Another little feud

This was said on a discussion about why atheists are not always to happy when theists say they will pray for us.

This was the very end of that discussion and a deist jumped in to say a few things and I responded to her.

"So many posts here and the only thing I got from all of it is how completely inane it is to debate religion/belief/atheism. No one is going to convince the other to their "side" and it appears that people are using this avenue for their own gain.

For the record, I'm a deist...and a Unitarian. However, that does NOT give me the right to tell the deeply religious they are right/wrong...and it doesn't give me the right to tell the atheists they're right/wrong. As a human being who's been around people from various sides of the "debate", I do feel I can say the following:

Let's agree to disagree and just go your separate ways! All sides in this need to stop "preaching" or "pushing" their agendas and just let people be."

This was my response:

"However, that does NOT give me the right to tell the deeply religious they are right/wrong...and it doesn't give me the right to tell the atheists they're right/wrong"

I couldnt disagree with you more. I do not know where you live but in most democratic nations I have lived and visited the right to free speech is something that is valued, treasured and when properly enforced, the most valuable freedom any country could possibly have.

I have the right to say whatever I desire about ANY subject. That is a freedom that is GUARANTEED by pretty much every country, the few that do not have that right for the most part have a state religion and forbid the defamation of that religion. Censorship and faith usually go hand in hand, with no reason.

I have the right to say whatever I want about religion and guess what, there is NO LAW out there defending the "feelings" of the faithful. The first amendment says never said "you can say whatever you want so long it doesnt offend others".

"Let's agree to disagree and just go your separate ways! All sides in this need to stop "preaching" or "pushing" their agendas and just let people be"

I couldnt agree more with you here. This is certainly the best approach there is. I would love to see theists live up to it though.

The second theists tell me they will pray for me, the second they start legislating their beliefs, the second they tell me I deserve to go to hell, the second they start taking freedoms away from people THE WALL IS DOWN. I will respect your beliefs the second you learn that that they are YOUR beliefs and not mine, I dont care if you believe in god or magical pixies or whatever... just keep your faith to yourself and I will keep my criticism to myself as well.

I would give my right arm to see a world where people get along and where they "agree to disagree" but that will not happen until theists learn to stop proselytizing and lobbying to make sure OTHERS behave and believe in the ways THEY think are ok.

Until that happens, if you tell me you will pray for me I will reply by saying I will think for you. It is only FAIR.

If you think that ONLY YOU have the right to say things to me and only you have the right to NOT be offended then you have a very backwards view on how reciprocity works and what peace means.

Keep your faith to yourself, and I will keep my criticism to myself"

Please tell me what you think.

Learn to agree to disagree. Practice what you claim you preach.

Discussion ender

I recently saw a discussion in facebook that was sparked by a status update that said something along the lines of "Oprah's percersion of the christian religion is shameful.".

Percersion is not even a word, but anyways.

A lot of people left comments and it soon became a pretty fired up debate that included atheists, muslims and christians all defending their world views. Theists attacked each other and defended the holiness of their sacred texts and some atheists tried to refute their claims and other atheists tried to calm everyone down.

The debate ended pretty bad for us atheists. So i decided to jump in and try to fix it, this is what I said:

"ALL religions are stupid. There is nothing "shameful" about criticizing anything. None of the things that Ophra has said about religions is inherently offensive or false, as far as I know. If you are offended by the things she has said about Christianity... get over it. There is nothing special about your faith.

The bible is just as divisive, hateful, perverted, destructive, prejudicial, dangerous, bigoted, counterproductive, evil, unjust, detrimental to society, hurtful, damaging, abominable, bitter, pestiferous, vile and despicable as the Quran. The only difference is that the Quran is more explicit about it, while the bible is more poetic.

Both religions believe in eternal punishment for finite crimes and BOTH religions are founded on NO evidence. BOTH religions have killed "infidels" and other religions in the past. Christians wiped out MILLIONS because of verses written in the bible that explicitly command people to do so. You still have the nerve to name it "holy" bible??

You guys are extremely biased (Lauren, Nathan) you won’t admit that there are verses in the bible that are responsible for innumerable deaths, suffering and destruction. The Old Testament is riddled with depictions of YOUR god wiping out hundreds of thousands, sometimes just for the hell of it. Jesus was not here to unite people, he was not here to bring peace on earth, he was here to divide us and so far the myths of Jesus and Mohammed have been pretty good at that. Look at yourselves.

Jesus was JUST A MAN. If he even existed (which is unlikely and unsupported by independent evidence) he was not the man you think he was. Luke 19:27 “But those mine enemies, which would not that I reign over them, BRING HITHER AND SLAY THEM BEFORE ME” Luke 12:51 “Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but DIVISION”. Do not try to interpret this, these are very explicit verses and they mean what they say. Jesus, if he ever existed, was nothing but a man.

Muslims are known for killing those who disagree and beheading those who “disrespect” islam. I know not all Muslims are the same, I am aware that the difference between fundies and moderates is faith. Fundamentalists usually believe the whole thing as opposed to moderates who betray reason and faith equally. But I cannot paint the whole bunch with the same brush because it wouldn’t be fair to either side. HOWEVER, I can criticize moderate religion for refusing to stand up and criticize those who take their “holy” texts literally and kill people for them. Moderate Christians should stand up and criticize people like the Phelps family, George Bush, Pat Robertson, etc. You would be surprised to see how people will stop criticizing your god when you start criticizing the other Christians around you who give you a bad reputation.

The “no true Scotsman” fallacy will not fly here. It is very easy for you to preach about being responsible and accountable, but when other Christians do stupid shit around you all you do is close your eyes, plug your ears and say “lalala not listening! Not a true Christian lalala”. Get up your asses and clean up YOUR mess. The rest of us are tired of having to clean it up for you.

Look at what your faiths have done for societies. None of the “accomplishments” of faith are exclusive to faith; every single good thing that can be achieved through religion can and has been achieved through secular means as well. However, some of the bad things about faith ARE exclusive to faith.

