It isn't hatred, it's pity. Dawkins' "Root of All Evil?" makes a compelling case how even pacifist believers contribute to the willful suspension of reason and critical thinking that gives rise to religious extremists. Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.

(12-18-2009 08:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  It isn't hatred, it's pity.

Whatever the case may be, at least admit you are not an unbiased bystander. You started this thread with an agenda and used the NC news brief to further your opinion.

You are worse than Fox News....

(12-18-2009 08:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  It isn't hatred, it's pity. Dawkins' "Root of All Evil?" makes a compelling case how even pacifist believers contribute to the willful suspension of reason and critical thinking that gives rise to religious extremists. Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.

Certainly not in the 20th century. Nor the 19th. Or 18th. I'm not sure if there was a single century that religion was the champion of.

(12-18-2009 08:59 PM)blah Wrote:  Whatever the case may be, at least admit you are not an unbiased bystander. You started this thread with an agenda and used the NC news brief to further your opinion.

You are worse than Fox News....

Of course I'm biased. And of course I posted as because I'm atheist, and the defacto argument is atheists are out to eradicate religion in public, and the religious people have never done any wrong to atheists. The difference is I'm not a media organization with the slogan "fair and balanced" who is claiming to deliver facts and let you, the viewer, decide. Call me crazy, but that "little" nuance seems to be a rather important distinction.

(12-18-2009 09:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 08:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.

Certainly not in the 20th century. Nor the 19th. Or 18th. I'm not sure if there was a single century that religion was the champion of.

So Hitler was killing based purely on race or ethnicity?

All the Israeli wars, conflicts, and incidents ... but of course, those are really just deaths that occured purely over gender... religion had nothing to do with the matter.

Afghanistan? Oh, we must be there because that's where they smuggled Saddam's WMDs....

9/11? They hated us because we were free, but of course...

Northern Ireland? Just a heated property dispute ... that's all ...

The Sri Lankan Civil War? Over who had the better garden ...

The Second Sudanese Civil War? That must of been over who likes Europe the most.

The Taiping Rebellion -- the bloodiest civil war ever recorded at 20 million dead? Must have been over Opium...

The Algerian Civil War? Who knows... food maybe?

And of course the embassadors of world unity ... the KKK ... who never hated anything other than a black person, and were double ultra extra friends with Jews and Roman Catholics.

(12-19-2009 01:54 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 09:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 08:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.

Certainly not in the 20th century. Nor the 19th. Or 18th. I'm not sure if there was a single century that religion was the champion of.

So Hitler was killing based purely on race or ethnicity?

All the Israeli wars, conflicts, and incidents ... but of course, those are really just deaths that occured purely over gender... religion had nothing to do with the matter.

Afghanistan? Oh, we must be there because that's where they smuggled Saddam's WMDs....

9/11? They hated us because we were free, but of course...

Northern Ireland? Just a heated property dispute ... that's all ...

The Sri Lankan Civil War? Over who had the better garden ...

The Second Sudanese Civil War? That must of been over who likes Europe the most.

The Taiping Rebellion -- the bloodiest civil war ever recorded at 20 million dead? Must have been over Opium...

The Algerian Civil War? Who knows... food maybe?

And of course the embassadors of world unity ... the KKK ... who never hated anything other than a black person, and were double ultra extra friends with Jews and Roman Catholics.

That's the first time I heard anyone spin Hitler and say religion caused all that death because those who were killed were religious. Yep, it was all the victims fault. But even presupposing the victims deaths can be put in the column "deaths caused by religion", Hitler killed far more people for other reasons than their religion, so, fail on that account.

Your 20th century examples don't add up to more than a few percent of all the killing done by atheists, dictators, fascists, commies, you know, all those non-religious butchers who kill for non-religious reasons.

N. Ireland? Less than 3200 deaths in 36 years of their conflict.
KKK? Since 1882 less than 5000 murders.
Sri Lankan Civil War? 80,000
Second Sudanese Civil War? 1.9 million
The Algerian Civil War? <200,000.
And yes, I'm aware you could add more examples.

That's assuming any of the deaths above could be attributed to religion. Other than the Islamic rebels in Algeria, I would argue no one else was fighting for purely religious reasons.


But Afghanistan, 9/11, all the conflicts Israel has, yes there is one religion that does a lot of killing strictly for their religion because their child raping prophet told them to.

