Feed on Posts or Comments 21 September 2014

Christianity &Islam Thomas on 02 Aug 2010 12:53 am

Can you define morality without a “god”? Of course you can

Can you define morality without a “god”? Of course you can. Here’s how to do it:

This sure beats the “morality” in the Bible. The Bible is repulsive:

100 Responses to “Can you define morality without a “god”? Of course you can”

  1. on 02 Aug 2010 at 3:54 pm 1.Horatio said …

    Ha ha ha, what? Well she is about what I would expect an atheist to resort to for morality. I have quizzed the atheist on here many times about why a certain action is wrong. An answer I never get.

    For the atheist it is all subjective therefore an action such as murder is wrong only if you believe it to be wrong. Therefore an atheist has no basis to judge the morality of others.

    Which begs the question. How can Thomas refer to Biblical morality as repulsive when morality is determined by each individual. he sounds like a judgmental bigot? This is an issue that haunts the atheist worldview.

  2. on 02 Aug 2010 at 7:40 pm 2.Anonymous said …

    Horatio, If a god provides morality, then why does the United States ignore most of that god’s morals and laws in the bible?

  3. on 02 Aug 2010 at 8:12 pm 3.Anti-Theist said …

    It is very sad that theists truly believe morality is impossible without a supernatural dictator. I say speak for yourself. I am moral because I am moral. You are moral for the sheer fact that you’re trying to avoid hell. Without your god I shudder at the discussing things you might do. Of course I also shudder at the sick things you’re bible tells you to do.
    (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

    If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

  4. on 02 Aug 2010 at 9:00 pm 4.Biff said …

    “It is very sad that theists truly believe morality is impossible without a supernatural dictator.”

    Ant-Freeze,

    Where did I claim morality is impossible? I think you have been diluted to the properties of water. What I claim is for atheist morality is up to the individual. Therefore you have no high ground to judge the morality of another individual. That includes whatever is in your favorite manuscript Deuteronomy.

    I think atheist read the Bible more than Christians. Why are you guys so hung up on ancient Hebrew laws? Odd for something they claim to have no use for

  5. on 02 Aug 2010 at 9:03 pm 5.Biff said …

    Horatio

    Sorry, I thought Anti-Freeze was responding to one of my oosts..

  6. on 02 Aug 2010 at 9:23 pm 6.Anonymous said …

    Biff, are you the same person as Horatio?

  7. on 02 Aug 2010 at 9:37 pm 7.Rayn said …

    @Biff
    Here is a short demonstration that morality is objective.
    http://jim.com/moralfac.htm

    Here is a section of The Descent of Man by Charles Darwin, explaining how morality evolved.
    http://jim.com/descent-.htm

    Morality isn’t “up to the individual”.
    Morality is objective, and god wasn’t require.

    I used to be a christian myself, and reading the bible actually led me to atheism. One of the things that I was appalled at was the blatant sexism and support for slavery.

    Ancient Hewbrew laws formed the basis of the Christian religion, before “Modern Christianity” where the believers simply cherrypick the bible.

  8. on 02 Aug 2010 at 10:24 pm 8.Lou said …

    Rayn

    I read the links. I laughed as I finished because each was the opinion of a man. Why is this man’s opinion/actions moral but Stalin’s were not? We even have a bust honoring him here in the US now. Geez, look at DC. A large segment of the politicians who cheat, lie and steal simply condone it by claiming it is just politics.

    Many christians cherry-pick the Bible true, but you my friend cherry pick which morality is good and which is wrong and you do it with opinion, not objective facts. Sure you take in the facts, but YOU determine what is right and wrong just as any man does.
    If it were as simple as your two opinion pieces we would not ethic classes and why we consistently have split juries.

  9. on 03 Aug 2010 at 1:35 am 9.A real-ist said …

    And since the bible was written by man, the morality that was made up during the time the bible was written was man’s opinion at that time.

  10. on 03 Aug 2010 at 1:44 am 10.Rayn said …

    What do you believe Lou?
    Should we follow the morality of the bible?
    Or is morality subjective?

  11. on 03 Aug 2010 at 2:47 am 11.Lou said …

    Realist & Rayn

    Why is it when you argument is trumped and you are backed into a corner you fold? Why must you change the subject? DO you believe in your system or not?

    If morality is subjective then it does not exist at all. Right? Its like arguing who was the greatest running back of all time.

  12. on 03 Aug 2010 at 3:11 am 12.Rayn said …

    You never trumped the argument at all, you just made a baseless claim that morality isn’t based on facts.
    Did you honestly read those pages?
    Can you point to a specific part of the reasoning that you disagree with?

  13. on 03 Aug 2010 at 3:18 am 13.A real-ist said …

    Lou,
    There are natural morals, for example, don’t kill others unless it is for survival, and there are man made morals. I was simply pointing out that the bible has man made morals in it as well as natural morals. The morals in the bible are not from a God.

    We are trumped and backed into a corner according to who, your opinion? Just because you don’t like what we say you think we are backed into a corner? LOL

  14. on 03 Aug 2010 at 10:57 am 14.Lou said …

    “You never trumped the argument at all, you just made a baseless claim that morality isn’t based on facts.”

    Well, you two just do not understand. I never made such a claim. I’ll try once more. Everyone makes decisions on how they see the facts. That is without question. However, subjective morality dictates that there is no universal morality. If everyone does what is right in their own eyes then essentially morality in reality does not exist. Consequently, Rayn could never question the actions of a Stalin since he made his decisions based on his interpretation of the facts. Why would one man be the moral superior of another?

  15. on 03 Aug 2010 at 12:14 pm 15.Joe said …

    @ Lou:

    I think you make the mistake of assuming that morality is either “subjective” or “universal”. There exists a third type of morality, which is somewhat inbetween the other two and could be called “objective morality”.

    It is the type of morality that we get when asking the question: Given all evidence and knowledge currently available to human beings, which type of human behaviour allows us to live together happily, in peace and harmony?

    Such an approach to morality can lead to objective answers on the basis of the sciences and the humanities. And as we can put it into laws, society can work without any need for religiously founded moral values, and yet rely on a good fundament of moral values. Certainly, such a concept of morality is more modest and pragmatic than your quest for “universal morality”, but it works.

    Three further remarks about this:

    1. It should be obvious that the concept of objective morality is sufficient to question the actions of a Stalin. You do not need “universal morality” for this.

    2. Regarding the question of truth (i.e. the question of “true vs. false” in contrast to the moral question of “good vs. evil”), science has for long followed such a concept of “objective truth” (instead of looking for “subjective” or “universal truth”). A closer look at the history of science would show you that it is precisely such a comparably modest and pragmatic concept of “objective truth” that has given rise to the great inventions and the great scientific success that characterises Western civilization.

