Video: “Growing Pains” star ready to save America from rational thought
posted at 9:13 pm on September 25, 2009 by Allahpundit
It’s times like these that I wish Tony Danza were an atheist so that we could have a proper theological debate between stars of bad 80s sitcoms. After this week’s post about America’s trend towards non-religion, I figured I owed you guys some end-of-the-week comment fun at the expense of atheists, Darwinists, and all the other racist/sexist/crypto-Nazis in the Kirk Cameron cosmology. Dig in.
Brought to you by the same two guys who think bananas not only appeared on Earth in their current form, but that they are, in fact, a fruit-formed “atheists’ nightmare.” Exit question: Kids can no longer “pray in public”? What?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 16 17 18 19 20 Next »
I beleive in God. I don’t know how he created all of this, through evolution, intelligent design, or some other way…etc. But, I beleive he did it. I am grateful I still live in a country that respects religious freedom. It does, doesn’t it????
WyoMike on September 27, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Prepare to be threatened:
First, the laws of logic are inherently secular. The beautiful thing about logic is that, just like mathematics, it holds equally true for all people in all places. It may interest you to know that the laws of logic were first discovered and codified by a pagan Greek philosopher.
Second, the branch of philosophy known as ethics is nothing other than an attempt to derive a universal, secular moral code. Many different secular ethics are compatible with many different religious views. What you know as Christian morality is heavily influenced by secular ethics, and many secular ethicists have taken the Christianity out of Christian morality to attempt to make the underlying ethical system palatable to a wider, not-necessarily-Christian audience.
As an atheist, I can pick and choose from a veritable smörgåsbord of different systems–I am not limited to the one system that bears the stamp of approval of my preacher’s interpretation of one particular religious text. Before the accusations of moral relativism begin, let me say: a religious person makes a similar choice from a more limited range of options when he picks which religion to follow. An atheist picking a philosophy has one more tool at his disposal than a mystic picking a religion: rationality. (Whether or not he chooses to exercise it is a completely separate matter—my experience has been that most atheists adopt an approach equally as mystical and irrational as the religious regarding matters of ethics; see Sartre, Jean-Paul, and Marx, Karl.)
Because I happen to value rationality, and because I demand that my own philosophical notions (belief-systems, if you prefer) be internally consistent, I have for my own life adopted the ethics put forward in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. No “rescuing devices,” to my knowledge, are necessary: the good is defined as an action which furthers the life of man qua man–an action regarding which one may rightfully be proud to have undertaken. It is driven by a study of what man’s life requires–for instance, virtuous actions are those which further the goal of reaching happiness at the end of a long and prosperous life, noble ends are those to which the many would aim if all were as wise as the wisest, etc. It’s not quite as neat and tidy as a simple dictum such as A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death, but it can be explained through logic and secular reason only, without recourse to mythology.
An explanation for the uniformity of nature is something best left to the individual sciences, rather than to philosophers (and if philosophers aren’t qualified to study it, by what rational standard can priests rightly be judged fit?) A physicist would tell you that the anthropic principle applies–the very fact that we are here asking questions like these demonstrates that this universe had to be hospitable to life, and a non-uniform universe certainly would not have permitted our existence. A biologist would answer the question by invoking the principles of natural selection (once I post this comment I’m going to crack the cover on Dawkins’ new book, The Greatest Show On Earth, which is devoted to this very topic). You might not find these answers to be deeply satisfying, but (remember, we wish to avoid relativism here) the point is not to have an answer you like; the point is to have the correct answer.
hicsuget on September 27, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Most violent death in the 20th century was at the hands of atheists. If they’re your hope for world peace, prepare to be disappointed.
Practically speaking, the path to world peace goes through the removal of conflict and/or a better means of resolving conflict.
We can certainly use Muslims as an example of religion being a cause of war, since they’re one of the few who enshrined war into their faith as jihad. If not for jihad being part of their faith, and the millions of Muslims who use jihad to justify killing and conquering, I doubt Christians would have any particular conflicts with Muslims.
On the other hand, Europe has been Christian for over 500 years. Yet Europe saw World War 1 and 2, and religion was not the cause for any of the millions who died in those wars. Obviously, the removal of religion is not going to bring about world peace.
