What counts as offsides in a Religious debate?

Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
How could I use my right to life expressly to cause harm? :confused:

Never the less nothing you have said refutes the idea that freedom of speech protects lies. Lying is does not necessarily, nor purposely, cause direct harm to your person or any of the rights that you enjoy. There is after all no freedom of truth.
Dear BWANA i will stand by one thing and because i experienced it... "The truth will set you free" In truth there is complete freedom, people don't like the responsibility coming with it...
 
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
4,252
How could I use my right to life expressly to cause harm? :confused:
Well, the criminals are essentially doing this by killing people and then claiming that their right to life is protected but that's a different debate altogether...
Anyway it is recognised that there is a limit to free speech as numerous cases has shown. It is up to each and every person to ensure that those limits are never needed. It appears be have different views on it so we'll just agree to disagree.
 

bk.ru

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
599
Just to put some clarity on this.

Although we don't agree with other religions and find some of their ideas to be outright hilarious at times we don't go around mocking them for it like most of the atheists/agnostics do.
Yeah, you just kill them.
 

bk.ru

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
599
...mmm...who is trolling now?:p
Ssssh. Go away. You have no credibility at all. While I am still working on mine, you managed to completely and utterly destroy yours. Your opinion is worthless to me and anyone with intellect on this forum.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
4,252
Ssssh. Go away. You have no credibility at all. While I am still working on mine, you managed to completely and utterly destroy yours. Your opinion is worthless to me and anyone with intellect on this forum.
Have YOU ever had any credibility at all?
 

Nick333

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
30,659
Although we don't agree with other religions and find some of their ideas to be outright hilarious at times we don't go around mocking them for it like most of the atheists/agnostics do.
Yet you have no problem mocking atheists/agnostics.

Don't claim victory just yet... these bozos will ALSO claim it to be a fact... I've seen it happen with my own eyes. :eek:
Whether you like it or not religious people receive no special protection under our constitution. So suck it up clown boy. :)
 
Joined
Apr 22, 2005
Messages
4,889
Lol, the concept of finding the beam in your own eye before looking for the splinter in someone's else's.

And that's all I'll say on the matter.
 

nthdimension

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
763
if you make the claim that the Bible is a collection of fables you HAVE TO PROVE IT.
Wrong. The religion claims that its fairy tales are true. Burden of proof rests on the religion.

To call people delusional for believing in God is just plain nuts. Again you have to provide the proof that He is not real. It is commonly accepted in medicine that God is a belief and not a delusion as the latter would require proof that He is not real. A person can not be labeled delusional without other symptoms like seeing dragons other people don't see
Can you prove my invisible rabbit isn't real? Can you prove there are no dragons? Burden of proof rests with those who claim there is a god.

If someone tells me the Easter Bunny is going to cut off my supply of chocolate if I don't worship His Great Bunniness I am going to laugh at them.

God is a delusion because it exists only in some peoples' imaginations. None of them can demonstrate this god's existence. The fact that psychiatrists are reluctant to properly designate it as a delusion demonstrates their weakness. If we're going to call thinking there is a god a belief, then we should extend the same to dragons.

the fact that you can seek legal recourse is indicative of this. If I have a right to something there can be no legal recourse when I exercise that right. I have the ability to kill yet I don't have an undeniable right to do so. You have a right to life yet you don't have a right to use that to cause harm. Free speech is just like every other right. If you abuse it by using it to purposely hurt or harm other people you can lose it.
Being held liable for consequences doesn't mean you lose the right. Even lying is generally allowed. Governments do it daily. Free speech makes it possible for those lies to be countered.

Well, the criminals are essentially doing this by killing people and then claiming that their right to life is protected
But they did not use their right to life to directly harm anyone.

I could no doubt show just as much committed against Christians by both other religious groups and atheists.
Fortunately atheism is not an organisation. Christianity is one. One that for over a thousand years violently imposed itself on the world. The evil activities of other religions are not relevant. For the record Islam also has a disgusting, sick record.

Religions have been and in many places still are forces of evil. These organisations have been stamping on the face of the world for many centuries. Those who still follow should just stop whining about how their feelings are being hurt.

Since religion claims to have the moral high ground we should hold the organisations and every follower to an extremely high standard.
 