Lauren: You need to read the bible with an open mind and THINK ABOUT IT. It makes absolutely no sense. As far as the hating goes, the bible is not really unique in its kind; most of the books written around the same time period were just as violent. The Iliad talked about genocide as well and there are many others. The only difference is that NOBODY is claiming that the Iliad is the source of our morals. Nobody is killing in the name of the Odyssey. But people are dying and killing because of the teachings of the prophet Mohammed and the hatred that the god in the bible has for apostates, homosexuals, etc. The similarities between the Old testament and the books written around the same period is evidence that this may very well be just another human made myth. Would you really be surprised?

God has failed to reveal himself to people like me, like Eric, and millions out there. According to the doctrines of BOTH Christianity and Islam I deserve to be punished forever for not believing in something. God has revealed himself to you but he has not revealed himself to me. What makes you so special? Why wont he just appear next to me right now? Free will? I have one word for you: SATAN. Satan without a doubt is absolutely certain that god exists but he still uses his free will not to worship him. The Israelites by the way had pretty concrete evidence that god existed: all the plagues, the parting of the red sea, a tower of fire leading them by day through the desert. And that apparently didn’t violate their free will. And by the way, when they got to the mountain Moses went up the mountain for a while, AND THEY DECIDED TO CREATE A NEW GOD WHILE HE WAS GONE. So obviously, god could reveal himself to us, yet he doesn’t. Its stupid, immoral and divisive. If Ophra really was criticizing this… I am glad she did and I hope more people do it"

Yet another response to a theist...

I was in class and I got out to give you a short response here is THE response.

"Christianity spawned from a supremacist group’s desire to oppress and control minorities"

You do not know that, that is just an assumption. I am an atheist and I don’t think that is the reason Christianity "spawned". I think it is nothing more than a rewrite of old pagan religions, whose original purpose was to explain things we did not understand.

"However, why would any person or any group of people put this in their writings if it originated from them if their goal was oppression?"

Here is where you start with assumption after assumption. You start with the assumption that Christianity was indeed created to subdue and control, but you do not know that. You then assume that the history about Christ really happened, but there is no evidence that it ever did other than the bible. You can’t use the bible because that would be circular, you would need independent sources for that. I recommend you find and provide an independent firsthand account talking about Jesus Christ for that. Another assumption you seem to make here is that if the bible was not written to control (which is based on the assumption that it was) that the next logical conclusion is to say that it was "from god".

Your argument makes sense IF AND ONLY IF ALL THE ASSUMPTIONS YOU HAVE MADE ARE TRUE.

"The first red flag, “the problems are not all solved.” Let’s continue"

You guys do this over and over again, time after time, it gets old people. Just because we have gaps in our understanding DOES NOT MEAN you just get to shove your stupid imaginary friend in there. This is a non-sequitur Ace. A god of the gaps argument is one that argues that since some phenomenon is unexplained, it must be due to god. The hand of god is posited without proof and often with complete disregard to other possible explanations. A god of the gaps argument is an argument from ignorance: it boils down to "We do not know how X happened; therefore X was caused by a god." However, ignorance is never an argument for something. It merely means we do not (yet) know the cause of the phenomenon. Here is a helpful tip for you to know if your argument sucks of not. If in your argument god can be replaced with flying spaghetti monster, transcendental-universe-creating-pixies, the bogey man, big foot, or aliens that means you got a pretty BAAAAAD argument. Try to connect the dots with evidence; don’t just assume that a gap in knowledge is god.

"The second red flag, “the best explanation is kin selection?” Are you telling me that the reason we as humans show self-sacrificing behavior is because it benefits those who are related to us and this only under the right set of circumstances? Amazing!"

Well I would like to see the report you are quoting, I want to make sure you are not taking things out of context and that you actually understand what they mean by "kin", "sacrifice" and "benefit". But lets assume for the sake of the argument that the meaning is the colloquial meaning -do you really think that is unlikely? I am sure you do, you have shown over and over again that you do not understand evolution. Buts lets pretend that a behavior that facilitates the survival of specie over long periods of time is unlikely. If your against this explanation is something that is even MORE complex and unlikely than that which you are trying to describe, then YOU should be raising a red flag. That is not an explanation at all; you cannot dismiss an explanation because it is unlikely and then propose a different explanation that is even more unlikely without explaining anything about god!

"We show self-sacrificing behavior when at the end of the day it benefits us in some way. Whether by short-term gain or long, the result is the same"

Of course, Ace... TRUE altruism doesn’t exist. That would be the most horrible thing in the world. We do nice things for others (even strangers) without expecting anything in return because of the personal emotional gain. If the story about Jesus is true (which I will be honest, the odds are NOT on your side) and he really """"""""sacrificed""""""" himself for us I am sure he felt he was doing the right thing. I am sure that if it did happen, Jesus did it because he wanted to, because he would feel good by doing it. Why would he do it if he didn’t think it was the good thing to do? Why would he do good things if it didn’t make him feel good? In fact the verse says what Jesus' gain was, thanks for providing the verse that refutes your own premise "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this". God wants to demonstrate his love and he did it by sacrificing himself. That a benefit. His sacrifice represented a benefit. TRUE altruism does not exist. There is always a benefit involved. Beware... if you want to reply to that by saying something along the lines of "waaa!!! no fair!!! waaa!!! That is not god's nature! waaa!!!" I will ask you to prove that god exists. God cannot have a nature if he doesn’t exist, if he doesn’t exist he cannot make sacrifices.

"In short, our altruistic behavior ends at sacrificing our lives for someone who is righteous And by “righteous” that can only mean someone who I know will reciprocate that behavior (altruism) to those of my kin or group."

I assume that by sacrifice you mean giving something up. If that is what you mean then you are wrong. Like I have said before, I have given money to the poor, I have given money to poor people who wouldn’t work to earn it, I have given money to people I will never see again in my entire life, I have given money to people even if they don’t reciprocate to me, my kin or anyone I know, I have given money to people even if I know they are not "worthy" of it. THIS IS RIDICULOUS. I can do it, I have done it and I do it from time to time.

