If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Creationist Ken Ham says that "God is a God of grace and mercy" and will demonstrate this by roasting Bill Maher in a "lake which burns with fire and brimstone" for eternity   (rawstory.com) divider line 515
    More: Amusing, Ken Ham, Bill Maher, Bill Nye, the Science Guy, roasts, mercy, PZ Myers, righteousness, lakes  
•       •       •

6796 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Mar 2014 at 1:01 PM (26 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



515 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-24 04:59:04 PM

Ed Grubermann: whidbey: Ed Grubermann: allylloyd: Ed Grubermann: allylloyd:
Going TO heaven and getting INSIDE heaven are two very different things...

Actually, they are the same thing. It's impossible to accomplish either. What part of "dead" do you not grasp?

That is your interpretation and/or belief and you are entitled to it. I am entitled to mine.

That's not my belief, it's what the evidence makes clear. Dead is dead. Once the brain is gone, you are gone. Show me any credible evidence that there is anything beyond death and I'll reconsider my position.

Logically, though, how would you even know until it happens?

Medical science, how the fark does that work? We know that brain damage can destroy memories, scramble personalities, erase morals, destroy our ability to sense our surroundings, etc... We know that chemicals can alter the way in which we think. We have mountains of evidence that shows that everything the "mind" does is a function of the brain and no credible evidence that there is a incorporeal mind, to hell with anything like a soul.


Again, you're only making this conclusion based on the available evidence. Aristotle thought insects came from mud. He was obviously missing a piece of the puzzle, and I daresay perhaps so are we.
 
2014-03-24 04:59:40 PM

Rueened: whidbey: Not surprised. What else do you find irritating about liberals?

Also not surprised that you crossed out the relevant part of my statement and pretended that I'd never said it.

Although you're supposed to delete it before quoting - you're losing your touch.

And what gives you the right to assume it's about liberal vs conservative? Why do you assume I'm a conservative?



Can we just assume you're a pendantic asshole?
 
2014-03-24 04:59:46 PM

Lord_Baull: Gecko Gingrich: Rueened: Dry your eyes princess, no-one is forcing anything on you.

No? Then why does my brother have to go two counties over to buy a beer on Sunday? Why did my sister need to drive an hour and a half when she wanted to get an abortion? Why can't my cousin marry his boyfriend?


Settle down. Rueened said he wasn't religious, so your point is invalid.


Umm. the points Gecko brings up are still valid. They might not be forcing anything on him, but they are forcing things on people around him. There only needs to be one more rule like "Shrimp is now illegal because Leviticus" or "Masturbation/Living in your mother's basement is punishable by public stoning" to affect him.
 
2014-03-24 05:00:03 PM

The_Hairy_Gooch: He is not saying what you believe is wrong.


That would be me making that particular argument.
 
2014-03-24 05:01:47 PM

tlars699: Lord_Baull: Gecko Gingrich: Rueened: Dry your eyes princess, no-one is forcing anything on you.

No? Then why does my brother have to go two counties over to buy a beer on Sunday? Why did my sister need to drive an hour and a half when she wanted to get an abortion? Why can't my cousin marry his boyfriend?


Settle down. Rueened said he wasn't religious, so your point is invalid.

Umm. the points Gecko brings up are still valid. They might not be forcing anything on him, but they are forcing things on people around him. There only needs to be one more rule like "Shrimp is now illegal because Leviticus" or "Masturbation/Living in your mother's basement is punishable by public stoning" to affect him.


I would say that since some many of the socially conservative and other negative aspects of religion are mainstream and commonplace, we're all bearing of the brunt of it.
 
2014-03-24 05:06:10 PM

tlars699: Only Vulcans can use that word.


Fascinating.
 
2014-03-24 05:07:17 PM

tlars699: Lord_Baull: Gecko Gingrich: Rueened: Dry your eyes princess, no-one is forcing anything on you.

No? Then why does my brother have to go two counties over to buy a beer on Sunday? Why did my sister need to drive an hour and a half when she wanted to get an abortion? Why can't my cousin marry his boyfriend?


Settle down. Rueened said he wasn't religious, so your point is invalid.

Umm. the points Gecko brings up are still valid. They might not be forcing anything on him, but they are forcing things on people around him. There only needs to be one more rule like "Shrimp is now illegal because Leviticus" or "Masturbation/Living in your mother's basement is punishable by public stoning" to affect him.


 
I was being facetious. I was making a joke that somehow, because he's not religous, his comment that no one is forcing religion on others must be a reasonable statement. Too subtle?
 
2014-03-24 05:08:17 PM

Lord_Baull: Rueened: whidbey: Not surprised. What else do you find irritating about liberals?

Also not surprised that you crossed out the relevant part of my statement and pretended that I'd never said it.

Although you're supposed to delete it before quoting - you're losing your touch.

