Atheism and sharing the bridge to the future

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by Despanan

But what do you mean by tolerance? I mean we already tolerate Christians. I have Christian friends, I tolerate your Christianity. I tolerate my Christian relatives at holidays. I even attend church if they want me to on special occasions.

What I mean is close to what you said in the following:

Originally Posted by Despanan

So I don't see why you're bringing up tolerance...unless of course by tolerance you mean that I don't talk about my objections to the bible and to Christianity in general, that I don't voice my problems with the divinity of Jesus Christ in the proper social context (For instance, the various atheist threads we've posted on here), or that I say something like: "You have your beliefs and I have my beliefs and they're both equally valid"?

Is that what you mean by tolerance?

change "equally valid" to "to each their own" and you have the tolerance I am speaking of in the context of this thread.
I am not saying anything different than what our First Amendment says regarding freedom of religion, except instead of it applying to the government, applying it in local interactions.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by Despanan

I agree,

I'm just asking them to play by the rules their divine book very clearly sets down.

Why? People have freedom to choose their faith and the way they worship (or don't).

Originally Posted by Despanan

We've seen that statistically, Christians know far less about their own religion than atheists. I want more Christians to read the bible and understand it because that will inevitably lead to more atheists.

I agree with the first part. The second part may or may not happen, depending on if they follow the entire bible (Judeo-Chistians) or follow it as a guide to living.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

...
I didn't say these things. Atheists never said this stuff. It was the CHRISTIANS that said this. It was the Christians that drew the lines in the sand. Now you mean to tell me that you have the fucking grapes to amend these VERY tenants in your religion? You mean to tell me that in the face of your religion you can say that THESE PARTS ARE NOT IMPORTANT? Then you tell me what part is important?

Wait a minute: when did this thread turn from cooperation between people of different beliefs to Christian consistency? They may be important to some people and not important to others.

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

Thing is, the fault will NEVER be on the non belief side. We make no positive claim about the existence of a DIVINE POLICE MAN. I'm not angry at them. I EXPECT them to struggle against me.

So this explains your posts that follow, you like confrontation.
The purpose of my thread was to find a way to lessen confrontation.

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

You tell me, H_P. Where does it end? Where can it all be reconciled?

I am not saying it needs to be reconciled, I am saying tolerated, live and let live.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

Wow. Just...wow.
OK, so much for debate! Hope your day gets better man.

"They have scorn for their brothers of the right-hand path because their religions carry different labels, and somehow this animosity must be released. What better way than through "prayer"! What a simperingly polite way of saying: "I hate your guts," is the thinly disguised device known as praying for your enemy! Praying for one's own enemy is nothing more than bargain-basement anger, and of a decidedly shoddy and inferior quality! If there has been so much violent discrepancy as to the proper way in which to worship God, how many different interpretations of God can there be -and who is right?"

[Murder.Of.Crows]

What is that excerpt from?

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

Wait a minute: when did this thread turn from cooperation between people of different beliefs to Christian consistency? They may be important to some people and not important to others.

But that's living a fucking lie. Being consistent is imperative. To be otherwise is outright hypocrisy.

So this explains your posts that follow, you like confrontation.
The purpose of my thread was to find a way to lessen confrontation.

Yeah, because my very existence and lack of belief doesn't beg for confrontation. H_P, I find your belief in a god to be stupid and illogical. I find it to be a character flaw. Though it's not that important, on paper, I believe you are patently wrong. It's almost a clinical observation. How can you live with that?

I am not saying it needs to be reconciled, I am saying tolerated, live and let live.

Because pardoning you for your bad ideas is personally hypocritical of myself. Each time these conversations come up, I HAVE to tell you why you're wrong. I don't actively go out and do this shit cause I don't have to. But if I'm confronted with it, I WILL fight it. I see no reason why I shouldn't. I think you're wrong and I think you being moderate about your faith gives credence to a VIOLENT belief. I think that is patently wrong.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by Saya

I absolutely encourage everyone to discuss it, and I think thats the only to maybe move above "tolerance" and into "acceptance."

As do I, I expected to be called on the idea and for my position, but didn't expect the "fuck yous" form KK. But that's ok, I think KK is a little drunk. I have said some crazy shit when I take too much of my pain killers. I seriously can't see myself being that good of a threat to piss him off that much.