Furthermore, the Soviet Union was not directly at war with anyone for most of the Cold War, but millions were put to death in it, anyway. If millions are being killed, but there is no war, can we really say there is peace on earth?
tom on September 27, 2009 at 11:50 PM
Karl Marx said that and he was also wrong.
Science cannot offer what Religion offers, which is not philsophical drugs. Science offers only kowlege and power, not much of a framework to deal with that knowledge and power.
Any Scientist who claims Science can answer everything should go hand in his degrees.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 12:36 AM
Stalin and Hitler were responsible for many of those deaths. They were evil but had complicated views about religion during their lives. Hitler going so far as believing that Christ was an Aryan who justified the killing of the Jews.
dedalus on September 28, 2009 at 12:50 AM
Don’t forget Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot.
The point is not that atheists are murdering madmen, but that the strawman of blaming war on religion is absurd.
tom on September 28, 2009 at 1:22 AM
The Murdering Madmen of the 20th Century were not just Atheist, they were predominantly Marxist.
According to some, the Dalai Lama is just laying in wait to start his own Final Solution or Cultural Revolution and Bertrand Russell’s obstinate pacifism was a mere ruse.
Without God, everything and nothing is permissible.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 2:27 AM
balkanmom2 on September 28, 2009 at 2:28 AM
Yes, but apparently not freedom from religion.
Seixon on September 28, 2009 at 3:34 AM
Religion/faith is perhaps the most divisive thing humans have ever invented, and is what divides most of the humans on Earth today. It feeds into a tribal instinct that breeds contempt and fear of “others”. Throughout history this single thing has created so much pain, death, and problems on this planet, which has left many remnants of things that are still problematic today.
Atheism breeds critical thought and appealing to logic and what is rational – that which will not lead to creating enemies of peers.
Seixon on September 28, 2009 at 3:38 AM
what do you mean?
thanks.
balkanmom2 on September 28, 2009 at 3:39 AM
Uh, I live in the only country in the history of the world in which the dictator declared the national religion to be atheism. There were no mosques, synagogues or churches. All were bulldozed.
Neighbors squealed on each other and everybody lived in fear of the dictator. The generalization above is false: atheism did lead to “creating enemies of peers.”
balkanmom2 on September 28, 2009 at 4:00 AM
FIFY.
Hope you slept well.
ted c on September 28, 2009 at 5:56 AM
Seixon, clear your mind. Wake up and dust off your glasses. The narrow focus of your worldview would be so greatly enhanced through seeing things as God would see them. Your method is to see the world and others through how they see and how they pursue “religion,” a man made construct. Unfortunately, that worldview keeps your mind imprisoned in the fallacy blurring reality and I remind you that “All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.”
As I told you last night, we’re all prisoners of our own sin. Moreover, you cannot judge others and expect to arrive at a rational conclusion because we’re all equal in his sight, and that is fundamentally flawed because we have sin in our hearts. It is simply illogical and fallacious to see that one can put himself above others simply because of his religious beliefs. Furthermore, it is wrong to dismiss God because of how others demonstrate their faith. You’re a sinner just like me and God wrestles with your heart just like he wrestles with mine. He knocks at your door and that’s the reason why you’re here. If it were of no consequence, then it would be otherwise.
ted c on September 28, 2009 at 6:11 AM
“Rational thought”? – Like all the utterly complex organisms and ecosystems we see all around us – just happening by random accident? Yeah, like that.
The Zoo Keeper on September 28, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Most atheist I know are retard stoners who don’t like religion cause they live immoral lives and will amount to nothing….
O and most athiest are just anti Christianity and go out of their way to start fights ( AP )
And thinking Humans came from retarded fish is more insane than thinking a God created us just so you know. Science can not prove 90% of what they say about evolution. They also know you don’t evolve into different species, such as a dog can never become a lizard.
Donut on September 28, 2009 at 10:15 AM
I do not attend Church. I do not take my children regularly to Church. Saturday at 10am my eldest son had a baseball game in Menifee, CA in the hot sun. Turned out to be sick and starting throwing up in a trash can. He refused to leave the game because they had enough to replace him in outfield but the team would have to take an out every at bat he had. He ended up steal home once. On the way home I was talking about how horrible it was that he got sick in the sweltering heat because it obviously made things horrible worse for him. He responded by telling me that now that he was in the air conditioned car he felt better except for some body aches. Then out of no where he says, “You know mom? It’s so strange about the world. If the world were to stop turning right now we’d all be careening into space at the rate of speed the earth is rotating. It’s weird to think if the earth was tilted just a slight bit different we probably wouldn’t exist…” To which I responded, “So, what does that say to you?” His reply? “That there is something bigger like God that created it all.” Yep, those poor illogical children who need to be taught science so that they can learn to not to see and feel what they see and feel.