And what gives you the right to assume it's about liberal vs conservative? Why do you assume I'm a conservative?


Can we just assume you're a pendantic asshole?


Assume what you like, facts never seem to make any difference to you people anyway.

welcometofark.jpg
 
2014-03-24 05:09:33 PM

Rueened: Lord_Baull: Rueened: whidbey: Not surprised. What else do you find irritating about liberals?

Also not surprised that you crossed out the relevant part of my statement and pretended that I'd never said it.

Although you're supposed to delete it before quoting - you're losing your touch.

And what gives you the right to assume it's about liberal vs conservative? Why do you assume I'm a conservative?


Can we just assume you're a pendantic asshole?

Assume what you like, facts never seem to make any difference to you people anyway.

http://welcometofark.jpg/


trollface.gif

/fixed
 
2014-03-24 05:09:44 PM
Maher is a Marxist.  Marxists are properly dealt with by one round in the head in the old Soviet style.
 
2014-03-24 05:09:45 PM
Kit Fister:
Pardon me, and I don't disagree that his statements are inherently illogical, but since when has "Because I farking want to" been a bad reason to do something? Unless you have a good reason NOT to do something, if the spirit, pardon the expression, moves you to do it, then why the fark not go with it? ...


Iraqi war. Economy crash of 2008. Proposition 8 passing.
All cases were essentially driven by "Because I want to."
The drivers involved in both instances had no good reasons Not to do it, because those actions would not directly affect them, unless they were brought to trial and punished.
Both sets of criminals got away with it Scott Free, and the citizenry was allowed to run roughshod over a minority population.

Fundamentalists keep trying to make Evolution a sinful catergory to be taught, and keep pushing public school systems to force their ideas and ideals down children's throats in indoctrination practices, because the churches are losing followers overall. They have no good reason NOT to do so, because it is in their best interests to Do so.

So the question arises: Should you believe in a system that allows for people to as they please to start infringing on other people's rights?
Or should you try and question the adherents to shake their beliefs foundations, and perhaps convince someone else that following something that wants to force others to follow it is wrong?
 
2014-03-24 05:09:51 PM

whidbey: Show us on the doll where the free-thinking person touched you.


I am often reminded of the Allegory of the Cave. A person who only knows one set of beliefs and cannot prove what you tell him to be the "truth" is never going to truly accept that until they witness it for themselves.

Fundamentally, humans look for meaning in things, they look for some object lesson, some force that explains shiat they otherwise find senseless. They seek order. Accepting that the universe happens randomly, without reason, is a much harder pill to swallow than that there is some reason for it all. And I can speak on this from personal experience: It was far easier for me to believe that i had done something wrong and caused a problem with the people who beat and stabbed the shiat out of me than to accept that it just happened for no damned reason. After all, if I had a reason for it, I could fix it and prevent it from happening. If it's just farking random chance, then...well...that's damn hard to accept.

ANyway, if you find comfort in your beliefs, great. As long as that doesn't lead to you hurting other people and doing shiat that's insanely stupid, like completely rejecting all logical data in favor of your binkie, then have at it.
 
2014-03-24 05:10:56 PM

tlars699: The_Hairy_Gooch: Gecko Gingrich: The_Hairy_Gooch: Forced and coerced are two different things, that I will give you.

True, but immaterial. He didn't assert that no one was being forced to be religious. He stated that no one was forcing religion on anyone.

I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt, otherwise he was coming off as a real jerk. I'm with you on the matter trust me. I came at it from this angle; maybe he believes that people are not having religion forced upon them because it is their decision to believe or not, no matter how much one is coerced or told to believe a certain thing. I would disagree, but I can see that argument.

Even with your statement as it was, isn't' there the weekly thread of a kid getting mistreated at a school because they don't follow the Christian based guidelines at a public school? Where they have to do *insert Xtian activity* else they are given detention, bad grades, etc?


Oh don't get me wrong, I *know* Christian guidelines, laws, and customs rule over this land often unchecked and unquestioned because hey that's the way we have always done it. If you saw in that comment I said I totally agree with Gecko on every point. Gay rights, abortion, morality laws, evolution vs. creation and all that.
I am also a realist and see that most people with their religion deeply engrained in them wont see those a being forced on anyone. They just simply are the way of the land to them. You wont ever change their minds, its a sad reality, but true. They like the status quo they have created, as it suits them and any change is seen as destruction of "traditional family values". When in reality families are no longer traditional and it sticks in their craw that the times they are a changin'.
 
2014-03-24 05:11:58 PM

Kit Fister: Pardon me, and I don't disagree that his statements are inherently illogical, but since when has "Because I farking want to" been a bad reason to do something? Unless you have a good reason NOT to do something, if the spirit, pardon the expression, moves you to do it, then why the fark not go with it?


It's a fine reason to do things. It's a fine reason for doing almost anything, really.

