How Do We Eradicate Religion From Modern Society?

[olylifter420]

Funny how no one sees the hypocrisy in his statemwnts. Heis, yu are always changing positions

Hes goading you into another strawman, unless you really do feel religious people should be deigned the right of expression. Do you? To me it looks as if you were simply pointing out that when they do express themselves, it serves to spread lies and misinformation and to discourage the human race from progression, which you find contemptible. If free expression take precedence over all, then you should be as free to express your contempt as they are to express their beliefs.

 

[olylifter420]

Inquisition and crusades! The people who did those things obviously were atheists at heart. With hatred these rejects on here are spewing, it is clear anyone with such hate should be labelled an atheist. Yes, atheists i know this wont make sense to you for obvious reasons(you are an atheist)

I always love it when I hear,"what evidence? What history? to not see it you would have to actively avoid it, its like you stand in a freeway median asking, "what cars?" The evidence is all around you, and I suppose depending on the paradigm view you could say the same to me about how the evidence of your view is all around us. However, mine is documented through historians and replicable through science. My beliefs dont hinge upon what some dessert dwelling goat herders passed along by word of mouth for a few thousand years. Remember, these were the same people who thought the earth was flat and wanted to burn gallaleo and copernicus at the stake for the correct scientific view that they fealt challenged their religion.
my argument is simple, had there not been religion, the number of attrocities.commited in the name of god would surely be less, thus making the world a better place. You arent saying the world is a better place because of religious attrocities are you? For reference we could chose the crusades and the spanish inquisition. Your turn curly bill, make texas proud!

 

[Heisenberg]

Don't bother using logic and reason with oly. He's only here to cause grief and aggravation. He's been on ignore for the most part yet he still pops up in every thread and cries and whines about atheists and how his beliefs are being belittled (whether the thread is about religion or not).

Recently people have begun to respond to him again, try to explain that atheism isn't a belief or doctrine, he doesn't listen or doesn't care and acts like a child in a roomful of adults that feels he's not getting any attention.

The best thing you can do is go to your user control panel and put him in your ignore list. That way his inane rantings won't interfere and ruin the dialogue and the only time you will see his posts is when someone unwisely quotes him.

Unfortunately as a mod I don't have the luxury of ignoring people via digital selection. I advocate reinstituting the "oly says the darndest things" campaign, only lets just say it in our minds and move on, instead of wasting thread space. His goal is to confound us into senseless diatribe, or to exasperate us into silence. The best response is to simply treat him as if he is silent, until such time he decides to say something with substance. If you don't want to act like an adult, you don't get to talk with the adults. Of course he will see this as exclusion due to his beliefs instead of his conduct, and why shouldn't he, that's exactly how a child would see it.

 

[Hepheastus420]

I always love it when I hear,"what evidence? What history? to not see it you would have to actively avoid it, its like you stand in a freeway median asking, "what cars?" The evidence is all around you, and I suppose depending on the paradigm view you could say the same to me about how the evidence of your view is all around us. However, mine is documented through historians and replicable through science. My beliefs dont hinge upon what some dessert dwelling goat herders passed along by word of mouth for a few thousand years. Remember, these were the same people who thought the earth was flat and wanted to burn gallaleo and copernicus at the stake for the correct scientific view that they fealt challenged their religion.
my argument is simple, had there not been religion, the number of attrocities.commited in the name of god would surely be less, thus making the world a better place. You arent saying the world is a better place because of religious attrocities are you? For reference we could chose the crusades and the spanish inquisition. Your turn curly bill, make texas proud!

Finally a real debate from you. Alright I have to agree with you that there would be no more atrocities in the name of god (which I have already admitted and I have stated I don't agree with using religion to justify your actions). I have stated I don't represent the crusades or Spanish inquisitors. So yes you are right and I never twisted away from that, I never said your previously imaginary argument was false. My argument all along was that religion shouldn't be eradicated as a whole. Anyways do you believe that these people would not have found a way to create other atrocities? People that claim they do these evil/cruel acts because their religion wants them too are either evil for following that religion or are lying hypocrites for blaming their religion. So my point is that either way these people would have made a way to control a certain group with or without religion. There has been many atheist dictatorships (not saying their atrocities were motivated by their atheism), but my point is that they did not need religion to create atrocities. And the reason I asked where is your evidence is because you never posted any evidence nor argument so I was curious to what evidence you were referring to. So in conclusion yes you are right and my new argument is that there would still be just as many atrocities in the world with or without religion.