Originally Posted by Saya

But I do think that Christianity has to prove itself to others, the onus isn't on the secularists to just not attack, as long you're acting like a dickhead you're going to get called on it.
...

This is valid, and I do not see Christianity growing. Logically its demise must be taking place if atheism is growing (in America, where population growth is too low to account for atheism membership growing and Christianity maintaining numbers). The atheist members have to come from somewhere.

Again: what I am trying to do in this thread is not justify Christianity or prove it or anything mentioned in the previous posts by others, I am trying to encourage people of different persuasions to tolerate and even accept one another as the religious landscape changes.

I expected heat from believers. I am really quite shocked by the reaction and the attempted change of topic by the non-believers. I suppose there is deep seated distrust and grudges held against believers even when they are holding out their hand.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

As do I, I expected to be called on the idea and for my position, but didn't expect the "fuck yous" form KK. But that's ok, I think KK is a little drunk. I have said some crazy shit when I take too much of my pain killers. I seriously can't see myself being that good of a threat to piss him off that much.

I am STONE. COLD. SOBER. I just find you incredibly offensive. Massively so. And I've been HONEST with you the entire time.

Discussion is confrontation. Don't even think you can ride Saya's coattails and mince words into her posts as if you're saying the same thing. You're not.

This is valid, and I do not see Christianity growing. Logically its demise must be taking place if atheism is growing (in America, where population growth is too low to account for atheism membership growing and Christianity maintaining numbers). The atheist members have to come from somewhere.

Ah, so you support the demise of Christian thought. Then get with the fucking program, dude. If you see it for what it is, stop playing pretend.

Again: what I am trying to do in this thread is not justify Christianity or prove it or anything mentioned in the previous posts by others, I am trying to encourage people of different persuasions to tolerate and even accept one another as the religious landscape changes.

You're asking me to shut the fuck up and keep my ideas to myself so that people can just quietly continue to do what they do now. FUCK. THAT.

I expected heat from believers. I am really quite shocked by the reaction and the attempted change of topic by the non-believers. I suppose there is deep seated distrust and grudges held against believers even when they are holding out their hand.

I have no reason to actually trust a believer to have my interests in mind and I have no reason to respect the idea of "live and let live" as some kind of compromise. It's not. It's just a beautiful lie you tell to children so they don't fight each other. End of the day, ONE OF US is fucking wrong and you know it and I know it. WE can not continue to live our lives based on a lie.

I am SERIOUSLY not cool with you right now. You've taken the passive aggressive stance of attacking my character and I'm just being brutally honest with you. Go Fuck Yourself.


You present me ideas of live and let live as some kind of good idea when it isn't. You're asking me to give your faith a respect it doesn't deserve, Humane and it's really pissed me off.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

But that's living a fucking lie. Being consistent is imperative. To be otherwise is outright hypocrisy.

OK, now we're talking. Off topic, but what the hell, this is only a forum. So here is an example of, shall we say, "justifiable inconsistency":

The Old Testament says parents are to stone their children if they are bad.
Now in the 21st century one goes to prison for that. A mother in the U.S. was recently arrested for killing her son and daughter for "being mouthy".
So she would be considered consistent, according to scripture, right?
But how many Americans are going to stone their kids? (But I guarantee you many would LOVE to at times LOL).

So people are inconsistently following the bible. And guess what? The bible is inconsistent! It says to obey the local government! So, parents are damned if they do and damned if they don't stone their kids. If they don't stone them they are inconsistent Christians and if they do, they are violating the local law.

So yes, living a truly consistent Christian life is impossible. Your beef with Christians objectively and logically speaking is accurate. But here is the part you underestimate: people need guidance, they need comfort during stressful times, "man does not live by bread alone". So faith will continue whether it is perfect or not. Religion survives because it works in people's lives. It gives them endurance. The Egyptians ruled the Jews who were their slaves, but the Jews endured.

So people of today know about the inapplicable parts of the bible and are ok with it.

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

Yeah, because my very existence and lack of belief doesn't beg for confrontation. H_P, I find your belief in a god to be stupid and illogical. I find it to be a character flaw. Though it's not that important, on paper, I believe you are patently wrong. It's almost a clinical observation. How can you live with that?