But in a situation where one believes that the wrong choice will result in ETERNAL DAMNATION? "Because I feel like it" is a terrible farking "reason"
 
2014-03-24 05:12:09 PM

Lord_Baull: tlars699: Lord_Baull: Gecko Gingrich: Rueened: Dry your eyes princess, no-one is forcing anything on you.

No? Then why does my brother have to go two counties over to buy a beer on Sunday? Why did my sister need to drive an hour and a half when she wanted to get an abortion? Why can't my cousin marry his boyfriend?


Settle down. Rueened said he wasn't religious, so your point is invalid.

Umm. the points Gecko brings up are still valid. They might not be forcing anything on him, but they are forcing things on people around him. There only needs to be one more rule like "Shrimp is now illegal because Leviticus" or "Masturbation/Living in your mother's basement is punishable by public stoning" to affect him.

 
I was being facetious. I was making a joke that somehow, because he's not religous, his comment that no one is forcing religion on others must be a reasonable statement. Too subtle?


Apologies; as a Vulcan, the subtleties of the human capacity for sarcasm interpretations via text sometimes escapes me.
 
2014-03-24 05:12:19 PM

theotherles: Maher is a Marxist.  Marxists are properly dealt with by one round in the head in the old Soviet style.


Sieg heil.
 
2014-03-24 05:15:27 PM

Kit Fister: Ctrl-Alt-Del: A brief analogy to describe the conversation so far:

allyloyd: I drive a Ford F150

eraser8: Why? Why do you drive a Ford f150?

allyloyd : And my response is "Why not?" My driving of a Ford F150 is because I love to drive

eraser8: By that reasoning (if honest) you should be willing to drive ANY car because you love to drive. How could you possibly choose just one?  And, how did you choose the one you chose?

allyloyd : I'm not changing my response for you.

eraser8: I'm not asking you to changer your response.  I was just asking for an honest one.
Either you have a reason for driving that particular car or you don't.  Your "why not" answer only works if there is only one car from which to choose...but, even if you limit your set of possible cars to those that are currently manufactured, there are at least hundreds -- probably thousands -- to choose from.

allyloyd: I drive a Ford F150 because I can drive a Ford F150 .  I drive a Ford F150 because I want to  drive a Ford F150 .  I drive a Ford F150 because  driving a Ford F150 makes me happy, joyful, compassionate, forgiving and sometimes, sad...

And around and around you go - never actually answering the question. Why don't you drive a Honda Accord? Why don't you drive a Mercedes? Why did you choose a Ford F150 over all the other possible cars to drive? Especially if you posit that there is only one correct car to drive, and choosing the wrong one will result in eternal damnation.

So I'll ask once more - what made you choose the belief system you currently hold? I'd bet my next paycheck that the answer is "Because that's what my parents and all of the adults around me said was true my whole life - from even before I could read or write."

Personally, I think eraser8 is barking up the wrong tree, since that is almost universally the answer to that question. The more interesting discussion is when that question is directed at converts.

Pardon me, and I don't disagree that his statements are inheren ...


I don't think he meant to be inflammatory, just simply stated her reasons were not logical as she proclaimed them to be. And her reason are fine if that's what brings her comfort, no problem. Just don't proclaim them to be logical was all he was saying.
 
2014-03-24 05:16:28 PM

Trivia Jockey: The person responding to this comment pointed out a number of ways that Christianity (or at least certain aspects of it) IS forced upon all of us. In what we believe are very negative ways. Your particular religious beliefs or lack thereof are totally irrelevant.


Everyone's moral beliefs are forced on someone else; Christianity is not being forced upon people by the application of Blue Laws, but rather the collective "moral" attitude of that location. Kind of like how Abortion is legal because a preponderance of people felt it the "moral" thing to do, while others believe banning it is moral. Each side is attempting to force their "morals" on the other.

The original statement that nobody is forcing their "Religion" on anyone else is correct based upon the submitted counter argument.

Now when someone holds him down and forces a Eucharist down his throat, they the claim "they're forcing their religion" on me might be accurate.
 
2014-03-24 05:17:25 PM
Hell is gonna be awfully crowded, even if we don't consider that there are several religions who claim exclusive access to heaven, and they can't all be right. We've all failed the test anyway:

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2014-03-24 05:19:33 PM

Kit Fister: Pardon me, and I don't disagree that his statements are inherently illogical, but since when has "Because I farking want to" been a bad reason to do something?


As the person who started this line of discussion, I'm going to butt in here.

I can't speak for  Ctrl-Alt-Del...but, my intention was not to convince  allyloyd of anything and it wasn't to argue against his beliefs, to tell him he was wrong.  I DO happen to think his god hypothesis is almost certainly false.  Richard Dawkins suggested a sliding scale of belief from 0, I think, to 7 in which a 0 represents absolute certainty that a certain god is real and 7 is absolute certainty that a certain god is not real (I hope I didn't mix those up).  Anyhoo, Dawkins placed himself, IIRC, at a 6.  I'm about at the same place.  That is, I see no good evidence for a creator god but I see ample evidence that would militate against one.  Still, it's not my business to police what other people think.