Sultry Beauty on September 28, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Um, okay?
You seem to be missing the point, so let me add some clarity.
I agree that laws of logic “holds equally true for all people in all places”. Therefore, I assume you would agree that they are “universal” in nature. This means that they cannot be a human convention, because if they were they would lose their universal nature. Laws of logic exist OUTSIDE of the human mind, because whether or not I exist, laws of logic still exist. They are an abstract, immaterial entity. So, how does the atheistic worldview account for this?
That is all well and good. However this presents a problem. If one can pick and choose what is right and what is wrong by adhering to whatever moral code seems right to him/her, then he/she would have no basis for viewing the code of another as either right or wrong. Why should any particular standard be THE standard. The goal of seeking happiness borrows from the Biblical worldview.
You really haven’t answered the question. How does an atheistic/evolutionary worldview account for uniformity in nature? If one says that he/she assumes uniformity because uniformity has always been present in the past, then he/she is assuming uniformity to explain uniformity (circular reasoning). If one says that uniformity is a property of the universe, then he/she cannot assume that uniformity will always exist in it’s present form because many things in the universe change. How do we know uniformity will not/has not change(d)? It cannot be accounted for in an atheistic worldview.
Vaporman87 on September 28, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Pardon the “strong” emphasis on the responses above. HTML goof.
Vaporman87 on September 28, 2009 at 10:48 AM
I love how people misrepresent, distort and misquote what Nietzsche said.
Mankind has killed the concept of the old Gods with Science. God is no longer a viable source of all wisdom, no longer capable of acting as law giver or capable of Teleology.
In effect, the Old Gods are obsolete.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 10:49 AM
As stated where? Is that the clause in the Constitution right after the establishment of the “wall of separation between Church and State?”
This is the biggest frustration I have with those who want to remove any reference to God or religion from the public square (including public buildings, pronouncements, etc.) There is no guarantee of freedom from that which offends you. (And yes, Christians can go down this road, as well.)
Add in the fact that a concept of freedom “from” religion is wholly antithetical to the founding of the nation, and contradictory to the writings and statements of Washington, Jefferson, et al, and it’s historically inaccurate to boot. But other than that…
jrouse9394 on September 28, 2009 at 10:55 AM
Donut, you’re a liar.
They need to be taught science so they can understand what they see and feel.
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Human concepts are supposed to represent things which exist independent of human consciousness. Evolution by natural selection was happening for eons before mankind noticed, and will continue to happen long after you cease to exist. There is nothing “deep” or profound here.
Au contraire—you yourself picked and chose what you would think about right and wrong when you picked your sect of Christianity out from the hundreds of thousands of competing belief-systems. If you had picked a Jewish religion instead, for instance, you would think it wrong to eat today (happy Yom Kippur, everybody!). Your choice of Christianity over Judaism was at least as arbitrary (and in practice likely far more so) as my choice of Aristotelianism over Platonism.
How can I decide if the code of another is wrong? Easy! I picked my code not arbitrarily, but by selecting the most rational code I could find. Other people’s codes aren’t just different from mine; they’re less rational. I say that others’ codes are wrong, not because they’re different, but because they do not further the ends of man qua man. In short, I do not call those who disagree with me “heathen infidel doubters doomed to hell;” I call them “stupid people destined to reap the natural results of their own stupidity—iustum fatum stultorum.”
Please explain what you mean by “uniformity.” Apparently my guess at your definition was incorrect.
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 11:43 AM
It’s pretty funny that this argument is still going.
The atheists aren’t going to convince the religionists of anything, and the religionists aren’t going to turn the atheists into believers.
The most interesting thing to watch in these threads is how far either side will go to either convince the other side they’re right, or that they have the freedom to believe whatever they wish.