Mao, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler (yes, I'm putting him back in the correct category), and the countless other non-religious butchers in Central and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia,... all your above examples pale in comparison.

Now you may have a stronger case with Taiping as a starting point in the 19th century....

(12-19-2009 10:31 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 01:54 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 09:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 08:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.

Certainly not in the 20th century. Nor the 19th. Or 18th. I'm not sure if there was a single century that religion was the champion of.

So Hitler was killing based purely on race or ethnicity?

All the Israeli wars, conflicts, and incidents ... but of course, those are really just deaths that occured purely over gender... religion had nothing to do with the matter.

Afghanistan? Oh, we must be there because that's where they smuggled Saddam's WMDs....

9/11? They hated us because we were free, but of course...

Northern Ireland? Just a heated property dispute ... that's all ...

The Sri Lankan Civil War? Over who had the better garden ...

The Second Sudanese Civil War? That must of been over who likes Europe the most.

The Taiping Rebellion -- the bloodiest civil war ever recorded at 20 million dead? Must have been over Opium...

The Algerian Civil War? Who knows... food maybe?

And of course the embassadors of world unity ... the KKK ... who never hated anything other than a black person, and were double ultra extra friends with Jews and Roman Catholics.

That's the first time I heard anyone spin Hitler and say religion caused all that death because those who were killed were religious. Yep, it was all the victims fault. But even presupposing the victims deaths can be put in the column "deaths caused by religion", Hitler killed far more people for other reasons than their religion, so, fail on that account.

Your 20th century examples don't add up to more than a few percent of all the killing done by atheists, dictators, fascists, commies, you know, all those non-religious butchers who kill for non-religious reasons.

N. Ireland? Less than 3200 deaths in 36 years of their conflict.
KKK? Since 1882 less than 5000 murders.
Sri Lankan Civil War? 80,000
Second Sudanese Civil War? 1.9 million
The Algerian Civil War? <200,000.
And yes, I'm aware you could add more examples.

That's assuming any of the deaths above could be attributed to religion. Other than the Islamic rebels in Algeria, I would argue no one else was fighting for purely religious reasons.


But Afghanistan, 9/11, all the conflicts Israel has, yes there is one religion that does a lot of killing strictly for their religion because their child raping prophet told them to.

Mao, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler (yes, I'm putting him back in the correct category), and the countless other non-religious butchers in Central and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia,... all your above examples pale in comparison.

Now you may have a stronger case with Taiping as a starting point in the 19th century....

Hitler was religious.

But since we are going to sit here and argue numbers...(which I remind you are human beings that had their lives taken from them)...I don't recall anyone ever killing anybody in the "name of the god I don't believe in". However, I do recall many people losing their lives in the name of the Christian god and others.

Religion is now, nothing more than excuse for advancing personal agendas. The real "success" stories that come from religion are normally nothing more than a reform of a lifestyle. Which, in most cases, are all local stories. And I use the word 'reform' loosely.

I notice many of the normal conservative posters have nothing to say about the original topic of this post, as it has now turned into the ordinary argument that it always does...although I did expect it.

I am going to reach here and say that the reason most of the regular conservative posters have not replied to this thread is because they are satisfied with the situation in North Carolina. They do not want an Atheist to hold public office (much less live in the same country) and they have nothing to say in this thread except that which might actually show their true colors.

Yeah, I'm calling you all out to be honest about this situation. I live in about as south Alabama as you can get. I live and interact with conservatives every day that fall on all ranges of the religious/political scale. I have seen and heard the worst from the bigots and yet I am still surprised by the occasional (very occasional) open minded human being that somehow was born and raised here.

I know how many of you feel about this. I'm just wondering if you have enough balls to come out and say it. Stop beating around the bush with this "Well, that is an interesting question" bull**** and be a man.

Read the article I posted before...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schwe...d=36499165

Hitler was religious ergo religion is why Hitler killed? If the Jews hadn't been so inconsiderate as to be Jews they'd be alive today? The stupidity involved in such a line of thinking is earth shattering.

I always get a chuckle out of the unadulterated hatred atheists feel for people of faith, motiviated by how intolerant they perceive them to be. It shows hypocricy is nowhere near confined to religion.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mousillini are among some of the most profound butchers and tyrants in history and none of them needed religion to become them. WWI and WWII combined for 10's of millions of deaths and religion wasn't the movitvation for any of them. No religious motivation for the Revolutionary, 1812 or Civil wars.