This is ridiculous, what Jesus allegedly did was not special at all. It was not even a sacrifice Ace, you have bought this dumb story and you refuse to see how dumb it is. "Jesus died for your sins" (or "Jesus paid for your sins") is a common appeal to emotion used by Christians when attempting to offer a reason to why one should accept Jesus Christ as their savior. This statement is based upon the Christian doctrine that Jesus was sent to Earth by god to take away the sins of the world, and was crucified, died, resurrected three days later and rose to heaven to be with god, his father (who is also himself).

Here are some reasons why this idea is stupid

1. The way the story of Adam and Eve is written, god apparently created people knowing that they were likely to sin, and then engineered the circumstances in which they would commit sin. Is it reasonable to blame people for acting in the way that god created them? It would be gods fault.

2. Why a sacrifice at all? Surely if an omnipotent being did not want to eternally punish people, he would simply not eternally punish them. He makes the rules.

3. How exactly does god sacrificing himself to himself change the situation? A common appeal to emotion is that all human suffering pales in comparison to what Jesus went through for us. Yet was any of his suffering related to what he wanted to accomplish? If the suffering was in some way efficacious for his ends, why didn't god make Jesus suffer a little more, thereby increasing the quality of his sacrifice? We can only conclude by the average amount of suffering Jesus underwent that it was all auxiliary to his main goal, which was simply to die; and then the question is why god didn't offer Jesus as a burnt offering (like Jephthah did with his daughter) or kill him in a way that was a little less painful.

4. For an eternal being, dying for three days is not much of a sacrifice. Jesus was crucified by people who didn't agree with his contemporary blasphemy, knowing that he was a god, was taken off the cross just a few hours later, supposedly died, rose from the dead and is now in heaven.

5. Plenty of people have suffered worse tortures throughout history, and have not gotten to become god in the bargain. Plenty of other mythological figures have also suffered much worse than Jesus supposedly did, e.g. Prometheus, who was chained to a rock and whose liver was picked out by a bird every day, then re-grew every night just to get picked out again the next day. Prometheus was immortal, so he suffered in this way for quite a long time, much longer than Jesus' measly three days.

6. Perhaps if Jesus had truly died and was suffering in hell right now and for the rest of eternity, that would be a real sacrifice for us. According to Christian accounts, Jesus didn't even die a real death. He knew beforehand that he was going to rise again (see Mark 8:31 or John 10:17-18), and apparently he even told other people about it (see Matthew 27:63). If he didn't die (or just pretended to for a few days), how is it a sacrifice? Why wait so long? If Jesus truly is the only path to salvation, then people lived and died for thousands of years with no chance to escape hell.

I know that was where you wanted to take this in the first place, its stupid Ace, you can’t seriously believe this.

I LOVE the way you end your sorry excuse of an argument.

"If this Jesus Christ, the Messiah did in fact exist and did in fact sacrifice his life by allowing himself to be crucified on a tree for a stranger (me) as recorded in this book (the Bible), then this changes everything. This is indeed evidence of more than just the philosophies of man in the Bible, but rather evidence of being authored outside the realms of human intelligence or morality – evidence of a deity – evidence of God. And there is no other evidence contradicting its truth"

This is what you should have started with Ace, you wasted your time and you wasted my time. These are HUGE ifs!

1. IF a man named jesus really existed

2. IF this man jesus really was the messiah

3. IF he really got crucified

4. IF his crucifixion really did anything other than just kill him

5. IF he really was the son of god...

This is what you should start with Ace. Look at what you did, you made all the assertions you could ASSUMING that these GIGANTIC ifs were true. I recommend you start by proving these things out first, that way your argument will make a little more sense, so far it is making no sense you are just making bold assertions. Or... continue with your next "evidence".

Another response to a theist.

wow you said a lot of things back there... that were just plain wrong. I cant let you go without actually trying to help you understand.

"if He did not create us to be the intellegent beings we are, then why didn't the other creatures on this earth follow suit? Science has many theories on this, I am fully aware that, but there are no facts to prove it, at least not any that science is willing to give God credit for"

First of all, as I explained before science and god... dont get along for the simple reason that science cannot do anything with god. We wont give god credit for anything because it has not been demonstrated that god exists!!! Is that really that complicated?

I already told you that the theory of evolution is a fact. You are close minded, stubborn and in denial. Look up the definition of a scientific theory. The theory of evolution is as solid as the ground i walk on, the rocks theists use to stone people who dont believe and the foundation of my house. Its a fact. Look it up.

The reason why other animals are not as intelligent as we are is because intelligence is a inheritable trait that is not necessary for survival.

A simple google search is sometimes more than enough to answer all these questions you ask about evolution. It really is that simply I really suggest you actually take the time every now and then to ACTUALLY INVESTIGATE these questions. You will find out that science has answered most of them and has EVIDENCE to support them. Your claim on the other hand is VOID of evidence and fails to explain many things about the explanation itself. It redundant.

I really really really cant stress that enough. go to www.google.com and in the search engine type "evolution of human intelligence". Make sure you space all your words and then hit "enter" on your keyboard or click on "search" on your screen.

Intelligence as an adaptation to the challenge of natural selection is no better or worse than any other adaptation, such as the speed of the cheetah or the venomous bite of the cobra. All mutations are here to try to serve a purpose and one purpose only; the perpetuation of the species. If mutation x helps the individual to survive his or her environment and as a result help him pass his genes the gene will be passed on and replicated more often. if on the other hand the mutation is harmful, it wont be passed down. Intelligence helped us in our environment but that doesnt mean intelligence will help ALL species in ALL environments.

Some of this is still a mystery to us, but we have a pretty good idea of how it happened, and we have NO evidence suggesting that a god decided to give our genes a boost 2.4 million years ago.

Evolution explains more than you know, and again... a simple google search will show you how wrong you have been about this. I urge you, for everything that is good in this world, to take the time to learn things, stop living in the dark ages, it is sunny and bright outside. You can come out.

"But then again, that is what your belief is all about. Self."

