Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok, but as long as you agree to fight the actual Taliban and other hajjis as well. Often anti-Chrstians, or Christianophobes give Muslims a free pass for some inexplicable reason.
When the Taliban comes to my town and tries to gut the biology curriculum with their intelligent design idiocy, I'll fight it.
When the Taliban spends many millions of dollars and turns out in droves to deny LGBT individuals the equal protection of the law, I'll fight it.
When the Taliban works to deny reproductive rights to Americans, to create special exemptions for people to ignore the law in the name of religion, pushes laws banning activities because their ancient book prohibits them, I'll fight it.
When a Muslim who ignores the law and demands on importing his religious texts into the courtroom, who rails that the United States is being punished by his deity for not being pious enough, is about to win a Senate seat, I'll fight it.
Until then, stop the pretense that the views on evolution, gays, abortion, and all manner of other things of a bunch of rabble living in Afghan caves is even remotely comparable to the powerful forces of Christianity in the United States, who wield vast power in all sectors of society.
By the way, who are these 'anti-Chrstians, or Christianophobes' of whom you speak? Richard Dawkins? Sam Harris? Christopher Hitchens? Hell, three of the so-called Four Horsemen of modern outspoken atheism have repeatedly singled out Islam for special condemnation. I don't remember if Daniel Dennett does as well. And what does 'free pass' mean? No one is giving the Taliban a free pass. Those you cast as 'anti-Chrstians, or Christianophobes' do not often dismiss 9/11, endorse the cultural destruction the Taliban wreaks where it can, give a free pass to suicide bombings, and the like. What they do - when they're not claiming that Islam is even worse than Christianity, which is what Dawkins and Harris do and what Hitchens did - is insist that Christianity must be held to the same standards that they hold Islam, because often (yes, actually often) people of one faith are totally blind to the glaring flaws in their own religion all the while gleefully pointing out those flaws in another religion. A classic example are those who claim that the 'other' religion is violent, while there religion is 'peace' or 'love'.
When the Taliban comes to my town and tries to gut the biology curriculum with their intelligent design idiocy, I'll fight it.
When the Taliban spends many millions of dollars and turns out in droves to deny LGBT individuals the equal protection of the law, I'll fight it.
When the Taliban works to deny reproductive rights to Americans, to create special exemptions for people to ignore the law in the name of religion, pushes laws banning activities because their ancient book prohibits them, I'll fight it.
When a Muslim who ignores the law and demands on importing his religious texts into the courtroom, who rails that the United States is being punished by his deity for not being pious enough, is about to win a Senate seat, I'll fight it.
Until then, stop the pretense that the views on evolution, gays, abortion, and all manner of other things of a bunch of rabble living in Afghan caves is even remotely comparable to the powerful forces of Christianity in the United States, who wield vast power in all sectors of society.
By the way, who are these 'anti-Chrstians, or Christianophobes' of whom you speak? Richard Dawkins? Sam Harris? Christopher Hitchens? Hell, three of the so-called Four Horsemen of modern outspoken atheism have repeatedly singled out Islam for special condemnation. I don't remember if Daniel Dennett does as well. And what does 'free pass' mean? No one is giving the Taliban a free pass. Those you cast as 'anti-Chrstians, or Christianophobes' do not often dismiss 9/11, endorse the cultural destruction the Taliban wreaks where it can, give a free pass to suicide bombings, and the like. What they do - when they're not claiming that Islam is even worse than Christianity, which is what Dawkins and Harris do and what Hitchens did - is insist that Christianity must be held to the same standards that they hold Islam, because often (yes, actually often) people of one faith are totally blind to the glaring flaws in their own religion all the while gleefully pointing out those flaws in another religion. A classic example are those who claim that the 'other' religion is violent, while there religion is 'peace' or 'love'.
What should I do when I am unemployable because of automation and my atheist leadership refuses to provide me with basic necessities?
What should I do when that atheist leadership imprisons me or exterminates me, so I no longer pull on available resources?
Atheist leadership is FAR more terrifying than Christian leadership.
This very point is just another piece of evidence that supports Christianity. There is a reason why atheists have a burning need to attack Christianity and ONLY Christianity with a relentless obsession. The reason is atheists have hardened their hearts against God and are living in deception by the great enemy. Satan hates God's people, the Bible, and anything to do with the Christian faith. Why they don't know it and certainly would never accept this reality, the truth is that Satan works through atheists to rip apart God's Word and sow seeds of doubt. This is why you see a lot of atheists just simply incapable of saying ANYTHING positive about Christianity. You would think we were scum of the earth according to their standards.