All I wanted was to get a glimpse inside the thought process of a believer from the point of view of the believer himself, rather than from psychology or neurobiology or so forth.  And,  allyloyd gave me that, to my satisfaction.  He didn't give it to me directly, because I don't think his answers were actually honest...but, I got what I was looking for. It helps me in thinking about the "bridgeability" between the way atheists think and the way religionists think.
 
2014-03-24 05:20:03 PM

Kit Fister: whidbey: Show us on the doll where the free-thinking person touched you.

I am often reminded of the Allegory of the Cave. A person who only knows one set of beliefs and cannot prove what you tell him to be the "truth" is never going to truly accept that until they witness it for themselves.

Fundamentally, humans look for meaning in things, they look for some object lesson, some force that explains shiat they otherwise find senseless. They seek order. Accepting that the universe happens randomly, without reason, is a much harder pill to swallow than that there is some reason for it all. And I can speak on this from personal experience: It was far easier for me to believe that i had done something wrong and caused a problem with the people who beat and stabbed the shiat out of me than to accept that it just happened for no damned reason. After all, if I had a reason for it, I could fix it and prevent it from happening. If it's just farking random chance, then...well...that's damn hard to accept.

ANyway, if you find comfort in your beliefs, great. As long as that doesn't lead to you hurting other people and doing shiat that's insanely stupid, like completely rejecting all logical data in favor of your binkie, then have at it.


Plato's Phaedo contains similar imagery to that of the Allegory of the Cave; a philosopher recognizes that before philosophy, his soul was "a veritable prisoner fast bound within his body... and that instead of investigating reality by itself and in itself it is compelled to peer through the bars of its prison.

That's really intense.

IMNSHO, there are two things that should definitely be taught in school: philosophy like your example and

cdn.zmescience.com

astronomy (cosmology).
 
2014-03-24 05:21:54 PM

CanisNoir: Everyone's moral beliefs are forced on someone else; Christianity is not being forced upon people by the application of Blue Laws, but rather the collective "moral" attitude of that location


lol no

good luck proving that a "majority" necessarily favors law based on interpretation Scripture
 
2014-03-24 05:22:29 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: htomc: Rapmaster2000: People were pretty uncreative if the best they could come up with is "lake of fire".

Notice how everything is defined in purely human terms.  Just like heaven supposedly has "streets of gold".  Why in the world would there be any need at all for gold there?  What possible use could it have there, beyond looking somewhat nice?

It's all just humans appealing to other human's prejudices, fears, and desires.


I was raised Baptist. My grandmother was and still is a very influential member of our*** church. I think my problems with organized religion started with Baptist preachers and how they were viewed. When I was a chile, I thought that Pastor Tucker was Jesus' cousin or something. I literally thought that the pastor, not GOD or Jesus, but the pastor had the power to hear prayers. I realized as I got older that my perception of him had been shaped by the adults in the church who sort of treated him as an infalible symbol of GOD. I began to ask questions like, if GOD hears all of us, then why do I need a middle man to send my prayers up? If GOD is omnipresent, then why do I need to go into a specific building to ask for forgiveness or to pray for mercy? The answers that I got about fellowship and being around other godly people always rung hollow. The tipping point for organized religion (not the existence of GOD) was one night when I went to what Baptists call a revival. Its a week worth of guest preachers, hollering, shouting, and singing that we had once or twice every year. It was at a mega church in Largo, MD that was as big as a small neighborhood. During the sermon, the pastor told everyone to pull out their tithing envelopes. Those people who had them (most folks in the very large room) pulled them out. The pastor then instructed everyone to "hold them above your head and waive them at the devil". I sat in this church watching people gleefully waiving envelopes full of their money...and then I noticed the other people, like me, who had ...


I was born Methodist in TN, but raised in the Baptist church in SC and know all to well of what you speak. I have many similar feelings.
 
2014-03-24 05:22:32 PM

Lord_Baull: tlars699: Lord_Baull: Gecko Gingrich: Rueened: Dry your eyes princess, no-one is forcing anything on you.

No? Then why does my brother have to go two counties over to buy a beer on Sunday? Why did my sister need to drive an hour and a half when she wanted to get an abortion? Why can't my cousin marry his boyfriend?


Settle down. Rueened said he wasn't religious, so your point is invalid.

Umm. the points Gecko brings up are still valid. They might not be forcing anything on him, but they are forcing things on people around him. There only needs to be one more rule like "Shrimp is now illegal because Leviticus" or "Masturbation/Living in your mother's basement is punishable by public stoning" to affect him.