You are being dishonest again buddy... I have already explained this to you.

You dont know anything about the things I believe in first of all.. you only know about the things that I DONT believe in.

Just because I dont believe in god does not mean I just believe in myself. I dont. I believe in doing what is right for everyone which is why I criticize religion. Religion is desperate to take rights away from the people and getting richer in the process. Faith IS the self-centered biggot. I believe that women have the right to be treated equally. I believe that homosexuals have the right to be happy and be who they are. I know the church is COMPLETELY OPPOSED to those last two which is why I have to keep fighting.

I am not a woman, and I am not gay, so obviously you are wrong about your assertion that I am just about me. All the discoveries that scientists make may grant them fame and fortune but the repercussions of their discoveries ECHO THROUGH TIME. While it may seem selfish for a scientists to want to discover things and understand the universe it really isnt. THanks to their accomplishments we have what we have today. Not thanks to faith.

I dont need god to care about others. Stop lying.

"Speaking of doing the work, how much science did you actually do yourself to come up with your view of reality?"

I love the subject of science in of itself. I love the applications, the end results and the process as well.

But on the other hand, I have also read about religion. A LOT OF BOOKS MY FRIEND. From the god delusion to more than a carpenter. I read more about religion than anything else. I know the subject pretty well and I also read the bible. I know more about the bible than most christians.

Also when I am faced with a question that I cannot answer... I investigate and try to come up with one and here is the catch.. IF I DONT COME UP WITH AN EXPLANATION... I AM HONEST AND I ADMIT I HAVE NO WAY TO EXPLAIN IT YET.

"there is nothing that will make me change what I have experienced as truth, as I am sure you feel the same"

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!

I give a damn if the things I believe in are true! if evidence is presented to me and the evidence contradicts things I previously believed in I CHANGE MY VIEWS ACCORDINGLY. It is called being open minded! It is called intellectual honesty! It is what science relies on to progress! The reason why faith is so wrong when it comes to reality and the truth is because faith is not willing or interested in actually finding the truth or knowing anything about reality.

The day evidence for god is presented to me, I WILL BELIEVE IN GOD. I wont worship him because he has a lot of explaining to do but I would believe if the evidence was presented. I am not close minded. I follow the evidence. Wherever it takes me.

"Not even when you criticized my wife"

I never criticized your wife. Dont lie.

Your next two paragraphs are nothing but preaching. NO EVIDENCE. So I skipped them.

"If this is the end of our conversations, so be it. Just know that I did not end it you did"

Actually YOU ended the conversation when you started to preach and failed to provide evidence. Sorry, but again... just because you say x is y doesnt mean it is.

Peace.

Think.

Free yourself.

Response to a theist 2

The phrases in quotations are what the opponent said.

"Death cannot be escaped. So do not use it as a basis for your theory. All of us die, the rate is irrelevant."

You missed the point completely. Obviously your wife "escaped" death, that is YOUR point. What I am telling you is that there is nothing miraculous about that. Improbable, yea, unlikely yes... but thats all. It is not impossible, lots of people survive when they are not expected to, and they are not all christians. Are you telling me that muslims that pray to allah to have mercy on their sick loved ones and they survive is evidence that islam is the true religion?

There is NOTHING special about your claim. Nothing about it surprises me, the only thing that surprises me (not in a good way) is the certainty that you hold and the void of evidence.

"And I do know it was God"

No you dont. You BELIEVE it was god. You have no evidence that god did it, you just believe that god did it. What evidence do you have supporting your claim?

I know you believe it was god, and I know you believe you know. But you dont, it is not true knowledge until you actually demonstrate that it is.

"There are too many things in this life that are still not explained, still not explainable, for mankind to rely on logic and science alone"

I have already said that just because there are unexplained answers DOES NOT MEAN MAGIC MAN DONE IT. Look back 200 years, 500 years one thousand years. Look at all the REAL answers that science has given us, look at all the myths that science has disproved, look at all the TRUE knowledge that science has given us. Science keeps getting better and god keep getting smaller and smaller and smaller.

Just because you say you KNOW something doesnt make it true. You have to do the work, you have to demonstrate that it is true and saying that there is no explanation for it yet IS NOT EVIDENCE AND IT IS NOT AN EXPLANATION.

You must have a pretty backwards view on the way in which reality works. Its ok to not know the answers to things sometimes. You want to know why? BECAUSE WE DONT KNOW THE ANSWERS. Only when we realize that there is something that has no explanation can we actually work towards explaining it. Everytime we do that we realize that the pseudo explanations we had for those things before we silly, stupid and not explanations at all.

We used to look at thunder and say "ay! The gods must be angry" and we actually settled for that "answer" for MILLENNIA. Eventually some people realized how this was not an answer at all and actually bothered to find out if it was true or not. The same can be said about 6 day creation, prayer, resurrections, afterlife etc.

"There is life after this"

PROVE IT. Stop making all these assertions without properly demonstrating that they are actually true. I understand you WISH it were true and that you BELIEVE it is true BUT ITS NOT A FACT.

"It must be sad to wake up everyday with the realization that there is nothing worth living for, there is nothing worth fighting for, there is nothing worth the energy, time, and effort you have invested in this"

You are unbelievable.

My life has a purpose. Guess who decides what that purpose is. ME. I decide what my purpose in life is, and my purpose in life is to investigate, to learn things, to fill mu head with things that are true and reject as many false things as I can. My purpose in life is to help people do the same, to criticize religions, to mock faith, etc.

Many things in life are worth living and the fact that you believe you actually need god to enjoy life, to be happy, to love others IS OFFENSIVE. That only shows how desperate you really are and how much you want this to be true. It may also explain why you reject all the evidence against it.

I was in your shoes years ago. I was actually raised to believe that I was born in sin, lived to sin and that there is nothing I can do to stop that sinful nature. I was taught that we deserve to be punished for this nature, and that the punishment is eternal.