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
4,252
Yet you have no problem mocking atheists/agnostics.
I actually hate the fact that you are driving me to it.
Don't claim victory just yet... these bozos will ALSO claim it to be a fact... I've seen it happen with my own eyes. :eek:
Whether you like it or not religious people receive no special protection under our constitution. So suck it up clown boy. :)
LOL Still sour about that one?
Do you really think that a thread starting with 10 points proving you are obsessed with religion is ever going to get a constructive thread going? Like I said I see it as a bash on religion in a humorous manner.
For those of you weary of happyclapping and idiots "rolling around on the floor "speaking in tongues"" I recommend the Church Of The Flying Spaghetti Monster, or Pastafarianism. Free pizza on conversion and a chance of winning a night with the Seven Vestal ( ie: wearing wet T-Shirts ) Virgins. Let His Noodliness into your heart at:
IC: Seriously if you wanted a thread on debating religion start your own. I started one on Bashing religion and never tried to hide that. Why did you change my subject line?
We were talking about beams were we? Someone? :rolleyes:
Wrong. The religion claims that its fairy tales are true. Burden of proof rests on the religion.
Wrong!!! We claim to believe that our non-fairy tales are true which is true. YOU make a categorical claim that it's false so prove it.
Can you prove my invisible rabbit isn't real? Can you prove there are no dragons?
No and I don't care to either since I didn't make the claim that it's not. It is of no concern of mine to prove that it isn't simply because you believe it is. :p
Burden of proof rests with those who claim there is a god.
We covered this already. We believe there is a God. We don't make a categorical claim so we don't have anything to prove to you.
God is a delusion because it exists only in some peoples' imaginations.
Can you prove that? You must be able to since you make the claim.
The fact that psychiatrists are reluctant to properly designate it as a delusion demonstrates their weakness. If we're going to call thinking there is a god a belief, then we should extend the same to dragons.
By all means if you want to believe in dragons do so. There are people who belief in them so that is their belief.
Being held liable for consequences doesn't mean you lose the right. Even lying is generally allowed. Governments do it daily. Free speech makes it possible for those lies to be countered.
I hate to disappoint you but no right is absolute as it carries with it a responsibility. There is a penalty I believe for lying to parliament, it is rarely used as it might lead to restricting political debate which is a slippery slope seen as the devil himself which we don't want to get into. Newspapers can be closed down for continually and purposely spreading lies and injunctions can be filed to prevent them from publishing inflammatory material. A court can bar you from talking about a case or anything else for that matter. As much as some people would want it to be free speech is not an absolute.
But they did not use their right to life to directly harm anyone.
No, but they lose it because they want to cause harm to someone else.
Fortunately atheism is not an organisation. Christianity is one. One that for over a thousand years violently imposed itself on the world. The evil activities of other religions are not relevant. For the record Islam also has a disgusting, sick record.
Out of all the religions Christianity is probably among the top when it comes to tolerance. Don't mistakenly assume some sick old man's sexual fantasies with a young girl is the result of Christianity because they claim it was. I might as well blow up a Mosque and claim it in the name of atheism and you would be held accountable.
Religions have been and in many places still are forces of evil. These organisations have been stamping on the face of the world for many centuries. Those who still follow should just stop whining about how their feelings are being hurt.
Do you attribute Hitler in the name of religion? Your argument has never had merit and it never will.
 
Last edited:

LoneGunman

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2003
Messages
4,552
"Out of all the religions Christianity is probably among the top when it comes to tolerance."

Well, Hitler and the Nazi's were very devout Christians. "Gott Mit Uns" ('God With Us') was the motto
of um, the SS I think it was. They had it carved on their ceremonial daggers.
And lets not forget the 600 000+ dead in Afghanistan and Iraq, wars launched by Bush, who
honestly believes that God speaks to him, and that he's doing Gods work.

Yup, good ole Christianity, tolerance, humility, forgiveness and pacifism
:p
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
17,099
I claim there is a god.
I can't prove it.
Therefore there is no god.

QED

It seems discriminatory that some people's imaginary friends get called beliefs while others are called delusions.
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
"Out of all the religions Christianity is probably among the top when it comes to tolerance."

Well, Hitler and the Nazi's were very devout Christians. "Gott Mit Uns" ('God With Us') was the motto
of um, the SS I think it was. They had it carved on their ceremonial daggers.
And lets not forget the 600 000+ dead in Afghanistan and Iraq, wars launched by Bush, who
honestly believes that God speaks to him, and that he's doing Gods work.