    3. I live in London, and in the past years I have met many gay Americans who emmigrated from the US to Europe because they could not stand anymore the religious hatred they had experienced in the US. For me this is just one more piece of evidence that the modest and pragmatic concept of objective morality works much better than any claim of universal morality.

  16. on 03 Aug 2010 at 2:10 pm 16.Lou said …

    “Given all evidence and knowledge currently available to human beings, which type of human behaviour allows us to live together happily, in peace and harmony?”

    Who is the determining factor of happy, peace and harmony? Peace through strength? Peace through complacency? Harmony through cooperation or force? It is all subject to individual opinion or possibly group opinion. With group opinion you can get Sharia law. Your arguments still go back to my original observations. Regarding point 2, ethics a s study of philosophy. Within the study you find meta, normative, applied, and etc.

    If you live in London then you should be tired of the hatred against Americans, Christians and Muslims. I had a son at Oxford for two years who rose to leadership because he kept it quiet that he was American. A sad state for your nation. Stop attempting to be the moral superior.

    These gay Americans you have met once again provide their opinion. They often take the word hatred to describe anyone who will not rubber stamp their lifestyle as OK. Not everyone must agree with the gay lifestyle. That is what freedom is all about.

    BTW, I know gay couples who are perfectly content and happy here in the US so there you go. This supposed objective morality goes right back to being subjective. You have chosen to believe one set of gay opinions over another.

  17. on 03 Aug 2010 at 4:19 pm 17.Severin said …

    14 Lou
    “Everyone makes decisions on how they see the facts.”
    Here you neglect the important fact that MOST PEOPLE SEE FACTS IN PRETTY EQUAL WAY!
    I do not say all, but majority does.

    Morality is the matter of the evolution and ONLY of the evolution. The main rule in evolution, developed through billions of years is NOT “do what is best for individual”, BUT “do what is best to transfer your genes further in future”.
    Traces of “moral rules” can be seen by primitive organisms, for example: “do not eat your youngs”. There are many exceptions (many primitive species, but also lions, gepards, and many other mammals which in SPECIFIC cases DO eat or kill their own youngs!), but majority of higher animals in most cases do NOT eat their youngs, even if they are extremely hungry, although they (youngs) are full of proteins. Aren’t those REAL moral rules? WITHOUT quotation marks!

    Natural selection doing its “job” for hundreds of millions of years, left to live and to develop societies which found the best compromises in their behaviour (“morality”!) to enable themselves to transfer their genes further in future.
    Societies of primates have HIGHLY DEVELOPED MORAL RULES without believing in god!

    Maybe the best example of how evolution (natural selsction) works are humans themselves.
    Just comapre biblical “laws” or real laws from 2000 or 3000 years ago with today’s laws!
    Humans did not change much physically, but evolved A LOT “spiritually” in only a few 1000 of years. Humans, same as animals, got a NATURAL sense of morality. Not all of them in the same extent, but I am positive that killing of other humans is somehow naturally “repulsive” to MOST people. No rational explanation, but most people just CAN NOT KILL another human being (except in self-defendind, but even then, with traumas).

    And, most important, that feeling is common to (majority of) believers of all religions, (najority of) atheists, (majority of) black people, majority of HUMANS!

    Natural morality has nothing to do with any religion!

  18. on 03 Aug 2010 at 4:45 pm 18.Rayn said …

    Well, you two just do not understand. I never made such a claim. I’ll try once more. Everyone makes decisions on how they see the facts. That is without question.

    Most Humans will see the facts in almost the same way. Natural Selection will favor organism that live together peacefully and spread their genes. If we didn’t realize that murder was wrong, then our species would have went extinct.
    However, If someone does not realize that murder is wrong they suffer from a serious mental disorder. They are wrong. We know Stalin is wrong because he murdered people.

    However, subjective morality dictates that there is no universal morality. If everyone does what is right in their own eyes then essentially morality in reality does not exist.

    Yes, that is what subjective morality is. I am not claiming morality is subjective.

    Consequently, Rayn could never question the actions of a Stalin since he made his decisions based on his interpretation of the facts. Why would one man be the moral superior of another?

    It is not “one man” being superior to another. Almost everyone in every culture would see Stalin’s actions as wrong. If someone thought that Stalin was moral they would be seriously deluded.

  19. on 03 Aug 2010 at 4:51 pm 19.Severin said …

    1 Horatio

    I did not see your answer to A’s clear, logical and fair question (#2).

    I will be free to repeat it:
    If god provides morality, why does the United States ignore most of that god’s morals and laws in the bible?

    Not only the USA, but MOST societies on earth!?

    I can answer it, but it was YOU who claimed morality comes from god, so please explain why don’t we keep persisting on god’s morality today?
    So: why?

    Additional question:
    Why don’t monkeys see good portions of proteins in their youngs when hungry?
    They do not read Bible and can not be guided by god’s morality code.

  20. on 03 Aug 2010 at 4:53 pm 20.Severin said …

    16 Lou
    “It is all subject to individual opinion or possibly group opinion.’

    It is all subject of our genetic inheritance.
    Like all other characteristic of ours.

  21. on 03 Aug 2010 at 6:52 pm 21.truthteller7 said …

    if the world would be a better place if everyone were athiests then what did people do with social darwinism they justified wars with that grow up life with out god will find a way to be hellish

  22. on 03 Aug 2010 at 8:59 pm 22.Lou said …

    Rayn: “We know Stalin is wrong because he murdered people.”

    The West knows Stalin was wrong. This is based on opinion.

    What about China, the Middle East? Half the world’s population lives in these nations however murder is not considered wrong. Lets see, murder for being caught in adultery, murder for having a Bible, murder for being born a girl, murder for speaking against the government, murder for being an infidel – Get the picture? You still look at this morality from your vantage point as a westerner and it is subjective. Your opinion is the correct one over these other people groups why?

    Oh, and Stalin survived quite well thank you very much. Natural selection actually favors the aggressor, not the peaceful.

  23. on 04 Aug 2010 at 12:19 am 23.Rayn said …

    21.truthteller7 said …

    if the world would be a better place if everyone were athiests then what did people do with social darwinism they justified wars with that grow up life with out god will find a way to be hellish

    How old are you?
    At least try to use spelling and grammar. I’m not even sure what you are trying to say.

    22.Lou said …

    The West knows Stalin was wrong. This is based on opinion.

    What about China, the Middle East? Half the world’s population lives in these nations however murder is not considered wrong. Lets see, murder for being caught in adultery, murder for having a Bible, murder for being born a girl, murder for speaking against the government, murder for being an infidel – Get the picture? You still look at this morality from your vantage point as a westerner and it is subjective. Your opinion is the correct one over these other people groups why?

    This is all caused by delusion. As Severin pointed out in the other thread Communism is very much like a religion, and its followers are deluded. All of this murder isn’t natural and is caused by dangerous systems like Islam and Communism. You forgot that Muslims and Communist have extra facts that they bring along with them. Muslims look at morality with the false assumption that Allah is real, Muhammad is his prophet, and the Quaran is correct. The Communist looks at morality with the false assumption that murdering certain people will be better for the state overall.

