the non-religious. This is why we oppose so aggressively any legislation that forces the non-religious to behave in accordance with the dictates of the religious.

So basically... you are going to do the same thing that communists do but just not so publicly.

 

[ding]

And if you had your way you would abolish religion, right?

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

Well... no, you haven't. I mean after all if religion is the great evil that you think it is and if religion has added zero good, then the logical thing to do would be to ban all religions.

No, it wouldn't. Authoritarian thinking concludes that the only way to eliminate unhealthy behaviour is to legislate it out of existence. Logical thinking recognises that rational people respond rationally to reason. Therefore, the goal of atheists is not to "abolish" religion. It is to expose the irrational nature of magical thinking, allowing rational people to conclude, on their own, that such thinking is irrational, and unproductive. In the meantime, it is the goal of atheists to limit the ability of the religious to influence the lives, and choices of the non-religious. This is why we oppose so aggressively any legislation that forces the non-religious to behave in accordance with the dictates of the religious.

I believe that was what this guy was saying about you...

 

[Czernobog]

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

Well... no, you haven't. I mean after all if religion is the great evil that you think it is and if religion has added zero good, then the logical thing to do would be to ban all religions.

No, it wouldn't. Authoritarian thinking concludes that the only way to eliminate unhealthy behaviour is to legislate it out of existence. Logical thinking recognises that rational people respond rationally to reason. Therefore, the goal of atheists is not to "abolish" religion. It is to expose the irrational nature of magical thinking, allowing rational people to conclude, on their own, that such thinking is irrational, and unproductive. In the meantime, it is the goal of atheists to limit the ability of the religious to influence the lives, and choices of the non-religious. This is why we oppose so aggressively any legislation that forces the non-religious to behave in accordance with the dictates of the religious.

Oh... so you are going to abolish religion through ridicule, right?

Well, in the pures sense of the word - to do away with; put an end to; annul; make void - sure. However, when most people talk about "abolishing" something, they are referring to passing laws to criminalise it. That we are not doing. There is no reason. Christianity is abolishing itself, as rational people become aware of the silliness, and unproductiveness of magical thinking.

 

[Czernobog]

Nope. No need. Humanity is outgrowing religion all on its own.

But you would if you could, right? I mean after all you do believe that religion is responsible for great evil and zero good, right?

How could you not want to abolish religion? How could that not make perfect sense given your argument? Please explain that to me because you are such a smart man who would never have such ridiculous logic. Plus who could possibly ever question your objectivity, right? I mean after all your belief that religion has done zero good and is responsible for the horrors of the world is such a balanced and well thought out position, right?

So please explain to me how abolishing religion is not the logical conclusion to you argument?

I've already explained the logic. It's not my fault that your rage has so consumed your intellect that you cannot understand simple English.

Well... no, you haven't. I mean after all if religion is the great evil that you think it is and if religion has added zero good, then the logical thing to do would be to ban all religions.

No, it wouldn't. Authoritarian thinking concludes that the only way to eliminate unhealthy behaviour is to legislate it out of existence. Logical thinking recognises that rational people respond rationally to reason. Therefore, the goal of atheists is not to "abolish" religion. It is to expose the irrational nature of magical thinking, allowing rational people to conclude, on their own, that such thinking is irrational, and unproductive. In the meantime, it is the goal of atheists to limit the ability of the religious to influence the lives, and choices of the non-religious. This is why we oppose so aggressively any legislation that forces the non-religious to behave in accordance with the dictates of the religious.

So basically... you are going to do the same thing that communists do but just not so publicly.

Not at all. The Communists made the same mistake that all authoritarians make - they thought that criminalising a behaviour will eliminate it. We don't wish to criminalise anything.