IMO, the most hilarious “arguments” are the ones on the religious side when they say if you don’t believe in their god (of free will) in their way, you’ll be punished for your free will and burn in hell. If there is some bearded old gent sitting on a throne making judgements, those people in particular are gonna feel the heat, not those that exercise their free will.
Everyone hates a hypocrite.
Spiritk9 on September 28, 2009 at 11:52 AM
No one can prove God scientifically since God encompasses all linear and non-linear reality. Science is empirical, not theoretical, and deals with the material universe. Evolution and creation are the same, since everything is being created and evolving simultaneously. Leave the whimsical musings of the naive to their own distortions. They may never “get it.” If I had young children now I would home school them for sure!
Nalea on September 28, 2009 at 11:52 AM
I always find it interesting how atheists have a god in their own image…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Why?
balkanmom2 on September 28, 2009 at 11:59 AM
but the most hilarious arguments to me are the total denial by atheists of anything that may defame the holy name of darwin…the racism and eugenics implicit in evolution are just denied….as is any evidence which may disprove the theory…
its why evolution is a faith, not science…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 12:01 PM
So your answer to the question, “How does atheism account for universal laws of logic?” boils down to: “They exist.” Interesting.
So your answer to the question “How does atheism account for the existence of moral absolutes?” boils down to: “I choose my own morals and so do you.”
Again, interesting.
I apologize if I was not clear. Uniformity in this case meaning that our universe is understandable – that it can be quantified in a way that our minds comprehend. Also, assuming the universe is logical and orderly and obeys mathematical laws that are consistent over time and space. Therefore allowing us to make successful predictions about the future.
Vaporman87 on September 28, 2009 at 12:16 PM
How sad that even some of those on the “right” have bought into the fallacius concept of “freedom from religion”. Relying on a partial quotation from Thomas Jefferson about “seperation of Church and State”. At the same time they are loath to consider that one phrase in context of the rest of the letter in which he clearly stated that the religious protections of the 1st amendment were specificly to protect religion from the power of government and not to protect or isolate the government or the people from the influence of religion.
LCT688 on September 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM
@balkanmom2 because the old gods and the old religions were necessary to explain the universe. If you understand that bacteria and virus’s make you sick and not a curse or the evil eye, you no longer have to placate the spirits to keep that from happening. The very issues of this thread point out that despite many religious peoples concerns, science does a decent job of explaining why things exist and how things happen, so religion is forced to either denounce rationalism or seek new ground, such as the extremely sad attempt to state that morals come from divine inscription instead of common sense and conflict resolution.
oh and @vaporman87 the universal laws of logic are by definition universal, and thus work in all cultures and times, a feat that religion has not replicated.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 12:29 PM
you take our morality and think you came up with it. typical atheist arrogance….
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 12:32 PM
I don’t know anything about that. Darwin loved to lick wienies on the farm for all I care. His scientific ideas are important historically, but are not current evolutionary theory.
See, I’m actually sitting here being faithless. Biology isn’t my field. When there are advances in the theory it hardly bothers me. I have no horse in that race.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 12:35 PM
@LCT688 oh give it a rest, the founders were Deist and hated organized religion. Thomas Jefferson hated the catholic church so much they are lucky he didn’t put in a special amendment targeting them for persecution. and if living by religious edicts is so great, name one successful theocracy that didn’t slaughter it’s own people to ‘purify them’
honestly, if religion can’t be trusted to govern you why would you insist on carrying it’s broken moral system into government? Our laws are based on personal property laws not religious morals.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 12:39 PM
@right4life who says I take your morals? I’m gay and I just think people should try to leave the world a better place than they found it. Your church morals call for my execution, I’m hardly a fan.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 12:41 PM
The Contradiction between Religious Myths and Observed Reality makes it so. There are no angry spirits in Volcanoes, so stop sacrificing virgins. You’ve sacrificed 10,000 virgins before and those spirits are still angry.
Unless you claim that all reality is merely a deception foisted upon us either by the Good God or the Bad God for various purposes. Which is laughable. What are you going to believe, countless observed facts or the Pie in the Sky.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 12:45 PM
so you’re a liar too…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 12:47 PM
yes thats why Jefferson went to church services in the capitol building and paid for christian missionaries to the indians out of goverment funds….
try reading Washington’s thanksgiving address…and get a clue.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 12:48 PM
the details differ, but the framework remains.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 12:49 PM
oh so the atheists were responsible for slavery and genocide of the native americans…thanks for clearing that up!