    Oh, and Stalin survived quite well thank you very much. Natural selection actually favors the aggressor, not the peaceful.

    Stalin is an exception, not the rule. If all humans were like Stalin, there would be very few humans left. Natural Selection favors organisms that are more peaceful to each other.

    Here is a quick documentary made by Dawkins.

    Nice Guys Finish First:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFj0caNX1s0&feature=PlayList&p=F500FE4DBF8B2592&playnext=1&index=57

    At least you might learn something new.

  24. on 04 Aug 2010 at 2:49 am 24.Lou said …

    Dawkins is not my source of information for ethics. As you mentioned about other groups, he has motives.
    Dawkins seems to be the atheist go to guy for every conceivable issue. You might consider broadening your horizons. Your position is tedious.

    Human nature is what it is and you may deny facts if you like. You seem to have an excuse for every group as to why they see reality as they do. That is my point. We have not even considered lieing, cheating and stealing. Check out some stats there with our young people.

    Atheist also have there issues that cause them to not see reality too clearly. Ethics and morality are a real problem for your group. To simplify matters, within the atheist framework each man is his God when it comes to ethics. Few if any absolutes truly exist.

    Good luck to you slick.

  25. on 04 Aug 2010 at 4:01 am 25.Rayn said …

    Dawkins is not my source of information for ethics. As you mentioned about other groups, he has motives.
    Dawkins seems to be the atheist go to guy for every conceivable issue. You might consider broadening your horizons. Your position is tedious.

    Dawkins is an expert in the field of evolutionary biology. Since morality is the result of evolution, I think Dawkins is a valid source.
    The documentary is many years old, a long time before Dawkins began his crusade against religion. I personally think Dawkins should return to doing science.

    Before I address the rest of your post I want to make sure that I understand your position correctly.
    Are you saying that morality is subjective (or that atheists must believe morality is subjective) because people disagree on what is right and wrong?
    If I am incorrect please clarify.

  26. on 04 Aug 2010 at 4:49 am 26.Severin said …

    22 Lou
    “The West knows Stalin was wrong.”
    Why the West? EVERYBODY knows Stalin was wrong.He is not gloryfied in Russia and ex-Russian countries.
    Russian poor, illiterate and religious peasants understood it some time after they supported revolution. They just could not do anything ay more.

    “Lets see, murder for being caught in adultery, murder for having a Bible, murder for being born a girl, murder for speaking against the government, murder for being an infidel”
    It is not called “murder” there! It is called “punishment by law”. Sheria laws, which are still valid in a few countries, are EXACTLY done by Biblical laws (an eye for an eye…).
    Such thing you DO NOT call murders when you read them in the Bible!
    How is it possible?

  27. on 04 Aug 2010 at 4:50 am 27.Severin said …

    Lou
    I remember you, or someone like you, called biblical murders “right” and story abour Abraham and his son “positive”.

  28. on 04 Aug 2010 at 5:02 am 28.Severin said …

    22 Lou
    “You still look at this morality from your vantage point as a westerner and it is subjective.”

    In past most of human societies were extremely cruel. Laws were cruel EVERYWHERE.

    Then some of those societies found some ballance in their behaviour, to keep themselves from dissapearing.
    They understood “sheria laws” (which were valid in west too, untill recently!) were not good for survival of SOCIETY, so they replaced sheria laws with less cruel laws.
    Some societies did not. THAT is EVOLUTION. It does not run smoothly and equally everywhere.

    Individuals on east, most of them, have the same FEELING of repulsio against killing of other individuals, and sooner or later, they will change their laws to less cruel and less unjustice.
    Some mulsim countries have normal laws and live like westerners already.

  29. on 04 Aug 2010 at 5:07 am 29.Severin said …

    Lou
    “Human nature is what it is and you may deny facts if you like.”

    Yes, and shit is also what it is, but both shit and human nature are products of evolution.

    Most humans have very similar shits.
    Most humans have very similar NATURAL feeling of repulsion about murdering of another human being, you like it or not, it IS SO, and you can not just deny it.

    And most humans did NOT have such a feeling only some 2 or 3000 years ago!
    They evolved!

  30. on 04 Aug 2010 at 5:11 am 30.Severin said …

    Lou
    Please do not forget that eastern countries are HIGHLY RELIGIOUS. No atheist there!
    So if they behave differently than western people, it is BECAUSE of religion. Their religion is an obstacle for them to evolve to a little bit higher level of morality!

    It is EXACTLY how things were going on in the rest of the world.
    It is only question of timing!

    Stalin survived… you said.
    So did many christian and muslim criminals!

    Evolution is NOT the matter of surviving of individuals, but societies (species).

  31. on 04 Aug 2010 at 5:19 am 31.Severin said …

    25 Rayan
    “Before I address the rest of your post I want to make sure that I understand your position correctly.”

    I will repeat for you a joke I put here several times beore to describe position of believers:

    The constitution of ex-USSR contains of only 2 articles:
    #1 Communist party is always right
    #2 In case communist party is not right, apply #1

    You can say what you want, use any logic and/or arguments you want, they will twist it their way.

    However, I have my reasons to keep debating here, and I will continue.
    My reason is: if a young individual poisoned with religion starts to THINK after reading my comments, I will be happy! Maybe it will prevent ONE brainwashing.

  32. on 04 Aug 2010 at 12:05 pm 32.Anonymous said …

    Lou
    Finally, you know better than I where to find biblical verses in which was said that ALL authorities come from god, and ALL authorities MUST be obeyed.
    Shall I find the verses for you?

    So, WHY, gentlemen, you have any complaints to Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler?
    Were they atheists or not, THEY CAME TO POWER DIRECTLY BY GOD’S WILL! All authority comes from god!
    GOD let them live and enjoy, and, of course, torture their people.
    It was HIS will, HIS plan!

  33. on 04 Aug 2010 at 1:26 pm 33.Severin said …

    32 Anonymous was Severin

  34. on 04 Aug 2010 at 4:31 pm 34.Lou said …

    “Since morality is the result of evolution, I think Dawkins is a valid source.”

    Rayn, you obviously have a very limited understanding of this field. DO some study. Yes, with simplicity Darwin can explain behavior conducive to the survival and welfare and naturally reproduction. This is the lowest forms or morality and not really even morality. It is only enlightened self-interest. A tremendous amount of study is being down in foundations and altruism and sorry, but such simplistic slight of hand as you have provided is seriously lacking in understanding.

  35. on 04 Aug 2010 at 7:36 pm 35.Boz said …

    “So, WHY, gentlemen, you have any complaints to Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler?”