Yup, good ole Christianity, tolerance, humility, forgiveness and pacifism
:p
Thanks for reminding us of one fact, LG , that those things happened in the name of christianity but not done by commiitted christians, done by people who sought their own goalls...
Thank you for reminding us LG that god name is misused mistreated etc for their own purposes...
Thank you for reminding us LG that although evil power may misuse christianity for its purposes because christianity is most powerful it will never be destroyed, christ is coming again to destroy all evil....AMEN!
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,776
I claim there is a god.
I can't prove it.
Therefore there is no god.

QED

It seems discriminatory that some people's imaginary friends get called beliefs while others are called delusions.
Yeah and while we are on claims even the anti-christ will claim to be the christ, that is how mighty and above all the name of christ is!.... AMEN!!!
 
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
4,252
Well, Hitler and the Nazi's were very devout Christians. "Gott Mit Uns" ('God With Us') was the motto
of um, the SS I think it was. They had it carved on their ceremonial daggers.
They surely weren't Christian. They might have deluded themselves into thinking God is on their side but I don't see any Christian principles included in their faith.
And lets not forget the 600 000+ dead in Afghanistan and Iraq, wars launched by Bush, who
honestly believes that God speaks to him, and that he's doing Gods work.
Should I list everybody killed by the Taliban and Saddam? I may not agree with the war and the real reason behind it but in the end they did do the world a favour although they crewed up the post war.

Like I said stop purpetuating that lie since I have shown you I could just as easily commit the same atrosities in the name of atheism. Out of all religions Christians were probably the most persecuted and you are actually showing that you are the least tolerant by continually stating that lie of yours.
 

LoneGunman

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2003
Messages
4,552
"Should I list everybody killed by the Taliban and Saddam?"

Yes please. The figures for both doesnt compare to the
current stats of civilian dead in the current 'war on terror'.

And again, dodo ducks the point, 'christianity' - already a delusion -
is used by the malevolent very easily to manipulate the masses.
"religion is the opiate of the masses"
Hitler and the Nazi's maintained their Christianity, right through to
the end - just like dodo would, if he was legally allowed to burn what
he saw as 'unbelievers' and 'heretics'. Saying 'oh but they were 'pretending'
to be christian, is bogus. They had god on their side, they believed that
they were doing the right thing.

Much like those countless dodo's who burned people alive, and tortured them
to death, because they didnt believe in the god fairy tale.
'Christianity' is inherently dangerous and evil, that way. It promotes murder
and intolerance, not 'forgiveness' or understanding, whenever the fairy tales
are used by any political group or Government.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
4,252
And somehow you are making the point that YOU are intolerant of religion and people will associate that with being atheist. You are no different than the Hitlers of the world. You may not do the persecution directly but you are saying it is alright to be intolerant by being intolerant yourself and are therefor just as guilty as any relious group you are accusing.

Go ahead and flame me now... :D
 

Edwe

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
2,023
I can't believe anyone is still blaming the religions themselves for the atrocities committed by some of their supposed followers. Evil deeds are perpetrated by evil people and most major religions don't sanction these actions at all. No matter how much Hitler, Saddam and any other religious evil individual in world history you could care to mention, may have tried to justify their actions using (or should I say "abusing"?) religion, it is mostly simply against the fundamental teachings of their respective religions. Yes, some of these people genuinely believed what they were saying, but do you trust a psychotic's judgement? Maybe Hitler just missed the part about "Thou shalt not kill"?
 

Nick333

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
30,659
I actually hate the fact that you are driving me to it.
You allow yourself to be driven mate. The emotions that are stirred within you, when your insecurities about your irrational faith are confronted, cause you to get angry and lose control.

Questions you should be asking yourself:

*Why are you so insecure in your faith?

*Why are your beliefs so easily threatened?

*Why do you cling to beliefs that are so easily threatened?

And for the higher grade pass::D

*Who is it that is insecure about their faith?

*Whose beliefs are so easily threatened?

*Who clings to faith?
 

arf9999

MyBroadband Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
6,791
Should I list everybody killed by the Taliban and Saddam? I may not agree with the war and the real reason behind it but in the end they did do the world a favour although they crewed up the post war.

.
Well to be completely fair, although Saddam was a Muslim, his government was secular... not that that helped the Kurds.
 
Top