This is immoral, it is inhumane, amoral and disgusting by any standard. The god you worship is a figment of your imagination, it is not moral and it is immoral. Would you punish someone ETERNALLY for a FINITE crime? NO YOU WOULNDT and I am glad our justice system does not work that way.

This is the reason why I do this, and I enjoy it, I love it. My life has meaning and just because I dont believe in god doesnt mean my life is void of meaning. In fact t has MORE MEANING than before. Before all my life was about was licking the balls of a god that created me in sin and was going to punish me for something that HE KNEW would happen. That is all... that was all that my life was about. Worshiping a god who does not care what you do, what you feel what you think... he just cares if you believe and love him. HOW HUMAN IS THAT? thats is not divine that is more human than anything else. it is selfish, self centered, redundant, circular, immoral STUPID.

You cant believe such a silly story...

How do YOU find meaning in this? How does a doctrine that says that this life is irrelevant and that the one that really matters is the one after it make you feel? Why would you even get up in the morning if what you do here is really irrelevant?

If you really think that what matters is the life after this life and that this place is just a place to wipe your feet before you go on and enjoy the blessings of your sky daddy DONT QUESTION MY MOTIVES AND DO NOT QUESTION MY MEANING OF LIFE. Start thinking about what is keeping you from killing yourself.

You have not provided any evidence for the existence of god.

All you have done is appeals to emotion, pascal's wager and you have tried to scare me into your belief. You have presented no argument that would stand for even a second in a court of law, you have not presented any arguments that stand on their own merits.

And I dont think you will.

I think this conversation is over, you have shown to me nothing to support your claims and I am gonna go ahead and say you forfeited.

Peace, think free and may the force be with you.

Starting this sunday...

I've had discussions with theists recently about the power of prayer. But this is nothing new, I have discussed this topic for a while now and I have heard all kinds of excuses trying to explain why god seems to be as effective as flipping a coin.

I usually ask theists to actually put their prayers to the test with me and I will do this EVERY SUNDAY NOW.

I have asked some of you to pray to god to strike me with lightning. Yes, but it is not that simple... here are the rules your god needs to maneuver through.

1. He has to strike me with lighting on a sunday, not just any day of the weed
2. He has to strike me with lighting at 3:30 PM. No later than that and no earlier than that.
3. He has to strike me with lighting and still give me some time to tell my story and convert. He can kill me after that.

Starting today, I will go outside a few minutes before 3:30 PM EVERY SUNDAY. I really think this cheating for god since he should be able to strike me with lightning no matter where I am but he does seem to have a history of being a lazy mother fucker. So I will help him there.

I chose sunday because you guys can talk about this at church and try to get as many people as you possibly can to join you. Maybe if 1000 people do it at the same time god will hear you and he might do it.

So discuss this at church and get together with your buddies after church and ask god to reveal himself to a vocal atheist.

Make all the excuses you want... god should be able to do this and if he really loves his creation he will reveal himself to me. If he does this I will convert and I will be "saved". If he is not willing to do this for me... then why worship such a fucking jackass?

Go ahead... start your bitching

And your praying

Response to Lovin Johnson

As the title implies... this is a response to Lovin Johnson.


Lovin: “ Marco on the other hand suffers from a psychological spiritual phenomenon called disconfirmation bias”

I have asked you to provide evidence for your claims over and over and over and over and over again and you have failed every single time and now I am the one who is close minded? I wouldn’t ask you for evidence in the first place if I wasn’t open minded. You have not met your burden of proof Lovin, do not try to change this one on me.

Stop avoiding the issue, you are very good at going on tangents and talking about how your argument is valid (even without evidence) and I just refuse to concede the points you make. I have asked you to provide peer reviewed research papers supporting yout claims and you have not supported anything of the sort. I have asked for evidence and all you seem to provide is more logical fallacies, and you also attempt to make the lack of evidence my problem. Somehow.

Not believing in something (atheism) until evidence is presented IS THE DEFAULT POSITION when it comes to just about everything. If someone told you that you could become an immortal being as long as you got some of your ribs surgically removed and gave yourself a blow-job you wouldnt believe it right away and uncritically would you? You wouldn't necessarily reject the argument and say that it isnt true but you would hold your judgements and I really doubt you are that gullible. Atheism is a faith like bald is a hair color and not playing baseball is a sport.

If it is that easy to convince you of things and if you really believe the things you claim to believe with absolutely no evidence (lack of evidence from the opposing side is not evidence for your claims) then i have a lot of things I want to sell to you man. I have a closet full of stuff I want to sell to you. I have dozens of DVD cases with magical fairies inside them and if you believe that they exist and if you pray to them while you stick a dildo up your ass.... you will be teleported to a different dimension where horny women run around naked. I am a generous person and I will sell this to you for just 400 dollars. Just make sure you do not open the case because if you do, the magical fairies will vanish and it wont work. Oh and if you follow the instructions and nothing happens... you are not doing it right.

You put forth your opinions as authoritative but you fail to do this without adequate grounds. Where are you getting your information? It may be easier to understand where you are coming from if you actually link us to VALID sources. I don’t care what you think about the way in which brains work I WANT TO SEE THE SCIENCE BEHIND IT. I won’t take your word for it. Science is reliable, and I know from experience that you are not. You keep saying your concept of god is a scientific one, and so far I have no reason to believe that that assertion is nothing more than a distraction from the actual point.

Consciousness depends on the mind. And a mind cannot be without a brain to support it. I guess we could (and we actually might) be able to make artificial intelligence at one point but those systems would still have a “brain” of some sort. But both depend on the physical aspects of the mind (or the hardware). If I hit someone in the head really hard, or I surgically remove a part of their brains their personalities will change, and maybe

Lovin: “An atheist would be arrogant to claim that he knows all the concepts of god out there and has adequately tested them” “Any absolute conclusions are obstacles to the progressive nature of science”

I agree with that, I have never said anything against that. However no scientists out there will come to the conclusions you have reached with the “evidence” you have provided. Just because my explanation does not disprove or refute your explanation DOES NOT, IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM validates yours. That’s a fallacy, and it goes against the scientific method.