The bottom line is man has never, at any time, needed religion as an excuse to kill his fellow man. And the myth atheists like to perpetuate that the world would be so much better off without religion by trying to argue he would is the height of lunacy.

I couldn't care less whether someone is an atheist or not as a requirement for holding office. I don't think there should be any religious test to hold office at all. Someone ought to sue and get North Carolina courts to rule it unconstitutional.

It's rank stupidity to claim religion is the biggest non-natural killer in history. Thirst for power is the biggest non-natural killer in history. Men have just used religion as a means to that end at times. Them doing so doesn't illustrate how awful religion is. Instead it just shows people throughout history, bent on killing, will find whatever excuse is available. If religion wasn't there, they'd find something else.

(12-19-2009 11:55 AM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 10:31 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 01:54 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 09:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 08:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.

Certainly not in the 20th century. Nor the 19th. Or 18th. I'm not sure if there was a single century that religion was the champion of.

So Hitler was killing based purely on race or ethnicity?

All the Israeli wars, conflicts, and incidents ... but of course, those are really just deaths that occured purely over gender... religion had nothing to do with the matter.

Afghanistan? Oh, we must be there because that's where they smuggled Saddam's WMDs....

9/11? They hated us because we were free, but of course...

Northern Ireland? Just a heated property dispute ... that's all ...

The Sri Lankan Civil War? Over who had the better garden ...

The Second Sudanese Civil War? That must of been over who likes Europe the most.

The Taiping Rebellion -- the bloodiest civil war ever recorded at 20 million dead? Must have been over Opium...

The Algerian Civil War? Who knows... food maybe?

And of course the embassadors of world unity ... the KKK ... who never hated anything other than a black person, and were double ultra extra friends with Jews and Roman Catholics.

That's the first time I heard anyone spin Hitler and say religion caused all that death because those who were killed were religious. Yep, it was all the victims fault. But even presupposing the victims deaths can be put in the column "deaths caused by religion", Hitler killed far more people for other reasons than their religion, so, fail on that account.

Your 20th century examples don't add up to more than a few percent of all the killing done by atheists, dictators, fascists, commies, you know, all those non-religious butchers who kill for non-religious reasons.

N. Ireland? Less than 3200 deaths in 36 years of their conflict.
KKK? Since 1882 less than 5000 murders.
Sri Lankan Civil War? 80,000
Second Sudanese Civil War? 1.9 million
The Algerian Civil War? <200,000.
And yes, I'm aware you could add more examples.

That's assuming any of the deaths above could be attributed to religion. Other than the Islamic rebels in Algeria, I would argue no one else was fighting for purely religious reasons.


But Afghanistan, 9/11, all the conflicts Israel has, yes there is one religion that does a lot of killing strictly for their religion because their child raping prophet told them to.

Mao, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler (yes, I'm putting him back in the correct category), and the countless other non-religious butchers in Central and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia,... all your above examples pale in comparison.

Now you may have a stronger case with Taiping as a starting point in the 19th century....

Hitler was religious.

But since we are going to sit here and argue numbers...(which I remind you are human beings that had their lives taken from them)...I don't recall anyone ever killing anybody in the "name of the god I don't believe in". However, I do recall many people losing their lives in the name of the Christian god and others.

Religion is now, nothing more than excuse for advancing personal agendas. The real "success" stories that come from religion are normally nothing more than a reform of a lifestyle. Which, in most cases, are all local stories. And I use the word 'reform' loosely.

I notice many of the normal conservative posters have nothing to say about the original topic of this post, as it has now turned into the ordinary argument that it always does...although I did expect it.

I am going to reach here and say that the reason most of the regular conservative posters have not replied to this thread is because they are satisfied with the situation in North Carolina. They do not want an Atheist to hold public office (much less live in the same country) and they have nothing to say in this thread except that which might actually show their true colors.

Yeah, I'm calling you all out to be honest about this situation. I live in about as south Alabama as you can get. I live and interact with conservatives every day that fall on all ranges of the religious/political scale. I have seen and heard the worst from the bigots and yet I am still surprised by the occasional (very occasional) open minded human being that somehow was born and raised here.

I know how many of you feel about this. I'm just wondering if you have enough balls to come out and say it. Stop beating around the bush with this "Well, that is an interesting question" bull**** and be a man.