 
I was being facetious. I was making a joke that somehow, because he's not religous, his comment that no one is forcing religion on others must be a reasonable statement. Too subtle?


I got it.
 
2014-03-24 05:23:35 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Rueened: Apart from their smugness, arrogance, narrow-mindedness and intolerance...?

Oh, nothing I can put my finger on really.

- Are you asserting that the list of things (Blue Laws, abortion restrictions, legality of gay marriage) I mentioned don't exist?

- If you agree that they exist, are you asserting they their existence is *not* due to religion?

- If you agree that they owe their existence to religion, are you asserting that they - as laws - are not being forced upon [me]?


*ahem*
 
2014-03-24 05:24:38 PM

Rueened: Lord_Baull: Can we just assume you're a pendantic asshole?

Assume what you like, facts never seem to make any difference to you people anyway.

welcometofark.jpg



You people?
 
2014-03-24 05:27:49 PM

Monkey2: know all to well of what you speak.


I dropped an "o" somewhere...
 
2014-03-24 05:28:13 PM

CanisNoir: Trivia Jockey: The person responding to this comment pointed out a number of ways that Christianity (or at least certain aspects of it) IS forced upon all of us. In what we believe are very negative ways. Your particular religious beliefs or lack thereof are totally irrelevant.

Everyone's moral beliefs are forced on someone else; Christianity is not being forced upon people by the application of Blue Laws, but rather the collective "moral" attitude of that location. Kind of like how Abortion is legal because a preponderance of people felt it the "moral" thing to do, while others believe banning it is moral. Each side is attempting to force their "morals" on the other.

The original statement that nobody is forcing their "Religion" on anyone else is correct based upon the submitted counter argument.

Now when someone holds him down and forces a Eucharist down his throat, they the claim "they're forcing their religion" on me might be accurate.


- Get an abortion, don't get an abortion. I really couldn't care less what you do.

-No one can get an abortion because I don't like them.

In your head those two statements are congruent?
 
2014-03-24 05:30:47 PM

Magorn: Some 'Splainin' To Do: I just don't understand the concept of hell. The idea of eternal punishment is just so  evil, that I don't understand how Christians rationalize it.

The ONLY conception of hell I can even vaguely accept, as a Christian, is CS Lewis' idea.  That hell is a place people send themselves because they are too stubborn, proud, arrogant etc to allow themselves oneness with the creator, and it isn't a BAD place, it's just a nothing place  that is horrible only in contrast with the eternal rapture that is joining with god.   And even then, I really ain't sure I buy it.   Hell has been a more or less universal feature of every region on earth since time immemorial (Even Buddhists got a hell, lots and lots of them in fact)  Which I think says more about human nature than the nature of the almighty, as a method of social control, religion needs a way to get their followers to do things that are contrary to basic human nature, and the threat of dire punishments for all maternity is an effective way to do that.


I had a Romanian Orthodox Christian describe hell as the removal of God's love.

The example he gave was that right now we live with ~14lbs of pressure that we don't notice because it is always there.  And that pressure is like God's love; always there.  Well, if you reject God, he sends you to an afterlife where you no longer feel the all encompassing pressure of his love that you don't notice now.  The realization of what you've lost is the only torture that you suffer.

This description seemed a whole lot less vengeful then the Puritan Fire & Brimstone.
 
2014-03-24 05:32:04 PM

Gecko Gingrich: CanisNoir: Trivia Jockey: The person responding to this comment pointed out a number of ways that Christianity (or at least certain aspects of it) IS forced upon all of us. In what we believe are very negative ways. Your particular religious beliefs or lack thereof are totally irrelevant.

Everyone's moral beliefs are forced on someone else; Christianity is not being forced upon people by the application of Blue Laws, but rather the collective "moral" attitude of that location. Kind of like how Abortion is legal because a preponderance of people felt it the "moral" thing to do, while others believe banning it is moral. Each side is attempting to force their "morals" on the other.

The original statement that nobody is forcing their "Religion" on anyone else is correct based upon the submitted counter argument.

Now when someone holds him down and forces a Eucharist down his throat, they the claim "they're forcing their religion" on me might be accurate.

- Get an abortion, don't get an abortion. I really couldn't care less what you do.

-No one can get an abortion because I don't like them.

In your head those two statements are congruent?


This^  I was just coming in to make that point.  Legislating your morality and deciding that people may not do things because your faith says they are wrong is inherently different from those things being available and you having the option of participating or not.
 
2014-03-24 05:34:19 PM

allylloyd: Some explanations needed here

CHRISTIANS DO NOT PRAY TO SAINTS. Rather, we ask for saints (just like we asks friends/familiar/church members) to pray for us.

There are people who given sainthood by the Early Catholic Church (before the Anglican Communion). This was because of what those men and women did to spread the words/works of Jesus Christ and their personal doings.