And don't complain about my insults towards your crappy spelling when you keep insulting Texas for no reason. And could you answer my question I previously asked? If you have a bad memory and simply forgot what question I'm referring to I will ask it again. Are those murders from Texas last year in the name of god?

 

[mindphuk]

As a mod, you should have the power to hide or even delete any OT posts, especially those of an obvious troll/thread saboteur (or at least forum mod Pad should be able to). In spite of what he thinks, I do not have him on ignore as I read his posts, hoping for that glimmer of sanity that I saw within him just a few short weeks ago. I wonder what it is about atheism that bothers him so much that he invests so much time and energy into posting about it. Start a blog already for fuck sakes!

 

[olylifter420]

Im offrnded with you being gay, but i aint gay bashing am i?


So you defend muslims for makings mosques all over the place in the US, but you are against freedom of speech from Christians, how hypocrite of you gurl!

I remember clearly you defending them, so please dont go back on your word if you got balls

im offended by their beliefs, not free speech. those crosses do nothing but to show that christianity is correct and you should submit now while you have the chance, if you havent already. i dont think its okay to spread ignorance and submission, and those big crosses on the side of the highway are a symbol of that.

i dont see a problem with an advertisement for a bar or club because they are a business that needs customers. religion on the other hand doesnt NEED more customers. they only feel the need to get more because they believe their god said to spread the word. they think it is righteous when they get more people to join them. they think it is a good thing that more people believe the lies they believe.

 

[Luger187]

Hes goading you into another strawman, unless you really do feel religious people should be deigned the right of expression. Do you? To me it looks as if you were simply pointing out that when they do express themselves, it serves to spread lies and misinformation and to discourage the human race from progression, which you find contemptible. If free expression take precedence over all, then you should be as free to express your contempt as they are to express their beliefs.

i think they should be able to express their beliefs. but at some point it becomes ridiculous, you know? if someone wanted to put billboards up that said bigfoot exists, i wouldnt have a problem with the billboard itself, but rather the idea behind the billboard. especially if that belief was as widespread and ingrained as christianity is in america. and ontop of that, the only thing they had was 'faith' and this book that says hes real and is mostly third person accounts of events.
for these reasons, i would not agree with it. i do not think we should go around taking down crosses or anything. i just think they shouldnt be there in the first place because people shouldnt believe such things

 

[olylifter420]

When did you become an adult?


Last i checked, you all asked for negatives of atheism and posted not 1, but 10 dudes who did some fucked up shit. Now, did they do cause they felt no restraint or value for human cause they were atheists, or did they do it cause they hate believers like you all do?


Last i checked i was an adult, i dont know about you bro. Ignoring fact and using big words to impress the small atheist minds on here is truly not being an adult, but an internet bully!

Unfortunately as a mod I don't have the luxury of ignoring people via digital selection. I advocate reinstituting the "oly says the darndest things" campaign, only lets just say it in our minds and move on, instead of wasting thread space. His goal is to confound us into senseless diatribe, or to exasperate us into silence. The best response is to simply treat him as if he is silent, until such time he decides to say something with substance. If you don't want to act like an adult, you don't get to talk with the adults. Of course he will see this as exclusion due to his beliefs instead of his conduct, and why shouldn't he, that's exactly how a child would see it.

 

[tyler.durden]

Unfortunately as a mod I don't have the luxury of ignoring people via digital selection. I advocate reinstituting the "oly says the darndest things" campaign, only lets just say it in our minds and move on, instead of wasting thread space. His goal is to confound us into senseless diatribe, or to exasperate us into silence. The best response is to simply treat him as if he is silent, until such time he decides to say something with substance. If you don't want to act like an adult, you don't get to talk with the adults. Of course he will see this as exclusion due to his beliefs instead of his conduct, and why shouldn't he, that's exactly how a child would see it.