Evolution is not right because creationism or wrong (or vice-versa). Things are “true” when evidence is presented for them and they stand on their own merits. You seem to think that if I am unable to disprove what you say (which I never understand because your English sucks balls) that therefore you made a point and somehow proved your claims. You are wrong as anybody can be. This false dichotomy of yours is the same false dichotomy used by creationists who think that if they can poke holes in the theory of evolution their “hypothesis” is validated.

Lovin: "the way to prove me wrong is to be able to do so, which otherwise is the strongest of theories"

The truth is that if you make an assertion, the burden of proof rests on you, and I bear absolutely no obligation to disprove what you say. I dont have to prove you wrong!!! You are the one that has to make the case. I do not reject your claims because I have a "preconceived notion" that they are false, I reject them because you have not followed a reasonable, structured argument to defend them. I reject just about everything that has not been demonstrated to be true by some standard and it is nothing personal against you. Your arguments have not been proven to be true, and while that doesnt mean they are necessarily false, it DOES mean that belief in any of those arguments as true is IRRATIONAL IN THE HIGHEST DEGREE.

You are illiterate when it comes to the scientific method and logic in general. If you knew shit about those two you wouldnt believe for a second that I have to disprove your theory or that if your theory is not disproved therefore it is true.

Lovin: "`I will write notes to explain wehy you are worng`` is arrogantly assuming you know everything."

I HAVE NEVER AND WILL NEVER CLAIM TO KNOW THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH ABOUT ANYTHING. And when I say you are wrong, and explain why you are wrong I am not saying I am right. I am simply explaining why I think you are wrong and I sure as hell believe I have supported my claim. You are wrong because you are asking me to prove you wrong, which is unscientific. You are wrong because you have created a false dichotomy based on an unsound and invalid premise. NONE of those things even remotely resemble the claim you say I make... I can tell you you are wrong ALL DAY, that doesnt mean I am right.

Lovin: "the reason why most people nowadays become atheist is to validate themselves and has nothing to do with truth..."

that is true. I know a lot of atheists that are atheists for the wrong reasons and I have said this before; the dumbest, stupidest people I have encountered are atheists. Not because they dont care about the truth though, simply because they replace with religion with some other kind of dogma or superstition.

You have something in your head that keeps telling you that your """hypothesis""" is valid as long as it is not disproved. YOU ARE WRONG. You have to do the work here genius.... You are the one that has to validate your statement. Since you said your definition of god was scientific I suggest you actually present the work done by scientists, maybe their scientific peer reviewed papers? I know science is not infallible or all knowing but IT IS the single most reliable method we have for discerning what is true and what is false. So...


Make your case.

Present the science behind it.

Stop going on tangents.

The faces on the american bills

I keep hearing it... it doesnt stop. "america was founded on christianity", "thats what the founding fathers would have wanted".

The founding fathers were above all, secularists who escaped england from religious oppression and persecution. Traditionalists are usually wrong when they claim abortion is wrong because it is a sin, and the founding father would have been against it.

here are some quotes by thomas jefferson... for those americans who have no idea who he is... he is one of your founding fathers.

"To talk of immaterial things is to talk of "nothings". To say that the human soul, angels, god are immaterial is to say that they are nothings, or that there is no god no angels no soul. i cannot reason otherwise... without plunging into the fathomless abyss of dreams and phantasms. I am satisfied, and sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which i may not have any evidence"

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Sit reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one, he must more approve of the HOMAGE OF REASON THAN THAT OR BLINDFOLDED FEAR"

"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man"

here is one by WASHINGTON

"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen; AND AS THE SAID STATES NEVER HAVE ENTERED INTO ANY WAR OR ACT OF HOSTILITY AGAINST ANY MEHOMITAN NATION, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions SHALL NEVER PRODUCE AN INTERRUPTION OF THE HARMONY existing between the two countries"

i would have loved to live in the america they talked about

and of course Benjamin franklin...

"lighthouses are more useful than churches"

More Christian coalition crap

I subscribed to the Christian coalition newsletter lol

They send me this email last nite.

"Dear Conservative Friend,

“Sooner, rather than later.”

That’s when a leading Democrat in Congress says they will introduce the radical pro-abortion “Freedom of Choice Act” – a bill which would overturn all current state and federal restrictions on abortion.

No more waiting periods. No more parental consent. No more ban on partial-birth abortions.

When President Obama was campaigning for President, he let it be known in no uncertain terms what his position was on abortion.

Within minutes of taking the Oath of Office, the official White House website was changed to add language supporting pro-abortion policies.

Obama has appointed numerous liberals from pro-abortion organizations like Emily’s List and the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) to critical positions in the government.

Taxpayer Funding of Abortion…

Just days after being sworn in as President, Obama reversed the Bush policy against taxpayer funding for abortions overseas. Another campaign promise kept.

Congressional liberals even tried to use the “cover” of the economic stimulus bill to provide further taxpayer funding for “family planning” services.

Destruction of Human Embryos…

Just this week, Obama repaid his pro-abortion supporters by overturning President Bush’s limits on using taxpayer dollars to fund embryonic stem cell research – a practice which destroys human life.

And now we hear they will introduce the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) “sooner, rather than later”.

FOCA is Next…

In a speech to Planned Parenthood, Obama exclaimed that making the Freedom of Choice Act the law of the land was so important that it would be “the first thing I’d do as President”.

President Obama and the most anti-life Congress in our nation’s history have declared war against the unborn! Without intense pressure from pro-family Americans, they may very well succeed.
Pro-life Americans have to act!

Click here to contribute to our campaign to Stop FOCA

What is FOCA?

In short, the Freedom of Choice Act is a federal bill that would end almost ALL restrictions on abortion. It is an unlimited right to tax-payer funded, abortion-on-demand. And liberals are pushing hard to get is passed.