Sigh. That one again?
Jeff, the reason you don’t believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster is because of the Great Evil Parmesan Cheese Monster (who wants to destroy your soul in the Everlasting Cheese Grater). That’s why you mock Pastafarianism. The fact that you mock Pastafarianism proves that Pastafarianism is true!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I don't believe in Zeus. And if there was a forum of Zeus believers, I would have zero desire or interest to go there and mock them or tear down their beliefs. `
Nobody hits their children in the name of Zeus. Nobody tells children that Zeus will send them to eternal fire for not believing in Zeus. Nobody voted for Trump because of Zeus. Nobody is trying to re-make the Supreme Court with the values of ancient Greek religion.
Do they have a mental health clinic in your town? Your paranoia appears to be near-crippling. I hope you get help.
Explain to me then, why should atheist leadership keep the billions of unemployable people alive?
Where the hell is the logic in that?
I thought atheism was supposed to be logical. There is no logic in letting billions of people destroy the planet, so why wouldn't the atheist leadership have them exterminated?
Explain to me then, why should atheist leadership keep the billions of unemployable people alive?
Where the hell is the logic in that?
I thought atheism was supposed to be logical. There is no logic in letting billions of people destroy the planet, so why wouldn't the atheist leadership have them exterminated?
Because "the atheist leadership" exists only your mind.
And I'd trust my newborn child to be minded by Joe Average Atheist any day. But I wouldn't let a Christian fundie near him.
What should I do when I am unemployable because of automation and my atheist leadership refuses to provide me with basic necessities?
What should I do when that atheist leadership imprisons me or exterminates me, so I no longer pull on available resources?
Atheist leadership is FAR more terrifying than Christian leadership.
Since you bring up political leadership:
Let's call up the Republican Senate candidate from Alabama. He preaches a steady stream of Christian values. And who did the religious right vote overwhelmingly for in the last presidential election? In their view, a true Christian.
It is becoming quite apparent what the Christian leadership is like in this nation is like.
I got news for you. There is no such thing as a humanist.
You know what a humanist is in prison? Prey.
If there is no basis for morality, who is to determine what is logical?
Let me ask you this.
If you have billions of people destroying the ecosystem, would it be logical to end them?
Of course. So that's the rationale that so-called "humanist" would take in dealing with the "population problem."
The Christian solution would be to let them live. In this case, wouldn't that be illogical?
Logic doesn't mean altruism. Machines are logical.
Lucky for humanists that there are so few of them in prison. Current statistics indicate that atheists represent about a tenth of one percent of the prison population.
RELIGION PRISON POP. GENERAL POP.
Protestant 28.7% 44.0%
Catholic 24.0 25.1
Muslim 8.4 0.6
Native American 3.1 0.1
Pagan 2.0 0.1
Jewish 1.7 1.2
Churches of Christ 1.5 0.8
Buddhist 1.0 0.5
Jehovah’s Witness 0.7 0.8
Seventh Day Adventist 0.3 0.4
Mormon 0.3 1.4
Eastern Orthodox 0.2 0.4
Apostolic 0.2 0.4
Hindu 0.1 0.3
Atheist 0.1 0.7
Pentecostal 0.1 2.4
Sikh <0.1 <0.1 https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...o-be-atheists/
Is the humanist solution to the ecosystem problems the elimination of humans? Well, no. The humanist solution is to call attention to the problem through education. The religious solution seems to be that humans were given dominion over the earth and ecosystem problems are a myth created by humanists.
The religious find justification for mass murder in their religious texts. Humanists find no justification for mass murder, PERIOD.
Explain to me then, why should atheist leadership keep the billions of unemployable people alive?
Why shouldn’t they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobster
Where the hell is the logic in that?
It’s not a question of logic. It’s a question of ethics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobster
I thought atheism was supposed to be logical. There is no logic in letting billions of people destroy the planet, so why wouldn't the atheist leadership have them exterminated?
Sensible environmental policies can minimize damage to the planet. Policies could also encourage people to have fewer children if overpopulation is a problem. No genocide required. Who is it that often opposes family planning and strong environmental protection laws? Atheists? Or conservative Christians?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