Read the article I posted before...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schwe...d=36499165

I was responding to GTS's claim that "Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.". I dispute that claim. You seem to want to, along with him, place Hitler in the wrong category. Just makes you wrong also. He simply was not on a religious crusade.

Do you want to list all the killing done in the 20th century, for religious reasons, that total more than the non-religious? If you choose to try, fine. You will fail.

As for replying to the original topic, for my part, I don't care about the original topic. I don't care if an atheist holds office anymore than I care if a Christian does. As long as a Christian doesn't demand that all people pray to his god, or atheist demand no one pray, I don't care. But I can appreciate that all the states have constitutions saying a person must believe to hold office. Change the state constitutions. I don't care. As much as people want to claim otherwise, this country was founded and is still a Christian nation. As much as people want to claim there is a separation of church and state, that simply isn't true. There is no wall. Yes, people have been convinced and the courts continue to rule as though it exists, but it's a fallacy. I say all this as a non-Christian, non-religious person. Just because I'm not a Christian doesn't mean I have to join the choir and demand Christians shut-up. I'm open-minded to the truth. But I imagine your definition of open-minded means agreeing with you.

As for "I live and interact with conservatives every day that fall on all ranges of the religious/political scale. I have seen and heard the worst from the bigots " I can change conservative to liberal and say the same.

I read the link you posted before. It was a waste of my time. I felt it would be a waste of my time to rely to you saying so. I will waste my time now to say so.

(12-19-2009 12:43 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Hitler was religious ergo religion is why Hitler killed? If the Jews hadn't been so inconsiderate as to be Jews they'd be alive today? The stupidity involved in such a line of thinking is earth shattering.

I always get a chuckle out of the unadulterated hatred atheists feel for people of faith, motiviated by how intolerant they perceive them to be. It shows hypocricy is nowhere near confined to religion.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mousillini are among some of the most profound butchers and tyrants in history and none of them needed religion to become them. WWI and WWII combined for 10's of millions of deaths and religion wasn't the movitvation for any of them. No religious motivation for the Revolutionary, 1812 or Civil wars.

The bottom line is man has never, at any time, needed religion as an excuse to kill his fellow man. And the myth atheists like to perpetuate that the world would be so much better off without religion by trying to argue he would is the height of lunacy.

I couldn't care less whether someone is an atheist or not as a requirement for holding office. I don't think there should be any religious test to hold office at all. Someone ought to sue and get North Carolina courts to rule it unconstitutional.

I can agree with some of your post.

Your blatant ignorance about Atheists however is not surprising. I do not hate any person because of what they believe in, as that is an absolutely ridiculous reason. However, Christians in this country do not have to succumb to the laws that inhibit their rights to live. And no, I do not mean literally stay alive, I mean have the freedom of choice to accomplish anything. If you have read the article I posted you realize that North Carolina is not the only state in which these laws are practiced. I have been discriminated against most of my life for not being a Christian. (I actually had a couple of Christians who were so upset that I was an Atheist that they actually physically attacked me.)

I also would like you to explain as to why you think the world is a better place because of religion.

(12-19-2009 12:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 12:43 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Hitler was religious ergo religion is why Hitler killed? If the Jews hadn't been so inconsiderate as to be Jews they'd be alive today? The stupidity involved in such a line of thinking is earth shattering.

I always get a chuckle out of the unadulterated hatred atheists feel for people of faith, motiviated by how intolerant they perceive them to be. It shows hypocricy is nowhere near confined to religion.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mousillini are among some of the most profound butchers and tyrants in history and none of them needed religion to become them. WWI and WWII combined for 10's of millions of deaths and religion wasn't the movitvation for any of them. No religious motivation for the Revolutionary, 1812 or Civil wars.

The bottom line is man has never, at any time, needed religion as an excuse to kill his fellow man. And the myth atheists like to perpetuate that the world would be so much better off without religion by trying to argue he would is the height of lunacy.

I couldn't care less whether someone is an atheist or not as a requirement for holding office. I don't think there should be any religious test to hold office at all. Someone ought to sue and get North Carolina courts to rule it unconstitutional.

I can agree with some of your post.