The “Freedom of Choice Act” would:

End parental notification or consent for abortions performed on minors
Mandate taxpayer funding of abortion
Allow abortions in military hospitals
End waiting periods before having an abortion
Overturn laws requiring informed consent prior to abortion
Deny doctors the right to refuse to perform abortion for religious reasons
Force religious affiliated hospitals and facilities to perform abortions
Overturn many abortion clinic health regulations
Overturn laws prohibiting abortion after the viability of the child
Legalize partial-birth abortion

FOCA would overturn the will of the majority of the American people

On each of these issues, the Freedom of Choice Act would overturn restrictions on abortion that are supported by large majorities of Americans. And it would prevent any further common sense restrictions and regulations on abortion in the future.

Tens of thousands of pro-life Americans worked and sacrificed for years to make the few gains we’ve made in fighting abortion. We cannot allow these hard fought victories to be erased.

Click here and make an online contribution

We simply must “Stop FOCA”!

I encourage you to visit our website and join our online campaign to defeat this monstrous legislation. There you will be able to sign our online petition, forward it to friends, print copies for distribution in churches, and even send personalized fax messages to your members of Congress.

We are facing well-funded opposition from pro-abortion and anti-Christian groups that are working to undermine human life and put our government permanently on the side of abortion.

That’s why we need every one of our faithful supporters standing with us at this time.

Will you help us give the unborn a voice and carry this campaign forward?

By contributing today, you will help us spread the word about our “Stop FOCA” campaign all across the country. By using web banner ads, radio and newspaper ads – and any way we can spread the word about this critical campaign – we will work to build an army of pro-life supporters to stand in the gap and stop this bill.

Planned Parenthood, NARAL and others have already begun planning their strategies. They are funded and ready to fight.

Please make a commitment to stand with us today by making your best contribution to our campaign to “Stop FOCA”!

The time for Pro-life Americans to act is now!


Sincerely,
Roberta Combs, President

P.S. A strong voice for the unborn on Capitol Hill depends on our standing together, united in purpose. Please make your contribution today!"

------------------------------------------------

First of all, you guys were not supposed to see that lol when you subscribe to the CC you swear NOT to use any of the content of their website. Also, the information sent to you for the receiver's eyes only.

FUCK THEM.

First of all notice the language the use; they never say PRO CHOICE which is the accurate label for obama's initiative. The initiative is not here to encourage pregnant women to get abortions. Here are some FACTS:

1. In the united states there is a strong religious bias against abortions, women who get abortions are criticized and discouraged. All women, regardless of their situation are encouraged by the religious right to keep the baby, even rape and incest victims.

2. The religious right is also a strong proponent of the abstinence only doctrine, which is ironically the most ineffective sexual education program in human history. Its like communism, on paper it looks dandy and perfect, but in reality... when those hormones start to show up teenagers get wild and fuck whatever moves. Palin's daughter is a PERFECT example of the expected outcome of abstinence only education. She is extremely religious, and her mom is against abortion. She wanted to have sex, they told her abstinence was the only way.... she wanted to have sex. SHE GOT FUCKING PREGNANT. I think that abstinence is the ONLY method that is 100 percent effective in preventing the transmission of STD's and pregancies BUT it shoudlnt be the ONLY sex ed topic. Schools should discourage teens from having sex, but they should also teach them about the alternatives. The class should sound something like this "its better if you guys wait to have sex, abstinence is 100 percent effective but if you are horny here is what you can do etc..."

These two simple FACTS make the religious position contradictory, and incongruent. If you want to reduce the number of abortions, you should increase the level of education and the awareness of the people who are out there having sex. Face it, even the religious have sex, and even the religious get horny, I am sure your god will make an exception on his condom rule once he realizes that abortions are greatly reduced.


"Deny doctors the right to refuse to perform abortion for religious reasons
Force religious affiliated hospitals and facilities to perform abortions"

They DONT HAVE A RIGHT to refuse based on religion. So fuck that. Its their JOB, do it or become a veterinarian and shut the fuck up.

Affiliated? If the hospital is public, owned by, payed for, and subsidized by the governmet IT DOESNT FUCKING MATTER what affiliations they have with ANY religion. Even privately owned hospitals answer to a higher power.

THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT. If you do not like that little thing called democracy you can get the fuck out.

To me this is a nonissue, we shouldnt even be debating this... it should be obvious that these fuckers lie left and right to legislate and to force EVERY FUCKER OUT THERE to behave, and believe in the same nonsense they believe in.

Religiosity vs Intelligence

I cant help it... I must be certainly biased and not thinking straight... But for some reason I think that in order to be religious you have to be a little stupid and or gullible.

I decided to look for the data behind this... are atheist really smarter than theists? Do I have evidence backing this up? Would intelligence really make a difference..?

I did the research (i googled it....)

http://digg.com/d15OfA

"The graph shown above relates the arithmetic mean IQ measured in various country's populations, to the fraction of each country's population that believes religion is very important.

The green diamonds represent individual countries; the yellow line is a linear regression (y = mx + b), calculated by the least squares method. The United States data point is circled in red. TK Solver was used to create the graph from the data listed in the table below:"

This graph shows that the higher the IQ of the population the less religious people are, or... the more religious people are the lower the IQ.

In this study the only countries that show the opposite correlation (high religiosity and high IQ) were three... THREE. Pakistan 91 % Turkey 65 %Uzbekistan 35 %.

Thats one study done in 2003 I believe.

The least educated, least discerning, most ignorant and gullible are those least likely to challenge and question, and the more likely to blindly accept faith over fact. This is just as true of Islam, the fastest growing religion in the world thanks to its appeal to the most undereducated inhabitants of the Third World.

So when we take all this data into account, what conclusion can we draw? Well, we cannot infer that all atheists are smarter than all theists. That would be an easily falsified assumption. But we can deduce by a preponderance of corroborating results from scientifically conducted studies that on the aggregate atheists are more intelligent than believers.


"Here’s a tip -- if you see people who are babbling mindlessly in tongues, or handling snakes as they dance around praising Jesus, or proclaiming the Earth to be 6,000 years old, or crawling on their hands and knees to be touched by a faith healer, or allowing themselves to be ceremonially crucified in honor of their savior, or attesting to the End being near; feel comfortable giving good odds, and placing a week’s salary bet, that none of them are brain surgeons, rocket scientists, or Mensa members. It’s money in the bank." Atheist Camel.