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 12:53 PM
Is this an excerpt from a book?
BTW, I haven’t sacrificed any virgins….I promise.
balkanmom2 on September 28, 2009 at 12:56 PM
Well, some did and some didn’t. Franklin was one of the founders of the American Episcopal church after the split from the C of E with the Revolution. He was far from a doctrinaire Christian, but didn’t see them or others as enemies.
As for Jefferson, Virginia had significant restrictions on Catholicism. It was very Protestant.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 12:57 PM
@right4life I’m a liar cause I’m gay? that’s brilliant…also your not that witty.
the church services at the capitol, you know for a fact Jefferson didn’t just go cause he was trying to get laid with some woman there? stop assuming morality and church affiliation, it could have been little more than a social event. As for the missionaries, they set-up schools and worked to educate people, a step the founders assumed would westernize and civilize the natives. Again you are assuming this implies religious beliefs when he might have simply been glad to send anyone that was willing to go.
Maybe you should read the speech yourself,
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 12:58 PM
@exception good point, I too am guilty of painting with to broad a brush! my bad
@right4life no that was religious people too, they had to kill them to save their souls remember? how’s that search for a nice theocracy going?
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM
unintelligent too…
Your church morals call for my execution, I’m hardly a fan.
right…show me which christian church calls for the death of gays..
ignorant too.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM
compared to any atheist regime, there is no contest…or the gay sharia that the gay-marriage proponents want to impose upon this country..where any criticism of homosexuality a crime…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM
oh I’m sure you’ll mention the terrible inquisition…which killed about 2,000 people over 200 years…and the awful crusades, which were a defensive reaction to the muslim invasion….and without which you would be wearing a beard and turban….
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:05 PM
gee you quote only a small section…what a surprise that you would twist Washington’s address..you atheists are so predictable….
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:07 PM
Washington was asking GOD for these things…thats who the ‘he’ is….get a clue….pathetic.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:08 PM
@right4life right…
Westboro baptist church led by Fred Phelps and family for one…several baptist churches I’ve attended throughout texas said they should be driven out and flogged. do you really want to stake this position?
Comparing your religion to the worst aspects of atheism is not really an endorsement, it’s just saying that your hands are as bloody as theirs. Is that moral relativism I hear in your words?
I’m ignorant? Your in my head? ohh scary did you like all the lectures on microbiology I had to attend? or maybe all the sermons I got to sit thru three times a week.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 1:09 PM
@right4life I love how you assume I’m an atheist or your assumption that it would bother me.
I suppose I could point out that Washington could just have easily been praying to the altar of an unnamed god than to your specific deity.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM
why don’t you post their doctrinal statement that calls for this??
your ‘flogging’ statement is so much BS.
you live in a judeo-christian country…so what you say is laughable.
its more than obvious. ignorant, hateful, bigoted…yeah a typical atheist gay.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM
right…sure…smirk…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:14 PM
is this really the best you can do?? please.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:15 PM
I suppose I could point out that Washington could just have easily been praying to the altar of an unnamed god than to your specific deity.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM
He wasn’t.
courtesy adherents.com
kingsjester on September 28, 2009 at 1:19 PM
In reality, Westboro is not a church, but a cult of people who use harassment to provoke attacks in order to file lawsuits and get money, to send their kids to law school to then learn how to file more lawsuits…
Darwin was not an atheist.
firepilot on September 28, 2009 at 1:27 PM
you know it doesn’t matter if he was or not…his theory is…
Wallace’s version of evolution is much more compatible with theism and intelligent design…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Leviticus 20, of course. However most Christians reject this, much in the way they don’t keep Kosher either.
Phelps’ little gang of freaks doesn’t have anything to do with anything.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM
because christians are not under the law…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Stephen Jay Gould was an atheist to the best of my knowledge, although the main thing I know about him is he helped me sell an extra Metropolitan Opera ticket I had to a former student of his.