//People were named saints in the Catholic Church as recognition of their duties towards God (in their teachings/actions/etc.)
//The Catholic Church still names people saints. Other churches no longer do this but they do have days of recognition where people's works are remembered. For instance, the Episcopal Church has a day were Martin Luther King, Jr. is recognized for his works/words.


For Non-Christians and Non-Catholics this difference feels like splitting hairs.
 
2014-03-24 05:34:48 PM

tlars699: Kit Fister:
Pardon me, and I don't disagree that his statements are inherently illogical, but since when has "Because I farking want to" been a bad reason to do something? Unless you have a good reason NOT to do something, if the spirit, pardon the expression, moves you to do it, then why the fark not go with it? ...


Iraqi war. Economy crash of 2008. Proposition 8 passing.
All cases were essentially driven by "Because I want to."
The drivers involved in both instances had no good reasons Not to do it, because those actions would not directly affect them, unless they were brought to trial and punished.
Both sets of criminals got away with it Scott Free, and the citizenry was allowed to run roughshod over a minority population.

Fundamentalists keep trying to make Evolution a sinful catergory to be taught, and keep pushing public school systems to force their ideas and ideals down children's throats in indoctrination practices, because the churches are losing followers overall. They have no good reason NOT to do so, because it is in their best interests to Do so.

So the question arises: Should you believe in a system that allows for people to as they please to start infringing on other people's rights?
Or should you try and question the adherents to shake their beliefs foundations, and perhaps convince someone else that following something that wants to force others to follow it is wrong?


Did you miss the part in my statement where I specified that a criteria for it would be that it doesn't hurt others?

And, again, if the person does not do anything that harms others or in any way causes bad things to happen to themselves or others, then I have no reason to be such a dick as to get in their face about it on general principle. It's not my row to hoe.
 
2014-03-24 05:36:30 PM

theotherles: Maher is a Marxist.  Marxists are properly dealt with by one round in the head in the old Soviet style.


maher is a marxist? prove it.

also... your'e saying that soviets executed marxists?

/yes i know he's trolling
//can't... resist
 
2014-03-24 05:38:05 PM

whidbey: theotherles: Maher is a Marxist.  Marxists are properly dealt with by one round in the head in the old Soviet style.

Sieg heil.


National Socialism:  12 Million

Comunism:  100 Million

Fark you murderer.
 
2014-03-24 05:39:38 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: It's a fine reason to do things. It's a fine reason for doing almost anything, really.

But in a situation where one believes that the wrong choice will result in ETERNAL DAMNATION? "Because I feel like it" is a terrible farking "reason"


Who the fark cares? If that motivates a person to, hopefully, live a moral life and help other people and so on, then what harm does it do? In the vast history of humanity, more good was done at swordpoint than ever was done because someone felt like doing it. More shiat got built, more shiat got invented, and more progress was made at the tip of that sword than ever was just because someone ever felt compelled to do something on a whim.

There's a metric shiatload of technology we take for granted today that was developed because it was greatly needed during wartime, and was basically pushed on a developmental basis by the war department to fill the need. We made more advancements in technology in a century thanks to conflicts and the need to more effectively battle those conflicts than we ever made just because someone was being nice.

Frankly, I get out of the bed in the morning and go to work because if I don't I don't get paid, and my family starves and I lose all the shiat i have. I don't do it because I love my job and want to work and help people of my own free will.
 
2014-03-24 05:41:49 PM
i242.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-24 05:41:52 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Gecko Gingrich: Rueened: Apart from their smugness, arrogance, narrow-mindedness and intolerance...?

Oh, nothing I can put my finger on really.

- Are you asserting that the list of things (Blue Laws, abortion restrictions, legality of gay marriage) I mentioned don't exist?

- If you agree that they exist, are you asserting they their existence is *not* due to religion?

- If you agree that they owe their existence to religion, are you asserting that they - as laws - are not being forced upon [me]?

*ahem*


*taps foot*
 
2014-03-24 05:45:30 PM

theotherles: herp


derp

troll harder
 
2014-03-24 05:47:25 PM

Gecko Gingrich: CanisNoir: Trivia Jockey: The person responding to this comment pointed out a number of ways that Christianity (or at least certain aspects of it) IS forced upon all of us. In what we believe are very negative ways. Your particular religious beliefs or lack thereof are totally irrelevant.

Everyone's moral beliefs are forced on someone else; Christianity is not being forced upon people by the application of Blue Laws, but rather the collective "moral" attitude of that location. Kind of like how Abortion is legal because a preponderance of people felt it the "moral" thing to do, while others believe banning it is moral. Each side is attempting to force their "morals" on the other.

The original statement that nobody is forcing their "Religion" on anyone else is correct based upon the submitted counter argument.

Now when someone holds him down and forces a Eucharist down his throat, they the claim "they're forcing their religion" on me might be accurate.

- Get an abortion, don't get an abortion. I really couldn't care less what you do.