GO AHEAD... START YOUR BITCHING

Bible verse of the month

LOOOORD HAVE MERCY... YOU GOTTA BE RETARDED.

Ok, the bible verse of the month goes to...

1 Corinthians 11:14-16!!!!

The verse talks about how men with long hair are a disgrace, for nature tells us that we should be ashamed of long hair.

Here is the verse that won this months award

"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have log hair it is a shame unto him? 15 But if a woman have long hari, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given her for a covering"

This is amazing... god is ashamed of men with long hair... so what does he do when he comes to earth in human form??? he has long hair. dont worry he wouldnt want to confuse anybody.

And then he tells us that the reason why women have long hair... IS "FOR A COVERING"???

God seems to be afraid of women...

Go ahead... start your bitching.

Is god omnipotent?

I got this from the counter apologetics website I have been working on for several months now. Visit this website for more counter-apologetics www.ironchariots.org

The omnipotence paradox is generally summed up by the phrase or some form of the phrase "Can God create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?". Either God can or can't create the rock. If he can create a rock so big he can't lift it then he's not omnipotent because he can't lift it. If he can't create a rock that big in the first place then he's still not omnipotent.

The omnipotence paradox may be resolved by stating that God is either accidentally or essentially omnipotent.

Accidental Omnipotence

An accidentally omnipotent God could resolve the paradox by creating a rock so large that he can't lift it and thus, ceases to be omnipotent. However, one could argue that it's hard to tell if a god of this sort was ever truly omnipotent or just in possession of great power. Also, not many Christians would want to use this resolution since it implies that God is only omnipotent some of the time.

Essential Omnipotence

Essential omnipotence states that it is impossible for the god to be non-omnipotent and that the god can only do that which is logically possible. With this resolution the god is intrinsically unable to create a rock so large that it can't be lifted yet it retains its omnipotence the whole time. One could say that god is unable to do the logically impossible and is, therefore, not omnipotent but saying that someone could do the logically impossible is inherently absurd and shouldn't be used in an argument.

Even if we grant that God can do all things except those which are "logically impossible", there still seem to be limits on God's abilities in practice, though not prohibited by logic. Can God act in a way that is evil? By definition, God is supposed to be omnibenevolent, so the answer should be no. Yet people can do many things that are evil, so clearly being evil is logically possible, but God supposedly cannot do it.

God's Free Will Apologists may respond to the above argument by stating that it isn't that God can't do evil, it's just that he always uses his perfect free-will to chose not to. This, of course, raises the question of why God didn't create humans the same way. It would be a good solution to the problem of evil.

God's Nature?Another answer to the above argument is the assertion that being good is "God's nature," and He can only do things that aren't against His own nature. At this point, the concept of omnipotence starts to get completely fuzzy. "God's nature" appears to be defined as "the things that God is capable of doing." In this case, the claim of omnipotence is nothing more than the tautological statement, "God can do all things that God can do." Under this usage, people are also "omniscient."
The fundamental problem may be that the concept of being all-powerful is ill-defined and lends itself to equivocation.

Standard of Morality

A third answer to the above: Because God is the defining standard of morality, anything that God does is good, regardless of how horrendous the same action would be if it were conducted by a human. This neatly resolves the omnibenevolence issue, but does not address omnipotence.

Therefore god cannot be omnipotent

Should I have the right?

A few days ago my facebook account was disabled. I was given no warnings and the only email I got from facebook to notify of this "minor" change simply said that my account was being disabled because I "targeted specific religious groups" which happens to be against facebook's agreement document. I wonder if they really think anybody out there actually has the time to read the whole thing. Maybe the actually expect us not to.

But anyways that is all water under the bridge and I now have a new account and I hope this one is not deleted anytime soon.

I told a friend of mine about this in my english class. People around me heard me as I explained the reason why my account was deleted. I really did not expect anyone to comment on the subject, and I certainly did not expect the only comment to say what it said. I dont remember what she actually said but I will try to be as accurate as my memory allows.

"well you shouldn't be saying bad things against religion in the first place... It should come to no surprise, it is offensive

I dont know her name, but she sits a few seats away from me and I never really had a conversation with her.

The fact that she thinks that it is OK to silence someone who is doing nothing more than writing down ideas should remind everyone how important the first amendment is and how that little right is a huge part of all democratic nations.

I really wonder if she really thinks her feelings are protected by the constitution. I would have asked her to provide the law that specifically states that people have the right to say whatever they want and that their speech is protected by the constitution UNLESS it offends people.

But I decided this battle was not even worth my time, I decided to walk away from the argument by saying that if she really believed my speech had to be silenced because it offended people then the religious wackos out there who believe that people deserve to be tortured for eternity should also be silenced. Those beliefs sure as hell offend me, somebody disable their facebook accounts!

Why do we even make an exception for religion though? It is perfectly OK for me to call people retarded gun lovers if they are republicans, and people call me "repugnant liberal" whenever I talk about gay and women rights. No facebook accounts are disabled and people use this kind of language to refer to people whom they disagree with every day on t.v. Why do we make an exception for religion? What is so special?

It really shows a double standard doesn't it? Theist can use whatever adjective they want to use to describe non-believers and people of other religions, and they are even allowed to make inferences regarding our "destiny" and our afterlife. But the second an atheist gets fed up with their shit... HOW DARE HE?! Those are his religious beliefs!!!

It is damn peculiar that the people who constantly complain about others who criticize their faith are also the ones that love to use that over used cliche "this is a christian nation! If you dont like that you can get out!" Which is not only shows how ignorant they are when it comes to american history and the constitution, they also forget that my speech against religion is clearly protected by the constitution. So, if they don't like that, they should move to North Korea; people there are really fond of censorship and the absolute rape of freedoms.

This nation was founded on secular principles, the same principles that make this country the icon for freedom. If you don't like that then YOU should get out.