Your blatant ignorance about Atheists however is not surprising. I do not hate any person because of what they believe in, as that is an absolutely ridiculous reason. However, Christians in this country do not have to succumb to the laws that inhibit their rights to live. And no, I do not mean literally stay alive, I mean have the freedom of choice to accomplish anything. If you have read the article I posted you realize that North Carolina is not the only state in which these laws are practiced. I have been discriminated against most of my life for not being a Christian. (I actually had a couple of Christians who were so upset that I was an Atheist that they actually physically attacked me.)

I also would like you to explain as to why you think the world is a better place because of religion.

Don't worry, before long none of us are going to have freedom of choice about anything.

(12-19-2009 12:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  I have been discriminated against most of my life for not being a Christian. (I actually had a couple of Christians who were so upset that I was an Atheist that they actually physically attacked me.)

That would be assault and you would be protected by the law. It would be your right to file charges. That's not you example of being discriminated against, is it?

(12-19-2009 12:48 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 11:55 AM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 10:31 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 01:54 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 09:40 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-18-2009 08:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.

Certainly not in the 20th century. Nor the 19th. Or 18th. I'm not sure if there was a single century that religion was the champion of.

So Hitler was killing based purely on race or ethnicity?

All the Israeli wars, conflicts, and incidents ... but of course, those are really just deaths that occured purely over gender... religion had nothing to do with the matter.

Afghanistan? Oh, we must be there because that's where they smuggled Saddam's WMDs....

9/11? They hated us because we were free, but of course...

Northern Ireland? Just a heated property dispute ... that's all ...

The Sri Lankan Civil War? Over who had the better garden ...

The Second Sudanese Civil War? That must of been over who likes Europe the most.

The Taiping Rebellion -- the bloodiest civil war ever recorded at 20 million dead? Must have been over Opium...

The Algerian Civil War? Who knows... food maybe?

And of course the embassadors of world unity ... the KKK ... who never hated anything other than a black person, and were double ultra extra friends with Jews and Roman Catholics.

That's the first time I heard anyone spin Hitler and say religion caused all that death because those who were killed were religious. Yep, it was all the victims fault. But even presupposing the victims deaths can be put in the column "deaths caused by religion", Hitler killed far more people for other reasons than their religion, so, fail on that account.

Your 20th century examples don't add up to more than a few percent of all the killing done by atheists, dictators, fascists, commies, you know, all those non-religious butchers who kill for non-religious reasons.

N. Ireland? Less than 3200 deaths in 36 years of their conflict.
KKK? Since 1882 less than 5000 murders.
Sri Lankan Civil War? 80,000
Second Sudanese Civil War? 1.9 million
The Algerian Civil War? <200,000.
And yes, I'm aware you could add more examples.

That's assuming any of the deaths above could be attributed to religion. Other than the Islamic rebels in Algeria, I would argue no one else was fighting for purely religious reasons.


But Afghanistan, 9/11, all the conflicts Israel has, yes there is one religion that does a lot of killing strictly for their religion because their child raping prophet told them to.

Mao, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler (yes, I'm putting him back in the correct category), and the countless other non-religious butchers in Central and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia,... all your above examples pale in comparison.

Now you may have a stronger case with Taiping as a starting point in the 19th century....

Hitler was religious.

But since we are going to sit here and argue numbers...(which I remind you are human beings that had their lives taken from them)...I don't recall anyone ever killing anybody in the "name of the god I don't believe in". However, I do recall many people losing their lives in the name of the Christian god and others.

Religion is now, nothing more than excuse for advancing personal agendas. The real "success" stories that come from religion are normally nothing more than a reform of a lifestyle. Which, in most cases, are all local stories. And I use the word 'reform' loosely.

I notice many of the normal conservative posters have nothing to say about the original topic of this post, as it has now turned into the ordinary argument that it always does...although I did expect it.

I am going to reach here and say that the reason most of the regular conservative posters have not replied to this thread is because they are satisfied with the situation in North Carolina. They do not want an Atheist to hold public office (much less live in the same country) and they have nothing to say in this thread except that which might actually show their true colors.

Yeah, I'm calling you all out to be honest about this situation. I live in about as south Alabama as you can get. I live and interact with conservatives every day that fall on all ranges of the religious/political scale. I have seen and heard the worst from the bigots and yet I am still surprised by the occasional (very occasional) open minded human being that somehow was born and raised here.

I know how many of you feel about this. I'm just wondering if you have enough balls to come out and say it. Stop beating around the bush with this "Well, that is an interesting question" bull**** and be a man.