Because to me it isn't stupid. I agree it is illogical. Faith is not a logical concept.

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

Because pardoning you for your bad ideas is personally hypocritical of myself. Each time these conversations come up, I HAVE to tell you why you're wrong. I don't actively go out and do this shit cause I don't have to. But if I'm confronted with it, I WILL fight it. I see no reason why I shouldn't. I think you're wrong and I think you being moderate about your faith gives credence to a VIOLENT belief. I think that is patently wrong.

And I want you to tell me when I am wrong. But don't think that I adhere to or condone any violent part of what is in the bible, I don't any more than you condone or adhere to the violent takeover and enslavement of African Americans by whites.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

I am STONE. COLD. SOBER. I just find you incredibly offensive. Massively so. And I've been HONEST with you the entire time.

...

I am SERIOUSLY not cool with you right now. You've taken the passive aggressive stance of attacking my character and I'm just being brutally honest with you. Go Fuck Yourself.


You present me ideas of live and let live as some kind of good idea when it isn't. You're asking me to give your faith a respect it doesn't deserve, Humane and it's really pissed me off.

Ok man, then I guess it is time to give you break from Humane on the brain. Mrs. Humane wants the computer now anyway to check her email. Signing off.
But don't think I am not going to reply, if I don't it is because I have to live a life now and then. But don't think I am "hiding". lulz

[Despanan]

You're getting alot of hate from KK right now, I'm going to play the good cop here.

Originally Posted by HumanePain

Holy cow, I was busy the past few days with work and come back to what I was warning about: lack of tolerance of believers by non-believers.

Tolerance
To-ler-ance

a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own

You tolerate a crying baby on a plane, you tolerate a nut talking about Libertarianism, you tolerate a smelly homeless man on the subway, it doesn't mean that because I tolerate him, I think it's okay when he pukes on my shoes.

How do I not have sympathy for your beliefs? I understand your beliefs and I haven't physically tried to stop you from believing them or practicing. I tolerate Christians in polite society.

I've been tolerating Christians for most of my life and I'm still tolerating them now, so I don't quite see what you're getting at...oh wait:

Originally Posted by HP

change "equally valid" to "to each their own" and you have the tolerance I am speaking of in the context of this thread.

Ahh, I'm starting to get it, by tolerance you actually mean:

I am not saying anything different than what our First Amendment says regarding freedom of religion, except instead of it applying to the government, applying it in local interactions.

So let me get this straight...(I'm going to be very nice about this)

The first amendment reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So I take this to mean:

A person shall make no statement respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


HP, this is self-contradictory. If you apply the first amendment to "local interaction" ie: communication the first part of it means that you're 100% not allowed to talk about religion at all. Then it goes on to say that you also can't tell anyone to stop doing a religious practice, or tell anyone to stop talking about religion, or write about religion in the paper, or tell people not to meet about religion...you see where this is going?

In the same breath you've said: "No one can talk about religion or tell someone to stop talking about religion"


I don't think this is what you meant though, I think you just thought the first amendment meant "freedom of religion". As in: "To each their own so no one should criticize another's religion to their face" Tell me If I've misunderstood, but from your statement it's pretty clear that you want freedom of religion to overrule freedom of speech.

This isn't tolerance HP, this is tyranny. You want to violate my own freedom of speech in order to insure that you and other believers have the right to never be questioned, challenged or offended.

I'm sorry, but you ask too much, this is never going to happen. I am never going to simply "shut up" because you don't like what I'm saying.

Des and KK posts are representative of the anti-religious vitriol that will prolong the struggle for acceptance, not ease it. Your approach isn't debate, it is a polemic. I suppose it is good I was busy for a while as you proved my point yourself.

Please stop passive-aggressively attacking our character. There has been no vitriol (at least not until you deeply offended Kontan, and really I can't blame him - you're out of line).

Although you demonstrated my point (with gusto!), personally I wish you hadn't as I had always thought you were open minded. But you are more narrow minded than Christian fundies! Wow.

I don't think you understand what it is to be open minded, I assure you my mind is wide open. Just because it's open does not mean I have to accept every idea that comes along as a valid one. An open mind does not preclude the ability to make judgments.