Great idea, Heis. I've never experienced a creature quite like Oly, not even among small children. There is absolutely no value, merit, style or substance to anything he has to say, so I recently stopped replying to his posts about/to me altogether. Not even his fellow theists seem to respect or listen to him, and I've never seen that before. I really respect other theists on this forum, their beliefs are usually well thought out, they contribute interesting ideas and they sometimes even admit when they are wrong. I originally thought Oly wasn't getting what we were saying, so I tried to make my points in simpler and simpler ways, as I do with children. I've come to believe that he does understand all of our points (the same way I believe that he dresses and feeds himself), but chooses to run from his comprehension. It's not that he doesn't see, but that he WON'T see (there's none so blind as those who will not see), and there's nothing to be gained by interacting with someone who makes that choice. His ranting smacks of desperation, it is not us he is trying to convince, but himself. I didn't know about the ignore feature, I'm going to figure out how to do this now, sorry you have to absorb his lunacy as mod. If he ever actually contributes something worthwhile, I'll know it from your response to him. Good luck...

 

[Bonzi Lighthouse]

im offended by their beliefs, not free speech. those crosses do nothing but to show that christianity is correct and you should submit now while you have the chance, if you havent already. i dont think its okay to spread ignorance and submission, and those big crosses on the side of the highway are a symbol of that.

i dont see a problem with an advertisement for a bar or club because they are a business that needs customers. religion on the other hand doesnt NEED more customers. they only feel the need to get more because they believe their god said to spread the word. they think it is righteous when they get more people to join them. they think it is a good thing that more people believe the lies they believe.

Seriously????? You are offended by other peoples feelings? Huh?

Hang on I got some offending to do.

 

[Bonzi Lighthouse]

 

[Bonzi Lighthouse]

 

[Bonzi Lighthouse]

 

[Bonzi Lighthouse]

 

[otheryoda]

One word, ALIENS!!!! They show up, it all ends. Faith does not equal Truth. Its the belief in something without proof.

 

[Filthy Phil]

Finally a real debate from you. Alright I have to agree with you that there would be no more atrocities in the name of god (which I have already admitted and I have stated I don't agree with using religion to justify your actions). I have stated I don't represent the crusades or Spanish inquisitors. So yes you are right and I never twisted away from that, I never said your previously imaginary argument was false. My argument all along was that religion shouldn't be eradicated as a whole. Anyways do you believe that these people would not have found a way to create other atrocities? People that claim they do these evil/cruel acts because their religion wants them too are either evil for following that religion or are lying hypocrites for blaming their religion. So my point is that either way these people would have made a way to control a certain group with or without religion. There has been many atheist dictatorships (not saying their atrocities were motivated by their atheism), but my point is that they did not need religion to create atrocities. And the reason I asked where is your evidence is because you never posted any evidence nor argument so I was curious to what evidence you were referring to. So in conclusion yes you are right and my new argument is that there would still be just as many atrocities in the world with or without religion.


And don't complain about my insults towards your crappy spelling when you keep insulting Texas for no reason. And could you answer my question I previously asked? If you have a bad memory and simply forgot what question I'm referring to I will ask it again. Are those murders from Texas last year in the name of god?

Ah, Texas, now that is an arguable debate there on if the death penalty institution is motivated through Christian ideology. I would say yes...nut that wasnt my point and a WHOLE other argument. The reason i mentioned it was to highlight the correlation between areas of intense religious beliefs and intense craziness, like leading the world in executions from the land of the free. My reference to Texas wasn't to argue that Texas does it because of their extreme religious devotion (even though I do believe that) it was to show extremism walking hand in hand with extremism.

you asked," Anyways do you believe that these people would not have found a way to create other atrocities?" I believe that other atrocities throughout the course of humanity would happen certainly even despite the absence of religion. I dont claim that the absence of religion would make the world a PERFECT place, only a BETTER one. However, one atrocity less is always a good thing no? Furthermore, on these specific atrocities, they never would have happened without religion to begin with, so for these specific ones i see to reason to assume that another atrocity would happen in its exact place in substitute. THOSE THINGS HAPPENED SOLELY BECAUSE OF RELIGION. Their absence would have made the world better.

You said, "People that claim they do these evil/cruel acts because their religion wants them too are either evil for following that religion or are lying hypocrites for blaming their religion." It is a convenient stance to take to say that anyone who does something bad in the name of god was never representing that religion to begin with (despite the perpetrators statement that it does) If bad happens because of religion, it HAPPENS BECAUSE OF RELIGION. it is an objection to your belief, that is why you are finding coping methods, like denial, to say they are unrelated.

you said, "Alright I have to agree with you that there would be no more atrocities in the name of god" then you say ,"my new argument is that there would still be just as many atrocities in the world with or without religion." So if there are one or two fewer attrocities due to the lack of religion, (in reality hundreds more), isnt that FEWER ATROCITIES?