    So this guy has no problem with murdering tyrants? God may give the power but he didn’t authorize them to murder the people they had power over. He didn’t authorize them to abuse their power for personal gain. The dangers of guys who pull out a few verses and think they are scholars.

    Atheist will look up to just about anyone.

  36. on 05 Aug 2010 at 3:01 am 36.some guy said …

    If you don’t believe in God that’s your choice, but why would you waste your whole life trying to prove to people that there is no God and that when we die all we do is decay? If there is no God and we are all just a product of chance like the “Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution” tells us then why are we wasting our lives working, paying bills, and living with regrets of things we wish we would have done? If this is it, screw morals and do what you want to do because you were an accident anyways so why should you answer to anybody or live up to anybody else’s “ideas” of morality? To the christian’s on this page stop arguing your interpretation of scripture’s because all it’s gonna do is make you look foolish, and why are you arguing your point? Do you honestly believe that telling people they are wrong is gonna draw them closer to God or make them want to become a Christian? God is big enough to stand up for Himself. Besides the bible says “The way of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing.”

  37. on 05 Aug 2010 at 3:10 am 37.some guy said …

    you guys have fun proving to each other why the other person is wrong. Just do what everybody else does when they want to express their opinion and not be interrupted…write a book or picket. Matter of fact we should all get together in a room and have a real life pissing match instead of a cyber one. The truth is if you believe that when you die you aren’t going to heaven (because it doesn’t exist or whatever) then congratulations you are completely right.

  38. on 05 Aug 2010 at 6:49 am 38.18yroldgrlthatisnotrepulsed said …

    I believe the bible with all my heart and if you would not take things out of context then you would see that Jesus himself “worked” on the sabbath.

    ps. Do not take this man or even myself for our word. Find out for yourself.

    Mark 2:23
    And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn.
    24
    And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?27
    And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath
    28
    Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
    3:2
    And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him.
    4
    And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace.
    6:2
    And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?

    Luke 6:6
    And it came to pass also on another sabbath, that he entered into the synagogue and taught: and there was a man whose right hand was withered.
    7
    And the scribes and Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the sabbath day; that they might find an accusation against him.
    9
    Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it?
    13:10
    And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the sabbath.
    14
    And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath day, and said unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be healed, and not on the sabbath day.
    15
    The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering?

    I may not know terribly much about the bible, or be that great of a christian. But i do know that miracles happen. And only because there is a God.

    -A firm believer in her faith.

  39. on 05 Aug 2010 at 7:27 am 39.Anonymous said …

    35 Boz
    “So this guy has no problem with murdering tyrants?”

    Please do not twist my words.
    It is then called lying!

    I have problem to tolerate ANY crime, individual or massive (serial), both done by tyrants and god.

    I do not say that I tolerate crimes done by Stalin or Mao, but I do say that their crimes look like children games compared to god’s deeds described in Bible.

    And, yes, you should know the Bible better: there IS written that all authority comes from god and that all authorities must be obeyed.

    So your god is RESPONSIBLE for Stalin’s crimes, because Stalin’s authority, according to Bible, which is the word of god, CAME FROM GOD, directly.

    If Mr. god saw tyrants misusing their power, why did not he moved them off?
    Because he ENJOYED their crimes!

    He enjoyed seeing his own son on the cross!

    BTW, where people who did 9/11 “this guy” (atheists)?

    They told us their authority came from god too!

  40. on 05 Aug 2010 at 8:40 am 40.3D said …

    36.some guy said …

    If you don’t believe in God that’s your choice, but why would you waste your whole life trying to prove to people that there is no God and that when we die all we do is decay?

    Lots of reasons. Here’s a couple:
    1) Because if all we do is decay after we die, then a lot of good, potentially productive people are going to waste their lives praying to a bullshit God that doesn’t exist, just because they were indoctrinated by their parents into a cult at a young age; when they could be using their intelligence and talents to advance human progress. That’s one reason to fight religion.

    2) Because, unfortunately, the people who make the laws that govern us are religious (or at least they have a vested interest in pretending to be religious publicly), and so a lot of the laws that get passed and decisions that get made affect all of us, even those of us who don’t believe in religious bullshit. For example, opposing stem-cell research; some poor slob in a wheelchair can’t even hope for a cure in his lifetime that will let him walk, because some priest decided stem-cell research is bad, in between molesting children. Why should we all have to live under your dumb rules?

    3) Because if just one person stumbles across this website and is trapped in a hellish nightmare of a religious life, and gets the courage to leave the church because of it, that’s one less boy for a priest to be able to fuck.

    If there is no God and we are all just a product of chance like the “Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution” tells us

    What is it with you dumb fuckers and not understanding probability? Where are you getting this idea that evolution is “random”? It isn’t.

    then why are we wasting our lives working, paying bills, and living with regrets of things we wish we would have done?

    Because it’s the right thing to do. That’s the difference between you and me I guess — I have a good moral compass through life experience, so I know what is right and wrong and act accordingly. You only do good things because you are afraid to go to hell, and to you, if there was no God, it would be fine for you to rape and kill. I think raping and killing is wrong in any situation, including all the dumb fuckers in the Bible killing each other at the request of God.

    I am sorry to hear that you believe that living life on earth is a “waste”. This is a common POV of people who share a delusion of going to heaven after they die; they start to see life as unnecessary and mundane and wander through it aimlessly. Seek help.

    If this is it, screw morals and do what you want to do because you were an accident anyways so why should you answer to anybody or live up to anybody else’s “ideas” of morality?

    Because my morality comes from an objective analysis of the environment, while yours comes from a 5,700 year old book written by mouthbreathing dumb-fucks in the desert who thought it was cool to bash babies’ brains in with rocks because voices in their head told them too.

    I’ll stick with Plan A.

  41. on 05 Aug 2010 at 11:54 am 41.Severin said …

    35 Boz
    “So this guy has no problem with murdering tyrants?”

    Please do not twist my words. This is called lying.

    I have roblemes with murdering tyrants: Mao, Stalin, Polo Pot, Inquisition, Maya priests who sacrificed people and pulled their hearts out from their bodies…and with biblical too.
    I can not tolerate any crimes, individual or massive.

    Howeve, Mao, Stalin (etc) are innocent little children compared to god himself. They did massive crimes, but they tryed to hide their crimes from public.

    God publically declared his terrific orders (Bible), like: kill their little ones from crdls…

  42. on 05 Aug 2010 at 11:58 am 42.Severin said …

    Romans 13:1
    New International Version
    “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.”

    or

    “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”

  43. on 05 Aug 2010 at 12:05 pm 43.Severin said …

    So, Boz, do you doubt in Bible?
    It can not be more clear!

    “Poor” Hitler, Stalin, Mao….al came directly from god!
    Their crimes obviousle were not their guilt. Thye did what god positioned them to do for.
    Mr. god had all the power to stop them if he was not satisfied with their job. Who stopped him?