-No one can get an abortion because I don't like them.

In your head those two statements are congruent?


Get an abortion don't get an abortion, I don't care because I don't believe life begins at conveption, therefore abortion is not murder and eliminating a persons choice is wrong. That is a moral detrmination the same as: Ban abortion because I believe life begins at conception and therefore abortion is murder and wrong.

Both sides are attempting to force their moral belief of right and wrong on the other and neither is attempting to force a religion on anyone.
 
2014-03-24 05:48:16 PM
Back to the whole Ham issue:

i242.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-24 05:48:43 PM

CanisNoir: Both sides are attempting to force their moral belief of right and wrong on the other and neither is attempting to force a religion on anyone.


hurrwut
 
2014-03-24 05:55:19 PM

CanisNoir: Gecko Gingrich: CanisNoir: Trivia Jockey: The person responding to this comment pointed out a number of ways that Christianity (or at least certain aspects of it) IS forced upon all of us. In what we believe are very negative ways. Your particular religious beliefs or lack thereof are totally irrelevant.

Everyone's moral beliefs are forced on someone else; Christianity is not being forced upon people by the application of Blue Laws, but rather the collective "moral" attitude of that location. Kind of like how Abortion is legal because a preponderance of people felt it the "moral" thing to do, while others believe banning it is moral. Each side is attempting to force their "morals" on the other.

The original statement that nobody is forcing their "Religion" on anyone else is correct based upon the submitted counter argument.

Now when someone holds him down and forces a Eucharist down his throat, they the claim "they're forcing their religion" on me might be accurate.

- Get an abortion, don't get an abortion. I really couldn't care less what you do.

-No one can get an abortion because I don't like them.

In your head those two statements are congruent?

Get an abortion don't get an abortion, I don't care because I don't believe life begins at conveption, therefore abortion is not murder and eliminating a persons choice is wrong. That is a moral detrmination the same as: Ban abortion because I believe life begins at conception and therefore abortion is murder and wrong.

Both sides are attempting to force their moral belief of right and wrong on the other and neither is attempting to force a religion on anyone.


The difference is that one says that both are valid and you do not have to get an abortion and may adhere to your belief in choosing to do so and someone else can make the decision that they want or need an abortion in accordance with their beliefs or medical needs.  The other does not offer the option and instead says that all people must obey one sides beliefs.
 
2014-03-24 05:55:25 PM

CanisNoir: Get an abortion don't get an abortion, I don't care because I don't believe life begins at conveption, therefore abortion is not murder and eliminating a persons choice is wrong. That is a moral detrmination the same as: Ban abortion because I believe life begins at conception and therefore abortion is murder and wrong.


I know I'm not going to change your mind, but I've got 5 minutes to kill, so what the hell. In the first scenario, everyone can make their own moral determination, no group imposes theirs on anyone else. In the other, everyone is forced to follow one group's morality.

CanisNoir: Both sides are attempting to force their moral belief of right and wrong on the other and neither is attempting to force a religion on anyone.


Again, one makes no morality determination, the other does. Choice is not a moral.

When one's morality comes from one's religion, and one is trying to force another person to follow one's religious morality, that is forcing their religion one someone else.


/Replace "abortion" with "marriage" or "shellfish" or "not wearing poly cotton blends".
 
2014-03-24 05:57:14 PM

Lord_Baull: Rueened: Lord_Baull: Can we just assume you're a pendantic asshole?

Assume what you like, facts never seem to make any difference to you people anyway.

welcometofark.jpg

You people?


Don't be so sensitive.
 
2014-03-24 06:05:08 PM

gshepnyc: Nabb1: What an asshole. Maher, too.

Send them to Thunderdome.

Yeah, Maher is the asshole for pointing out what utterly, categorically evil things suddenly become holy and wonderful if you convince yourself that God wills them.  The character of God in the bible would not be admirable were he your next door neighbor, and yet billions of people put his alleged demands and desires ahead of the peace and happiness of their actual neighbor. It's good to have that drilled into people as often as possible. Religion deserves to be mocked and I'm glad we live in a time period when religions' ability to set themselves in a position immune to mockery is at an end.


Damn that was well said, it deserves repeating.

//I knew I had you marked as a favorite for some reason
 
2014-03-24 06:05:44 PM

Gecko Gingrich: /Replace "abortion" with "marriage" or "shellfish" or "not wearing poly cotton blends".


Or "sitting at a table where wine is served".
 
2014-03-24 06:06:39 PM

UncomfortableSilence: CanisNoir: Gecko Gingrich: CanisNoir: Trivia Jockey: The person responding to this comment pointed out a number of ways that Christianity (or at least certain aspects of it) IS forced upon all of us. In what we believe are very negative ways. Your particular religious beliefs or lack thereof are totally irrelevant.