That quote can mean a couple different things, each meaningful. In addition to the one you imply, and I don’t think you misread him, consider this. Is auto mechanics theistic? The workings of my car are not Faith based. That has no bearing on the worth of Faith. It’s just too much of the physical world for that. Same for any other worldly, physical thing.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 1:55 PM
basically the theory of evolution is much more than science, it is an athiestic worldiew imposed upon science.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM
That’s how I understand it. I think Christian theology agrees, but many individual Christians get confused, and end up picking and choosing the parts of the law that catch their eye. Sometimes also missed is the Biblical distinction between this law, and morality. In the Bible even before Exodus, men knew right from wrong, and were pretty damn accountable for failing. I can think of a couple serious examples of that accountability….
exception on September 28, 2009 at 2:01 PM
It’s just not. It simply never addresses God or any other gods. There’s still tons of stuff that are prerequisites for evolution, and it doesn’t address them at all. There is no First Cause expressed or implied by evolution. It comes on a little late in the game for that.
That doesn’t mean that it’s compatible with your beliefs and Faith. But you don’t get to decide what it means or doesn’t mean to others.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 2:05 PM
@right4life you were fun to play with but if you can’t make a rational point your kind of useless. Your personal attacks lack merit and substantiation, your inability to see people as anything other than your preconceived stereotypes is sad and I would say alarming but I don’t know what you do, and lastly your poor grasp of history is damning to the schools that produced you. Read a book, and than some more.
@exception i would say that in fact Phelps is important as he can take the same literature and twist it with mild effort to serve his own twisted ways. It is in fact the primary problem with any religion that believes it has some sort of magic bible that is their god’s truth. When you remove the ability to question your holy texts it has been inevitable that the religion is than caught in the trap of time. As society moves on and adapts to new problems the religions like islam or fundamentalist christianity tries to enforce outdated moral codes which result in widespread violence and terror for the general population. This happened in Europe the US and now again in the middle east. The catholic church tries to get around this by having the ability to rewrite it’s doctrine, morons are lucky that they are still ‘writing’ their holy texts and buddhism and daoism both keep a limited number of written works and rely more on independent discovery. Until people accept that their religious texts are not immutable there is always the danger of radicalism.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:06 PM
very true..even in genesis 9:6
Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:07 PM
*embarassed* I did not mean morons, I meant mormon’s and I apologize to any reading.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:08 PM
really now, then why was it SO easy to make you look stupid?? oh as far as ‘personal attacks’ poor baby..can give it…but can’t take it…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:09 PM
In 1802, Jefferson received a gift: a 1,200-pound block of cheese that contained the inscription: “Rebellion To Tyrants Is Obedience To God”. If Obama received such a gift, I can only imagine how this website would interpret its meaning. Perhaps something like this: Death to Infidels is Loyalty to Islam.
Oh yeah, the gift to Jefferson came from evangelical christians.
Good4Onan on September 28, 2009 at 2:10 PM
oh yeah where was that link to Phelp’s church that called for the execution of gays???
hmmmmm????
or why don’t you just admit you were lying…but that would take integrity and courage…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:11 PM
Really? “In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes.” Judges 17:6
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:12 PM
@right4life you’ll find it here at Godhatesfags.com
moron.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:13 PM
I can’t go to that site at work…why don’t you post the text, you stupid piece of trash?
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:15 PM
and yes that really sounds like a church web site…sure…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:15 PM
uh that was after exodus…moron.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:16 PM
if you can’t go to the site why should I bother? google it it’s not that tough and if you haven’t heard about them your even more unlearned than your petty personal attacks imply.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:17 PM
I’m thinking of the Flood and Sodom, but there are many cases where it was clear man had to know how to behave before Moses.
You can go to the root: Genesis 3. The Bible states in a very straightforward way how man became a creature bound by morality rather than stay an amoral animal in Jewish and Christian thought.
See, I don’t have Faith in this, but I understand it and can present these views honestly. It’s not my belief, but that doesn’t make it right for me to define it out from others.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 2:17 PM
if you are the embodiment of such precious moral teachings why do you think I don’t follow them? Should we all go around insulting everyone we talk to? Is that the example you want us to follow or emulate?
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:19 PM
So how do those who would make the claim that our founding principles came from property right and not religious conviction rectify that with the Decleration of Independence’s statement that our rights are “endowed by are creator”?