    There is more, of course:
    Titus 3:1
    “Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed,…”
    or

    Peter 2:13
    “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority,…”

  44. on 05 Aug 2010 at 12:36 pm 44.Boz said …

    Sev I doubt you understand the chain of command as laid out by scripture. But, I’ll answer this question for you once.

    Civil authority is to be obeyed explicitly except where such obedience would cause the believer to deviate from direct Bible teaching. That is to say, God does not delegate any authority that would allow someone to overrule His expressed commands or to compromise a divine principle. The statement of Christ, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” bears out this principle.

    If my civil authorities ask me to break God’s commands, it will not be happening.

    Can you show me where God gave permission to Mao to murder, steal and lie? We give presidents authority but they are to follow the Constitution. If they do not, does that mean we agreed to their insubordination? No, of course not silly.

    But alas, I feel certain you will blather on about good not creating robots which you prefer. I feel sorry for any kids you may have raised since I’m sure you FORCED them to love you and obey every command you gave. The poor kids!

    God doesn’t, rather He gives us free will to make choices. I much prefer his kind of love over your tyrant sort of love.

  45. on 05 Aug 2010 at 12:41 pm 45.Severin said …

    38.18yroldgrlthatisnotrepulsed
    „I believe the bible with all my heart and if you would not take things out of context then you would see that Jesus himself “worked” on the sabbath.”

    Enlighten us, please! What could be the context of next verses from the Bible:

    “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.” (Hosea 13:16)
    “And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.” (Leviticus 21:9)
    “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, … 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. …“ (Deuteronomy 21: 18-21)
    „16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death. (Leviticus 24:16)

    „Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes…The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children.“ (Isaiah 13)
    „Therefore hear the plan which the LORD has made against Edom and the purposes which he has formed against the inhabitants of Teman: Even the little ones of the flock shall be dragged away; surely their fold shall be appalled at their fate. At the sound of their fall the earth shall tremble; the sound of their cry shall be heard at the Red Sea.“(Jeremiah 49:20)

    „Moses said to them, “Have you let all the women live? Behold, these caused the people of Israel, by the counsel of Balaam, to act treacherously against the LORD in the matter of Pe’or, and so the plague came among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.“ (Numbers 31)

    Need more? There is much more, but what I kindly expect is to learn from yoy WHAT CONTEXT ARE THOSE VERSES PULLED OUT?
    What is the ESSENCE of those verses?

  46. on 05 Aug 2010 at 4:25 pm 46.Horatio said …

    LOL; what is so funny is how atheist all take the same few verses and have no clue to their significance. They all “claim” to have read the Bible but in reality they just cut and paste from one another.

    Explanations of their meaning all over google but we all know they don’t have any desire to understand. It is the proverbial horse.

    (sigh)

    ________________

    18 yearold,

    Good for you for your boldness and you obvious compassion.

  47. on 05 Aug 2010 at 6:24 pm 47.3D said …

    46.Horatio said …

    LOL; what is so funny is how atheist all take the same few verses and have no clue to their significance. They all “claim” to have read the Bible but in reality they just cut and paste from one another.
    Explanations of their meaning all over google but we all know they don’t have any desire to understand. It is the proverbial horse.

    If any of those explanations held any water, you would have linked to one of them and quoted it. It would take 10 seconds to C&P a link and a passage from a site explaining the context of those verses. Or, simply, explained it yourself. But, instead of doing that, you typed out your typical horseshit which took 10 times longer.

    The reason you did that is simple — of all the “explanations all over google” (Google is a search engine, idiot, the content is not “on” Google, it’s on the Internet), none of them make the stories about God dashing children apart on rocks or ripping apart pregnant women’s bellies or Moses ordering people to steal young women to be sex slaves seem any less insane or more palatable. In fact, these “explanations” often make the stories even more horrifying, and shows the disgusting lengths people will go to bend their own morality to justify the crappy Bible. Here’s one:

    http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/586

    “However, to allege that the God of the Bible is some sort of “monster” for ordering Israel to destroy the inhabitants of Canaan exhibits an ignorance of biblical teaching. Those inhabitants were destroyed because of their wickedness (Deuteronomy 9:4; 18:9-14). They were so evil that their Creator no longer could abide their corruption. That they had numerous opportunities to repent is evident from the prophetic books (Nineveh did repent, for example, and for a time stayed the day of destruction). Complaining about Jehovah’s order to destroy innocent children is a vain gesture when one realizes that the children were spared an even worse fate of being reared as slaves under the domination of sin.”

    In other words, God did them a favor by having them killed, because otherwise they would have grown up under the torture and abuse of people commanded — by God — to take them as slaves. Hey, thanks God! Saving children from the sex slave trade you created, by killing them! You’re a real prince.

    Continuing…

    Instead of having to endure the scourge of a life of immorality and wickedness, these innocents were ushered early into the bliss of Paradise.

    Now that’s a good one. God did the innocent babies a favor by killing them, because they got to go to heaven sooner than normal. Which is kinda the same reasoning as the Jonestown and Hale-Bopp scams.

    But this guy brings up a good point — if Heaven is so awesome, why don’t all Christians just jump off bridges or drink bleach? They’d be happier in heaven than here, and we could listen to whatever music and do all the stem cell research we want. Win-win!

    Something tells me they’re not 100% convinced about this Heaven thing. (Most of them, anyway — the ones who actually drink the Kool-Aid are a small minority.)

    If the male children had been allowed to mature, they most likely would have followed the pagan ways of their forefathers, and eventually would have taken vengeance on the Israelites. Killing the males not only prevented them from falling into the same abominable sins as their parents, but also kept Israel from having to battle them later.”

    And now for the grand finale: God did the little children a favor by killing them, because eventually they may have done something bad in the future! The ultimate pre-emptive anti-crime initiative, kill them while they are infants. Sort of a late-term abortion.

    Of course we can ask why he didn’t have Hitler or Mao or Stalin killed as babies, for some strange reason. But I guess nobody’s perfect!

    Oh wait, God is perfect. Hmmmmmmm. I guess the only answer to that is that he wanted the little Hitler-baby to grow up and kill lots of people.

    This is just a random sampling but they’re all the same. None of these arguments add any CONTEXT to God ordering rapes, murders of children, and sex slavery. None at all. They just make attempts to justify it.

    If you want to argue that this stuff isn’t bad, that’s one thing. That’s your personal morality and it’s your choice to worship a God who is bereft of simple common human decency. But any attempt to add “context” always fails. They never cite other verses to change the meaning of the objectionable text, which would be adding “context” (like if I quoted you as saying “priests… rape young boys” and you really said “priests never rape young boys”). All they do is give their personal opinion of why God killing people, ordering stonings, rapes and sex slavery really isn’t so bad. And that’s a horrifying window into the twisted minds of Christian people.