Everyone's moral beliefs are forced on someone else; Christianity is not being forced upon people by the application of Blue Laws, but rather the collective "moral" attitude of that location. Kind of like how Abortion is legal because a preponderance of people felt it the "moral" thing to do, while others believe banning it is moral. Each side is attempting to force their "morals" on the other.

The original statement that nobody is forcing their "Religion" on anyone else is correct based upon the submitted counter argument.

Now when someone holds him down and forces a Eucharist down his throat, they the claim "they're forcing their religion" on me might be accurate.

- Get an abortion, don't get an abortion. I really couldn't care less what you do.

-No one can get an abortion because I don't like them.

In your head those two statements are congruent?

Get an abortion don't get an abortion, I don't care because I don't believe life begins at conveption, therefore abortion is not murder and eliminating a persons choice is wrong. That is a moral detrmination the same as: Ban abortion because I believe life begins at conception and therefore abortion is murder and wrong.

Both sides are attempting to force their moral belief of right and wrong on the other and neither is attempting to force a religion on anyone.

The difference is that one says that both are valid and you do not have to get an abortion and may adhere to your belief in choosing to do so and someone else can make the decision that they want or need an abortion in accordance with their beliefs or medical needs.  The other does not offer the option and instead says that all people must obey one sides beliefs.


No; pro-choice does not believe both are valid unless they are okay with murder. Both sides rely upon a belief when life begins and are moralistic. Neither is forcing a religion on someone.
 
2014-03-24 06:11:59 PM

CanisNoir: No; pro-choice does not believe both are valid unless they are okay with murder. Both sides rely upon a belief when life begins and are moralistic. Neither is forcing a religion on someone.


I never cease to be amazed at the whole "both sides" covering of the ass. Everyone's guilty, not just the obvious perpetrators. Because that would be unfair or something partisan to take a side.
 
2014-03-24 06:21:07 PM

Bane of Broone: allylloyd: Bane of Broone: allylloyd: After reading some of these posts, I don't know whose stereotypes are worse, the Atheists or the Christians?

They're both hilarious, but I'm an Atheist and even I'll admit that Atheists are usually easier to get riled up. I don't get it either. Aren't we supposed to be euphoric? :p

Since I'm not an atheist, I can't speak for atheists. However, I am a Christian, so when I hear a Christian say something ignorant, two thoughts come to mind:
1) They have a different interpretation of Scripture than I do or
2) They are just really ignorant.

//Sometimes it's a combination of both.

I hear you on that one. My gal is a Christian, but believes in evolution, kindness towards EVERYONE, is pro-choice, fiercely liberal....all that jazz. She doesn't care one bit about contradictions in a book that is thousands of years old. She finds comfort and inspiration in it and uses it to better her own life. So when people come out with "All Christians" or "All religions" stuff it just shows that they are willfully ignorant of people like a drug addict who uses it to stay clean, a person who becomes inspired to be a better, more understanding partner/parent/whatever. I don't care what tools you use to become a better person. "Religion" and "Christianity" are just red herrings (inb4 Clue). Fundies, no matter what side they fall on, are just too lazy to deal with problems on an individual level.


Your gal seems like a stand-up person. But at what point of disbelieving the bible as she does turn someone from a being a "Good Christian" to just being a good person? If she's able to ignore or "not care" about the contradictions of the bible, does she still believe the parts about god? Or just the parts she wants? Hell? The all-powerfulness of god? Does she think god COULD interject/solve our problems, but chooses not to?

At some point in religious introspection, you gotta realize that an all-powerful god that chooses NOT to help those who suffer is problematic. If you still worship that god, you're part of the problem. If you don't worship that god, are you still a Christian? Why would you want to be?
 
2014-03-24 06:23:06 PM

Gecko Gingrich: CanisNoir: Get an abortion don't get an abortion, I don't care because I don't believe life begins at conveption, therefore abortion is not murder and eliminating a persons choice is wrong. That is a moral detrmination the same as: Ban abortion because I believe life begins at conception and therefore abortion is murder and wrong.

I know I'm not going to change your mind, but I've got 5 minutes to kill, so what the hell. In the first scenario, everyone can make their own moral determination, no group imposes theirs on anyone else. In the other, everyone is forced to follow one group's morality.

CanisNoir: Both sides are attempting to force their moral belief of right and wrong on the other and neither is attempting to force a religion on anyone.

Again, one makes no morality determination, the other does. Choice is not a moral.

When one's morality comes from one's religion, and one is trying to force another person to follow one's religious morality, that is forcing their religion one someone else.


/Replace "abortion" with "marriage" or "shellfish" or "not wearing poly cotton blends".


Let me explain it this way: Everyone votes and advocates for laws based upon their personal philosophy of right and wrong. Doing so only attempts to force your personal philosophy on others, regardless of how they came to that conclusion. Neither is forcing a "religion" on anyone else.
 
Displayed 50 of 515 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report