LCT688 on September 28, 2009 at 2:20 PM
But there are about a billion people on the planet who use the same lit and think he’s vile. I find that more instructive.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 2:20 PM
oh poor baby..you can dish it out, but you can’t take it…and I was insulted by your first post..you are hate-filled, and you slander christianity with every post…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:21 PM
oh I did manage to pull it up…didn’t see anything on there advocating the death of gays…why don’t you post the text and the link???
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:23 PM
very true…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:24 PM
@exception i tried to square christian moralism for a long time, (I was raised quite severely in it) but over time I found it impossibly cruel to those that did not receive it’s message for whatever reason. Would tribesman in the desert go to hell if they were not immersed, would my grandfather go to hell because he was in a different faith, would our ancestors be sent to hell because they came to early? It wasn’t universal enough for me and never rang true so I chose to discard it over time.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Nietzche’s quote is from Thus Spoke Zarathustra I believe, it has been about 5 years since I read it. I explain it my own way.
Too many people get him wrong.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 2:30 PM
I bet you can’t post the text and link to the page…no surprise.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:31 PM
@right4life so you can’t take any critique of your religion? is your faith that thin? I don’t remember you treating atheist with any kid gloves
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:32 PM
@right4life information and blog about Fred Phelps. … “God hates fags,” “AIDS cures fags,” and “Fags die, God laughs (or mocks),” and claims that God will punish …
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:37 PM
thats not calling for the death of gays.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:38 PM
you posted his church site..ok, where on that site does it call for the death of gays???
saying God will punish gays is not the same as calling for their execution.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:38 PM
FAIL
corona on September 28, 2009 at 2:39 PM
criticize all you want..but you are lying…remember this??
a total and complete LIE. but coming from you, its not a surprise…so don’t be surprised if you get called on it.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:40 PM
The answer to the question “Why are the laws of logic true?” is: because the universe is structured in such a way as to make them true–because Aristotle’s axiom “a thing is itself and behaves in accordance with its own nature” is true. Your question seems to be “why is the universe structured in such a way as to make this true.” To answer this I again cite the anthropic principle: if it were otherwise, we wouldn’t be around to ask such questions.
“Subject to choice” does not necessarily imply “subjectively chosen.” Also, please note that some atheists are willing to claim that their morality is the absolute correct one in a metaphysical sense (see Rand, Ayn). Further, it is one thing to declare that one’s morality is absolute, but it is a different matter for one’s morality actually to be correct (see al Zawahiri, Ayman).
I refer you again back to the anthropic principle. If causality did not apply, no creature with cognitive power similar to our own would be around to ask why not.
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 2:45 PM
Some Christian people and some Christian sects (and versions and flavors and there are many) get stuff really wrong, even from the perspective of most Faithful readings of the Bible. People project their cultural values onto their belief system. That’s no surprise. The same people can project the same stuff on any other belief system. Not the same way always, but lots of very non-Christian people come up with some suspiciously similar ideas.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Think about it: freedom to practice your religion implies freedom from being forced to practice anyone else’s. If Jews are to be free to practice Judaism, they must be free from coercion to practice Christianity (among others). If Christians are to be free to practice Christianity, they must be free from coercion to practice Judaism (among others).
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 2:49 PM
Heh. By design. He wasn’t always looking to be understood.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 2:50 PM
As far as morality, atheism is, well, agnostic on the subject.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 2:52 PM
the ‘freedom from religion’ crowd goes beyond that…they don’t want to hear, see, or be exposed in any way to any religion…they want to outlaw all religous expression in this country.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:53 PM
Because they’re making up their religion as they go along (so much for absolutism). If keeping kosher no longer applies, why do the Ten Commandments? From my vantage point, this appears remarkably similar to the often-derided Islamic doctrine that only the most recently-spoken words of Muhammed are the correct ones.
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 2:53 PM
@right4life well there’s Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.
Than in the new testament http://www.religioustolerance.org/hombiblnt.htm
it simply condemns me to hell, which depending on your interpretation is either a lake of fire or a cold abyss, which i suppose to you is a ringing endorsement, and not the kind of language that lead to the burning of gays and witches for the past 1500 years. A strong record of trust and love I’m sure.
How is any of this lying?
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 2:54 PM
I guess it’s lucky for you Christians that all points of view are equally protected under the First Amendment. (You would do well to keep this in mind when the idea comes up that non-Christian speech should be restricted.)
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 16 17 18 19 20 Next »