So let me see if I understand your position: Because Christians don't follow the bible to the letter of the law they are hypocrites and should not be partners in building a future more accepting of non-believers?

They are hypocrites, but I'm not the one who makes them hypocrites, the BIBLE makes them hypocrites. The book is very clear about this.

HP, you'd never tell me I was going to hell, but by ascribing to Christianity even if it's "Just Jesus" you either believe Jesus and condemn me to hell, Because no man can come to the father except through Him or you reject Jesus's teaching but still claim to follow him. If you claim to believe in the divinity of and follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, but don't actually believe everything he said what does that make you?

Am I going to Hell HP? Yes or no?

I'm sorry if I'm asking you tough questions here, but this is pretty important. I mean, if Jesus is to be believed, my future, because I will never ever accept him as my savior, is eternal torment in a lake of fire.

This is my soul on the line HP. This is eternal paradise vs. the most excruciating torture I've ever felt FOREVER. If you believe that that is my future, but don't tell me because you think I'll be offended...man that is horrible. That is reprehensible.

Yes or no: am I going to Hell, or is Jesus wrong?

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

OK, now we're talking. Off topic, but what the hell, this is only a forum. So here is an example of, shall we say, "justifiable inconsistency":

The Old Testament says parents are to stone their children if they are bad.
Now in the 21st century one goes to prison for that. A mother in the U.S. was recently arrested for killing her son and daughter for "being mouthy".
So she would be considered consistent, according to scripture, right?
But how many Americans are going to stone their kids? (But I guarantee you many would LOVE to at times LOL).

So people are inconsistently following the bible. And guess what? The bible is inconsistent! It says to obey the local government! So, parents are damned if they do and damned if they don't stone their kids. If they don't stone them they are inconsistent Christians and if they do, they are violating the local law.

Yes. A GREAT example of how Christianity as a concept is absolutely irrelevant.

So yes, living a truly consistent Christian life is impossible. Your beef with Christians objectively and logically speaking is accurate. But here is the part you underestimate: people need guidance, they need comfort during stressful times, "man does not live by bread alone". So faith will continue whether it is perfect or not. Religion survives because it works in people's lives. It gives them endurance. The Egyptians ruled the Jews who were their slaves, but the Jews endured.

So people of today know about the inapplicable parts of the bible and are ok with it.


Because to me it isn't stupid. I agree it is illogical. Faith is not a logical concept.

That doesn't fucking pardon belief. Just because it's illogical doesn't mean it's invincible to scrutiny.

Guidance can be found in community. Guidance and strength can be found in friends and family. You don't have to outright prescribe RELIGION as a viable source of strength if they're getting that strength from a PLACEBO.

And I want you to tell me when I am wrong. But don't think that I adhere to or condone any violent part of what is in the bible, I don't any more than you condone or adhere to the violent takeover and enslavement of African Americans by whites.

Yeah. You cherry pick because you REALLY don't believe this shit. Trust me, HP... I know why you partake of the opiate of the masses. I understand. It's the same reason my sister does. But at the end of the day, I think you ARE being hypocritical. THANK FUCK you are a hypocrite cause the alternative IS much worse. I'm just saying that it's unfortunate that you'd be a hypocrite.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

Ok man, then I guess it is time to give you break from Humane on the brain. Mrs. Humane wants the computer now anyway to check her email. Signing off.
But don't think I am not going to reply, if I don't it is because I have to live a life now and then. But don't think I am "hiding". lulz

Step 5 is that? Well done sir, you are following the guide to a "T".

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

Ok man, then I guess it is time to give you break from Humane on the brain. Mrs. Humane wants the computer now anyway to check her email. Signing off.
But don't think I am not going to reply, if I don't it is because I have to live a life now and then. But don't think I am "hiding". lulz

HA. Is that your best? Implying that I have no life? Pffffft.

[Gloomy Sunday]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

I want you to understand my words. Understand them well, pagan.