Read the article I posted before...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schwe...d=36499165

I was responding to GTS's claim that "Religion is still the undisputed champion for non-natural deaths in the history of the world.". I dispute that claim. You seem to want to, along with him, place Hitler in the wrong category. Just makes you wrong also. He simply was not on a religious crusade.

Do you want to list all the killing done in the 20th century, for religious reasons, that total more than the non-religious? If you choose to try, fine. You will fail.

As for replying to the original topic, for my part, I don't care about the original topic. I don't care if an atheist holds office anymore than I care if a Christian does. As long as a Christian doesn't demand that all people pray to his god, or atheist demand no one pray, I don't care. But I can appreciate that all the states have constitutions saying a person must believe to hold office. Change the state constitutions. I don't care. As much as people want to claim otherwise, this country was founded and is still a Christian nation. As much as people want to claim there is a separation of church and state, that simply isn't true. There is no wall. Yes, people have been convinced and the courts continue to rule as though it exists, but it's a fallacy. I say all this as a non-Christian, non-religious person. Just because I'm not a Christian doesn't mean I have to join the choir and demand Christians shut-up. I'm open-minded to the truth. But I imagine your definition of open-minded means agreeing with you.

As for "I live and interact with conservatives every day that fall on all ranges of the religious/political scale. I have seen and heard the worst from the bigots " I can change conservative to liberal and say the same.

I read the link you posted before. It was a waste of my time. I felt it would be a waste of my time to rely to you saying so. I will waste my time now to say so.

This could possibly be the most ignorant response I have ever received.

1. I said Hitler was religious. I did not say that is why he did what he did.

2. You ignored/didn't understand my original reason for mentioning the idiotic religious/non-religious killings argument.

3. If you read the article and claim "it was a waste of your time" that just proves your ignorant and apparently moronic point of view on life in this country. But as you said, "You are open-minded to the truth" right?

4. Wow. You can change the word 'conservative' to 'liberal'. Congrats. I could change it from 'conservative' to many things and it would be the same. Thanks for that mind-blowing reformation.

5. Demand Christians shut up? Okay, Fox News...who said that? At all?

(12-19-2009 12:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  Your blatant ignorance about Atheists however is not surprising. I do not hate any person because of what they believe in, as that is an absolutely ridiculous reason.

Oh really? Well I know you do, and that makes me right. I'm just using your own line of "reasoning."

Quote:I know how many of you feel about this. I'm just wondering if you have enough balls to come out and say it. Stop beating around the bush with this "Well, that is an interesting question" bull**** and be a man.

So am I to understand the ability to know people's real feelings is a trait only endowed to atheists? Now why is that? Is it an ESP that comes from just being that much more enlightened than us cave dwellers who belive in God? Not likely. So why don't you be a man and simpliy admit what I already know. You hate people of faith because of their faith. The underlying vitrol in your statement above proves it. Why don't you just BE A MAN, HAVE SOME BALLS and admit it.(see I can play that card to)

Quote:If you have read the article I posted you realize that North Carolina is not the only state in which these laws are practiced. I have been discriminated against most of my life for not being a Christian. (I actually had a couple of Christians who were so upset that I was an Atheist that they actually physically attacked me.)

Cry me a river. I know people who have been discriminated against because they are black, hispanic, overweight, unattractive and poor among other things. And if they made broad based negative generalizations about whites, thin, good looking or rich people I'd say their assertions are just as ridiculous as yours.

Quote:I also would like you to explain as to why you think the world is a better place because of religion.

Sorry I don't explain myself to people who hate me and my beliefs like you.

(12-19-2009 01:06 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 12:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  Your blatant ignorance about Atheists however is not surprising. I do not hate any person because of what they believe in, as that is an absolutely ridiculous reason.

Oh really? Well I know you do, and that makes me right. I'm just using your own line of "reasoning."

Quote:I know how many of you feel about this. I'm just wondering if you have enough balls to come out and say it. Stop beating around the bush with this "Well, that is an interesting question" bull**** and be a man.