  48. on 05 Aug 2010 at 8:02 pm 48.Severin said …

    46 Horatio
    “Explanations of their meaning all over google but we all know they don’t have any desire to understand. It is the proverbial horse.”

    I am willing to spend a lot od time to find a meaning of the cited verses.

    Of course, no normal human can accept “explanations” offered in http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/586

    Just imagine (even in my native labguage I can not find proper words to describe my horror and disguting):

    “Complaining about Jehovah’s order to destroy innocent children is a vain gesture when one realizes that the children were spared an even worse fate of being reared as slaves under the domination of sin.

    I am shocked! Phooey!

    Why don’t we go and kill all muslim children to send them directly to paradise?
    Horror!

    Are your explanations similar to those cited?

  49. on 05 Aug 2010 at 8:07 pm 49.Severin said …

    47 3D
    “Of course we can ask why he didn’t have Hitler or Mao or Stalin killed as babies, for some strange reason. But I guess nobody’s perfect!”

    Perfect!

  50. on 06 Aug 2010 at 2:01 am 50.Boz said …

    Horatio

    Scripture is clear that

    “the meassage of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing”.

    So, they only fulfill what Scripture has pointed out so clearly. I just let them rant since I do not expect them to understand. The unregenerate heart is not capable of understanding heavenly truths. I admit I am amazed sometimes they cannot see what is so clear but then I remember the above verse.

    I liken this to when atheist attempt to state Pascal’s wager is not true. They fail to recognize Pascal’s wager was from the Christian pov, not the atheist pov. Even after pointing this out they continue to rant. Oh well…..

  51. on 06 Aug 2010 at 3:13 am 51.A real-ist said …

    “the meassage of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing”.

    What this really means is that people who believe the made up message of a person who died on a wooden shaped T are gullable and they think people who don’t believe the foolishness of this message are going to perish, which forces them to believe otherwise they think they are going to perish. This is how relgions survive, out of fear.

    Another B.S. message that is similar is the one that states only true believers can have a relationship with God….um, I mean, their imaginary friend.

    Why does God care if people believe in him or not? “You can’t observe me because I am in a different realm, but if you don’t believe I am real then you are doomed!” What, does he gain more power like Zeus if the more people pray to him? If so, why not show himself so people like me would actually believe? Stupid, that is all I have to say.

    Gods are created out of fear and the lack of understanding of the real world. That is all.

  52. on 06 Aug 2010 at 6:46 am 52.3D said …

    50.Boz said …

    Horatio
    Scripture is clear that
    “the meassage of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing”.
    So, they only fulfill what Scripture has pointed out so clearly.

    I agree, Scripture is very clear in this message. And Scripture is also pretty clear that women should shut up and obey their husbands. It also gives very clear instructions on how to slaughter and burn animals to please the Lord, and it’s clear about the very specific code on how to treat your slaves.

    In fact, most of the Bible is very clear. The weird thing is that Christians seem to get very agitated when you point out all the crappy stuff. They suddenly start saying the Bible isn’t clear anymore, and there’s all these hard to understand contextual do-overs about it.

    In reality, those crappy things in the Bible are clear too. The believers are just embarrassed by them and make up semantical dodges to get around them, by yelling ‘context!!!’

    (Also, as you saw in a prior comment, there are also some Christians — a small minority IMO — who are just so fucked up that they think it was GOOD that God did terrible things, like killed children. Horatio appears to be one who agrees with this sick twisted morality. In a way I respect it, at least they’re being honest and following what the crazy Bible says. How about you Boz?)

    I just let them rant since I do not expect them to understand. The unregenerate heart is not capable of understanding heavenly truths. I admit I am amazed sometimes they cannot see what is so clear but then I remember the above verse.

    Since you see everything so clearly, Boz, can you give your own personal interpretation of the “child dashing” and “ripping pregnant women to pieces” verses? I tried finding some of those helpful links “on the Google” that Horatio was talking about, but they just seemed to be cheering God on in his baby-killing. Maybe you can come up with something more uplifting and less… well, nutso.

    I liken this to when atheist attempt to state Pascal’s wager is not true. They fail to recognize Pascal’s wager was from the Christian pov, not the atheist pov. Even after pointing this out they continue to rant. Oh well…..

    First, how come none of you dumbfucks can spell “atheists”? Are you allergic to pluralizing Ss?

    Also, you are correct, Pascal’s wager is from the POV of a self-centered narcissistic Christian who didn’t even consider other gods in his philosophical musings.

    It fails because it is intended to point out the poor reasoning of the atheist in choosing to be an atheist. But in doing so he points out that he, himself, has used poor reasoning by starting with the false dichotomy that it’s “Yahweh” or nothing.

    Sinking in yet, Cletus?

  53. on 06 Aug 2010 at 8:36 am 53.Severin said …

    50 Boz
    “I just let them rant since I do not expect them to understand.“
    46 Horatio
    „Explanations of their meaning all over google but we all know they don’t have any desire to understand. It is the proverbial horse.”

    When my teacher explained to me, when I was 6, how is it that 2×3=6, I understood it perfectly.
    When I was 10 or 11, my techers explained to me how is it that 2×3 =6, but 2^3 = 8, and I understood it perfectly too. The same with 2^2 = 4, and -2^2 = 4 too, but -2^3 = -8.
    Later, I perfectly understood analitical geometry, trigonometry, derivation, integrales, differential equotions.
    I had classes of logic for 2 years in my high school, and I perfectly understood what my professors were talking about.
    Od coursse I understood all math, physics and chemistry I ever learned, including those on university. I had no problems with understanding things. If I learned more of it, I am sure I would understand it all.

    Now YOU are telling ME that I do not understand something.
    Unlike you, I am ready to admit that I do not understand something.
    In such cases I EXPECT EXPLANATION, and am ALWAYS READY to ACCEPT IT.

    I am NOT waiting for your judgment about how I am stupid and do not understand god’s deeds, but I am expecting THE RIGHT EXPLANATION.
    What I saw, was that god ordered many massive crimes.
    YOU said there is explanation, but without any attempt to give it, you proclaimed me/us stupid to understand it.

    Try me! I perfectly understood many very complicated things in my life!
    Or, if you are unable to explaint it, why don’t you just honestly say so?

    Otherwise, everything you say is only ranting!

  54. on 06 Aug 2010 at 1:28 pm 54.Anti-Theist said …

    Theists don’t have any superior understanding of scripture beyond that of non-theists. We all understand the intent and meaning of bible verses. These truths are compounded by the fact that the bible is not to be interpreted; it is all the inspired word of god, spoken through man. The men who wrote the bible called interpreters heretics and stoned them at the gates. John Hus was burned at the stake for advocating that people should read the bible in their own language. Interpretation and gods will seem to be an excuse for slave wantabees to call themselves Christians. I say if you don’t follow the bible, OT and all, you’re not even a Christian.