You're religion... is the mental refuse of a bad drug trip from the 60s. Addled minds who had no direction, no cause, oblivious and absent to the real world. You're religion is the result of an acid trip gone much too far. There is not a SHRED of reason to respect your religion. There is not a SHRED of reason for me to PARDON you for your KNEE JERK religious affiliation. Most likely, YOU are not a pagan out of some divinely inspired conviction, you're the dipshit who found the faults in Christianity yet could not grasp the idea that being without faith in an unprovable divine was another means of being a complete person. God certainly couldn't be real, but this really cool DnD hodgepodge you call paganism is TOTALLY where it's at. You replaced your Christianity for a far more STUPID and measurably less relevant brand of spirituality. YOU DESERVE LESS CONSIDERATION AND LESS RESPECT than moderate Christians who I find to be in the least, political allies yet hypocritical to their own faith. As far as you being a pagan goes.... SHUT THE FUCK UP, CHILD. The adults are talking. You have NOTHING to add to this discussion. Go back to your room and play with your FUCKING tarot cards.

I DARE you to prove to me that your spiritual beliefs are actually real. You tell me WHY you're fantasies are good for me if they're good for you. Unless you don't want to be treated like an adult. I wont bother eviscerating your fucking delusions.

Wow... You're one of those Athiest fundies that I've only heard of.. now I've MET one..

I've done drugs.. It was more awful than anything. Religion is peaceful. I rarely use tarot cards, and if I do I SURELY don't play with them. Haha.

I surely can't exsplain proper religion to your mind. Your mind is uncapable of such deep thinking..

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Gloomy Sunday

Wow... You're one of those Athiest fundies that I've only heard of.. now I've MET one..

I've done drugs.. It was more awful than anything. Religion is peaceful. I rarely use tarot cards, and if I do I SURELY don't play with them. Haha.

I surely can't exsplain proper religion to your mind. Your mind is uncapable of such deep thinking..

Troll Spotted

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by Gloomy Sunday

Wow... You're one of those Athiest fundies that I've only heard of.. now I've MET one..

I've done drugs.. It was more awful than anything. Religion is peaceful. I rarely use tarot cards, and if I do I SURELY don't play with them. Haha.

I surely can't exsplain proper religion to your mind. Your mind is uncapable of such deep thinking..

Is relevant.

[ape descendant]

One cannot be "recruited" to non-belief... one has to come to one's on conclusions.

However, with a good dose of logic and reason, it is inevitable to come to the eventual conclusion that somethings aren't real.. kinda like santa claus and pixies.

One doesn't "convert to atheism" one de-converts from whatever religion they had previously belonged to, a lot of times with really good reason.

And while I may think that Des and Kotan tend to be a little retarded when it comes to handling people, I think their blackened little hearts are in the right place.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

And while I may think that Des and Kotan tend to be a little retarded when it comes to handling people, I think their blackened little hearts are in the right place.

We're both highly charismatic, attractive salesmen.

If there's one thing I know how to handle, it's people. You know what people don't respond to? Whishy-washyness. (That's Obama's main problem IMHO)

I mean, you can call me an ass for asking tough questions, and posing difficult questions, but does that really make me an ass?

Is Dawkins an ass simply because he criticizes religion openly and makes no apologies for doing so?

[ape descendant]

You calling me wishy washy? I don't believe I have been, at least in this thread.

And yeah, sometimes Dawkins is an asshole, it doesn't mean I admire him any less though... cause he is damn sexy and smart.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

And while I may think that Des and Kotan tend to be a little retarded when it comes to handling people, I think their blackened little hearts are in the right place.

You don't know what you're talking about. You're just trying to make an appeal to all your friends. Stop being wishy washy.

[Despanan]

Actually, I'm calling the way Saya thinks I should handle this atheism thing wishy-washy.

I'd call HP wishy-washy, but his main point seems to be "shut up" so I think that's more, silent than wishy-washy.

WHY is Dawkins an asshole? Please give me evidence to back up this claim.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

And yeah, sometimes Dawkins is an asshole, it doesn't mean I admire him any less though... cause he is damn sexy and smart.

You think Richard Dawkins is sexy? He's not good looking. Why should I listen to you again?

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by Gloomy Sunday

Wow... You're one of those Athiest fundies that I've only heard of.. now I've MET one..

I've done drugs.. It was more awful than anything. Religion is peaceful. I rarely use tarot cards, and if I do I SURELY don't play with them. Haha.

I surely can't exsplain proper religion to your mind. Your mind is uncapable of such deep thinking..

Simple question. What is your evidence that your beliefs are real?

[Despanan]

Stop feeding the troll.