You have basically agreed, despite your recognition of such, that the world would have been a better place without those atrocities, which were due to religion, and would never have happened if religion was not present. In texas terms, that means the world would have been a better place if religion hadnt occurred. You know that feeling that just happened in your brain, a combination of frustration and denial...thats what we call coping.

your turn curly

 

[tyler.durden]

You have basically agreed, despite your recognition of such, that the world would have been a better place without those atrocities, which were due to religion, and would never have happened if religion was not present. In texas terms, that means the world would have been a better place if religion hadnt occurred. You know that feeling that just happened in your brain, a combination of frustration and denial...thats what we call coping.

your turn curly

Love your sig, that would scare the living shit outta me...

 

[otheryoda]

[video=youtube;55h1FO8V_3w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55h1FO8V_3w[/video]


My pie got is better than your cake god..... YUM CAKE!!! BRB.

 

[Heisenberg]

I wonder what it is about atheism that bothers him so much that he invests so much time and energy into posting about it. Start a blog already for fuck sakes!

Ha, and you know what, I'd read it! I love for oly to get his own public access show. Maybe even some youtube vids. The rainbow sprinkler lady gets old after a while.

[video=youtube;aIYZvr3ueGw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIYZvr3ueGw[/video]

i think they should be able to express their beliefs. but at some point it becomes ridiculous, you know? if someone wanted to put billboards up that said bigfoot exists, i wouldnt have a problem with the billboard itself, but rather the idea behind the billboard. especially if that belief was as widespread and ingrained as christianity is in america. and ontop of that, the only thing they had was 'faith' and this book that says hes real and is mostly third person accounts of events.
for these reasons, i would not agree with it. i do not think we should go around taking down crosses or anything. i just think they shouldnt be there in the first place because people shouldnt believe such things

Great response Luger. Now hep can stop accusing you of denying free speech to Christians.

Great idea, Heis. I've never experienced a creature quite like Oly, not even among small children. There is absolutely no value, merit, style or substance to anything he has to say, so I recently stopped replying to his posts about/to me altogether. Not even his fellow theists seem to respect or listen to him, and I've never seen that before. I really respect other theists on this forum, their beliefs are usually well thought out, they contribute interesting ideas and they sometimes even admit when they are wrong. I originally thought Oly wasn't getting what we were saying, so I tried to make my points in simpler and simpler ways, as I do with children. I've come to believe that he does understand all of our points (the same way I believe that he dresses and feeds himself), but chooses to run from his comprehension. It's not that he doesn't see, but that he WON'T see (there's none so blind as those who will not see), and there's nothing to be gained by interacting with someone who makes that choice. His ranting smacks of desperation, it is not us he is trying to convince, but himself. I didn't know about the ignore feature, I'm going to figure out how to do this now, sorry you have to absorb his lunacy as mod. If he ever actually contributes something worthwhile, I'll know it from your response to him. Good luck...

Didn't mean to complain about my situation. I'm glad to help even if it means suffering olys wrath. No need to be so confused about olys mentality, his is just an extreme case of cognitive dissonance reduction coupled with partiality bias and void of discerning logic. But you're right, it is exciting to see one in the wild!

 

[Filthy Phil]

When did you become an adult?


Last i checked, you all asked for negatives of atheism and posted not 1, but 10 dudes who did some fucked up shit. Now, did they do cause they felt no restraint or value for human cause they were atheists, or did they do it cause they hate believers like you all do?


Last i checked i was an adult, i dont know about you bro. Ignoring fact and using big words to impress the small atheist minds on here is truly not being an adult, but an internet bully!

you make the assumption that having no religion means that you have no ethics or moral values. You assume that because these people, some of whom actually were thiests, did these things because they lacked the love of jesus. The answer to each individual case can be found in history books, as to why they did it I mean. Making a simple assumption that they did it because they weren't christians shows a huge level of ignorance for history as a whole.

the reason people are asking you how old you are is because you are using reasoning methods that we all remember using in highschool. Seriously. You argue with the methods that teenagers use. And thats not meant ass a slam, but an explanation.