So am I to understand the ability to know people's real feelings is a trait only endowed to atheists? Now why is that? Is it an ESP that comes from just being that much more enlightened than us cave dwellers who belive in God? Not likely. So why don't you be a man and simpliy admit what I already know. You hate people of faith because of their faith. The underlying vitrol in your statement above proves it. Why don't you just BE A MAN, HAVE SOME BALLS and admit it.(see I can play that card to)

Quote:If you have read the article I posted you realize that North Carolina is not the only state in which these laws are practiced. I have been discriminated against most of my life for not being a Christian. (I actually had a couple of Christians who were so upset that I was an Atheist that they actually physically attacked me.)

Cry me a river. I know people who have been discriminated against because they are black, hispanic, overweight, unattractive and poor among other things. And if they made broad based negative generalizations about whites, thin, good looking or rich people I'd say their assertions are just as ridiculous as yours.

Quote:I also would like you to explain as to why you think the world is a better place because of religion.

Sorry I don't explain myself to people who hate me and my beliefs like you.

What? You actually read this before you posted it? You don't know anything about me but apparently you have it all 'figured' out. I wasn't attacking you in any way but for whatever reason you felt the need to post this garbage. Wow, is all I can say.

By the way...

How many generalizations have been made on this forum? Hmmmm....

Now, that I thought about it for a second, you are right. I shouldn't have said the word 'know'. But to assume I hate people of faith simply because of their faith? Absurd.

You are not giving me an answer because you do not have one, not because of who I am.

(12-19-2009 12:59 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 12:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  I have been discriminated against most of my life for not being a Christian. (I actually had a couple of Christians who were so upset that I was an Atheist that they actually physically attacked me.)

That would be assault and you would be protected by the law. It would be your right to file charges. That's not you example of being discriminated against, is it?

Ummmm....yes? Is this a real question?

(12-19-2009 01:08 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  What? You actually read this before you posted it? You don't know anything about me but apparently you have it all 'figured' out.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. See I didn't realize only you are supposed to have the ability figure out everything about people you don't know. Did you forget your post that quick? Here, I'll repost your comment again for you.

Quote:Posted by Paul of Troy - Today 11:55 AM
I know how many of you feel about this. I'm just wondering if you have enough balls to come out and say it. Stop beating around the bush with this "Well, that is an interesting question" bull**** and be a man.

So it begs the question I asked earlier. Why is it that only you have the ability to have it all "figured" out?

Quote:I wasn't attacking you in any way but for whatever reason you felt the need to post this garbage. Wow, is all I can say.

Oh, so I wasn't one of the ones you knew how I really felt? See that's the problem, you need to be more specific. You need to list the names of all the people you don't know on here, but who's feelings you know so it's clear who your ESP is tuned into.

(12-19-2009 01:05 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  This could possibly be the most ignorant response I have ever received.

1. I said Hitler was religious. I did not say that is why he did what he did.

2. You ignored/didn't understand my original reason for mentioning the idiotic religious/non-religious killings argument.

3. If you read the article and claim "it was a waste of your time" that just proves your ignorant and apparently moronic point of view on life in this country. But as you said, "You are open-minded to the truth" right?

4. Wow. You can change the word 'conservative' to 'liberal'. Congrats. I could change it from 'conservative' to many things and it would be the same. Thanks for that mind-blowing reformation.

5. Demand Christians shut up? Okay, Fox News...who said that? At all?

That is the most ignorant attempt to cover up one's own ignorance about their utter ignorance an their ignorant follow-up reply following there original ignorant response, which, by the way, was ignorant.

"1. I said Hitler was religious. I did not say that is why he did what he did."
Maybe your reply to me should have been relevant to the topic then.

As for your other points, see my response to #1

(12-19-2009 01:09 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 12:59 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 12:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  I have been discriminated against most of my life for not being a Christian. (I actually had a couple of Christians who were so upset that I was an Atheist that they actually physically attacked me.)

That would be assault and you would be protected by the law. It would be your right to file charges. That's not you example of being discriminated against, is it?

Ummmm....yes? Is this a real question?

Alright I'm moving along then. Can't waste anymore of my time on your nonsense.

(12-19-2009 01:08 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  You are not giving me an answer because you do not have one, not because of who I am.

Exactly. The intimidation stemming from your unimpeachable logic and reasoning has me frozen in intellectual fear.

(12-19-2009 01:25 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(12-19-2009 01:08 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  You are not giving me an answer because you do not have one, not because of who I am.

Exactly. The intimidation stemming from your unimpeachable logic and reasoning has me frozen in intellectual fear.

Then answer the question...