  55. on 06 Aug 2010 at 1:32 pm 55.Horatio said …

    Boz

    Is so true. Look how angry they get on something they claim does not exist! Quite amazing. The verse that strikes me personally about atheist

    “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” I Cor 2:14

    That is why they spend their time cussing and attacking others. Its sad. I will say this boys. The fact you don’t like God’s judgments in no way makes Him less real. You had better look at his sacrifice, grace, mercy and love while you still can. Stop looking at theist websites and look at a book called Romans, Ephesians or Galatians and then maybe you too can gain understanding.

    Oh, I agree with you as well on Pascal. I will take the wager of the father of Calculus over angry atheist any day. Don’t be concerned over spelling, that is his anger overwhelming his mind. (LOL)

  56. on 06 Aug 2010 at 2:47 pm 56.Anti-Theist said …

    Gods sacrifice is minor compared to the pain he inflicts on his slaves
    Exodus 13:2 “Consecrate to me every firstborn male. The first offspring of every womb among the Israelites belongs to me, whether man or animal.”
    God’s grace???
    Deuteronomy 28:53 “And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the LORD they God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straightness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee:”
    God’s mercy
    Isaiah 13
    15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through;
    all who are caught will fall by the sword.
    16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
    their houses will be looted and their wives ravished.
    17 See, I will stir up against them the Medes,
    who do not care for silver
    and have no delight in gold.
    18 Their bows will strike down the young men;
    they will have no mercy on infants
    nor will they look with compassion on children.
    God’s love… LOL
    Revelation 19
    13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.”[a] He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.

  57. on 06 Aug 2010 at 3:08 pm 57.Severin said …

    55 Horatio
    „Stop looking at theist websites and look at a book called Romans, Ephesians or Galatians and then maybe you too can gain understanding.“

    Why? To make you a favour? To stop spreading the truth that the god you believe in was a lunatic criminal, the source of hate and immorality?

    I read books from the beginning. I do not read them further unless I understand the beginning.
    On the very beginning of the Bible, after your god made man from mud and ordered multiplication of human race by incest, he ordered massacres of children and ripping of pregnant women. He also ordered disobediant children and „consumed“ brides to be stoned, among many other sad and disgusting things, not to repeat them. There is absolutely no doubt your god DID IT. It is there, in the Bible!

    I do not understand such a „love“ and such a „morality“, they do not fit my understanding of what is right.
    When such messages come from a GOD, I find them dangerous, because his followers will obviously get wrong ideas about what is right and what is wrong.
    They will understand that it is good to kill children to enable them to go to paradise, and that is good to kill young girls to prevent them of doing sins when they grow up. They will understand that burning people (Sodoma) or drawning them (BS) because they „sinned“ (lived “immoral” lives) is O.K.
    Didn’t god say and DO so? It must be right, then!

    WHAT other message can they get from those verses, if so many “kill them, rape them, masacre them, kill children from cradles” are repeated there endlessly!?

    At this point, your comments are only empty babbling. And pretty desperate one, otherwise you would offer something more than „mam (Boz), they do not understand me, they do not want to play with me“.

    Something CONCRETE to say?

  58. on 06 Aug 2010 at 3:34 pm 58.Severin said …

    Horatio,
    I am not angry.
    I am sad.

    I knew there are people who find killing of children and ripping of pregnant women was O.K., but I never expected to meet directly a person who justifies such deeds, and to debate with such a person.

    Not easy to accept it!
    I was obviously naive.
    I am sorry for you.
    I would like to help, if I knew how.

  59. on 06 Aug 2010 at 6:15 pm 59.Boz said …

    LOL

    Look they brought up Is 13 again! Somebody on another thread explained this chapter and even attempted to get atheist to explain why the deeds were wrong. Imagine the dismay when not a single atheist could explain why the deeds were wrong but that they just were.

    Wouldn’t it be just grand if these atheist who question God’s judgments would actually do something about children in China and here in the US who are heartlessly murdered? These are just men who are killing out of convenience!

    But alas, they are more concerned about a being who does not exist and deeds that never took place. The real mark of where their heart lies is their inactivity and lack of outrage. The murder really does not bother them. How sad.

  60. on 06 Aug 2010 at 6:53 pm 60.Anti-Theist said …

    I will say that murder is not wrong. Murder is just murder cosmically speaking. To me however, in my life, subjective to my morals and beliefs murder is very wrong.

  61. on 07 Aug 2010 at 6:29 am 61.Severin said …

    59 Boz
    ” Imagine the dismay when not a single atheist could explain why the deeds were wrong but that they just were.”
    Would you jump down from a skyscraper?
    If somebody told you or forced you to jump, would you ever consider theoretical/logical pro and contra reasons?
    You would just refuse to jump! No explanation necessary!
    Why? Why is jumping from a skyscraper wrong?
    Is there logical/theoretical explanation? Or refusing to do it comes directly from your mind/body (read: genes!).

    O.K., I can inform a human who can not find in his mind/heart/body why ripping of pregnant women is wrong:
    IT IS ILLEGAL.
    There are LAWS against such deeds, to prevent those who have no own compasses, to do such deeds.

    So, please, if you want to avoid the life sentence or to be killed yourself, but have NO “built in” prevention of such deeds, please avoid ripping of pregnant women and killing of children!

    Do you have children? Are you asking THEM why killing of children and ripping of pregnant women are wrong?
    WHAT do you tell THEM if they read the Bible and ask you directly (maybe in tears): why, dad, why god killed those chldren? Wasn’t it wrong?
    Is your answer: no, it was NOT wrong?

    Imagine the dismay when your child concludes: if it is not wrong, it must be right (tertium non datur)!
    And maybe makes a step ahaed: let’s try it!

  62. on 07 Aug 2010 at 9:29 am 62.3D said …

    59.Boz said …

    LOL
    Look they brought up Is 13 again!

    Sorry, I know it gets your panties in a bunch. If you like, next time, we can bring up a different disgusting verse from the Bible that you have no explanation for, to watch you squirm about it. There’s literally hundreds of ‘em!

    Somebody on another thread explained this chapter

    For the benefit of those who did not see this other thread, please sum up the explanation about God condoning the smashing of babies against rocks and ripping apart pregnant women. Was it a version of “this is not really what the Bible says”? Or was it more along the lines of “killing kids and ripping apart women is OK because ______” like we saw on that other ridiculous apologist website?

    and even attempted to get atheist to explain why the deeds were wrong. Imagine the dismay when not a single atheist could explain why the deeds were wrong but that they just were.

    At least the atheists knew they were wrong! That’s better than we can say for you. Apparently, you think that sometimes, it’s awesome to bash babies’ brains in with rocks, and murder pregnant women by ripping their bodies apart.

    The answer to your stupid question is, we learn morality from life experience and we inherit it from evolution. Killing is wrong because of the “ick” factor inherited in our genes; to protect the species, the vast majority of us have this “ick” factor about killing and bloodshed. Some are born without this conscience and those people, we band together as a society to throw them in jails.

    As you can see, sprinkle in enough religion into someone’s life, and eventually they will be completely fine with ripping apart pregnant women, like you two bozos are. But very few people start out that way. The Bible is really good at converting regular people into heartless, sick fucks — even military training doesn’t work as thoroughly. Soldiers come back from the war with PTSD after killing innocent people overseas, but Christians have no problem looking you in the face and saying that killing babies is awesome.

    Wouldn’t it be just grand if these atheist who question God’s judgments would actually do something about children in China and here in the US who are heartlessly murdered? These are just men who are killing out of convenience! But alas, they are more concerned about a being who does not exist and deeds that never took place.

    No we’re not. We’re concerned with the crazy followers of the non-existent being, who are very real and an impediment to human progress.

    The real mark of where their heart lies is their inactivity and lack of outrage. The murder really does not bother them. How sad.

    I give generously to Tibetan freedom causes. What did you do about human rights abuses in China, fucknose? Besides use them as a prop in an anti-atheist debate?

  63. on 07 Aug 2010 at 12:00 pm 63.Boz said …

    Angry Atheist is at it again.

    Personal attacks
    Vulgar language
    Smearing the morals of his opponent
    Bragging on his exploits
    False conclusions of science.

    That quite a list for one post even for an angry atheist. I feel no need to speak of my personal generosity or why I do not kill and smash babies.

    I mention the killing of children of babies in China and you bring up Tibetan freedom?? I am saddened you do not care about baby mutilations here in the US & China of which I challenge you to partner with me. I see how passionate you are about baby deaths think you would be a great advocate.

    But you are more interested in judging God, the creator and ultimate judge who does not exist. I spend zero hours judging Zeus so do not understand. I can only conclude you do believe in His existence and are concerned for your fate. That’s good.

  64. on 07 Aug 2010 at 1:18 pm 64.Severin said …

    63 Boz
    “I spend zero hours judging Zeus so do not understand.”

    How much time do you spend in judging Allah and muslim religion?

    What is with my wuesions? I was not unpolite!
    No answers? That is what I expected!

  65. on 07 Aug 2010 at 1:35 pm 65.Anti-Theist said …

    How can you profess to discourage “baby mutilation” when you advocate genital mutilation. How can you profess to care for all those Hindu children when you know you’ll revel, watching them burn in hell while you bask in the kingdom of heaven. At least you know how insane it would sound it would sound to brag about praying for the indigent against really giving to charity. At least Christians love to call themselves hypocrites. No atheist secretly are worried about your flying spaghetti monster. We debate you and try to cure you for the sheer fact that you vote. You encroach on our constitutional rights and spread ignorance and disease to the uneducated masses. If you need an example look to your pope telling Africans that condoms spread AIDS.

  66. on 07 Aug 2010 at 3:21 pm 66.Boz said …

    “when you advocate genital mutilation.”

    I don’t…….next

    “How can you profess to care for all those Hindu children when you know you’ll revel, watching them burn in hell”

    I don’t. That is why I support missions…..next

    “No atheist secretly are worried about your flying spaghetti monster.”

    Neither am I, nut when you a general “No” statement you show how weak minded you really are……next

    “If you need an example look to your pope telling Africans that condoms spread AIDS”

    LOL!, I don’t have a Pope. I support medical care, food and water, humanitarian relief in general through my christian organizations……next!

    LOL, it is really like talking to children to see how uninformed and how little you guys realize is going on in the world. I have personally been to 39 nations myself. Keep up you evangelism effort boys.

    Got things to actually do. Keep it live.

  67. on 07 Aug 2010 at 4:01 pm 67.Anti-Theist said …

    Circumcision is genital mutilation and is a product of religion…keep lying to use, well never find out.
    Missions are meant to convert people to whatever religion you have been brain washed / scared into believing, when people don’t convert you believe their going to hell, but keep lying to us; we can’t convict you of thought crimes like your sky daddy can.
    Of course you’re not secretly afraid of your god, you and wannabe Christians like you are open about it.
    I wonder if your alleged missions have contributed to toddlers being labeled witches and tortured in Africa. You people will never understand the destruction you cause spreading your sickness around.

  68. on 07 Aug 2010 at 6:57 pm 68.Observer said …

    I am not quite sure why there is controversy around circumcision. As for the cruelty angle, it seems a pittance compared to a vaginal birth where a the plates in a baby’s skull are crushed together to the extent a baby’s head is deformed by the time it is actually delivered (compare to a C-section baby). There is now a vast amount of evidence that circumcision, while not only having a leg-up on hygiene, think about its practice by the US Military during WWII in the Pacific and in Vietnam, it preventative measure for STDs (the WHO is recommending it), particularly HIV. This is a practice predating Abrahamic religions, and was practiced in N. Africa and Central and S. America in pre-Columbian times.

    It was only dropped by Abrahamic sects in Europe to broaden the appeal of the Jewish sects that became Christianity.

    Of course, if you believe we were created in the image of the Man-in-the-Sky, well anything is possible.

  69. on 07 Aug 2010 at 7:01 pm 69.Observer said …

    Boz, what with the recent news out of Northern Afghanistan, perhaps we can get together a collection for you and your cracker Christian buddies to take a trip to Badakhshan Province. I too am for making the world a better place.

  70. on 07 Aug 2010 at 7:32 pm 70.Anti-Theist said …

    Circumcision is by no means a substitute for condoms and for people to say it helps prevent HIV is grossly irresponsible and damaging to under educated people. I will assume that cleaning is easier. I believe circumcision was plagiarized by the abrahamic religions from the Egyptians over 4000 years ago as a payment to receive land (Canaan) from god. Circumcision is thought to (by scientists) elevate the chances of spreading HIV to women; unless of course their virgins, in which case your HIV will leave you into them (another lie taught by priests.) Do you also advocate female circumcision?

  71. on 07 Aug 2010 at 9:22 pm 71.Boz said …

    AT,

    I think you have some sort of warped sexual fetish. If you are afraid of circumcision by all means stay away from the knife. It all good and not being a Jew, I link no religious connections to it. If you know the Bible at all, you realize the NT is clear on the matter. Let it go buddy.

    I am all for it O. Are you willing to send a check? It is such a blessing to see the lives of thousands upon thousands change all because of of Christ in their lives. There is nothing like it.

  72. on 07 Aug 2010 at 10:18 pm 72.3D said …

    Boz,

    So, you do not have any answer for the question I asked you in my comment?

    I didn’t think you did, but I’ll ask one more time just to be sure you don’t have answers for it.

    Can you sum up the “explanation” of Isaiah 13:15-18 that you said was posted in another thread? Or better yet, can you give your own “explanation” in your own words?

    You seem pretty sure about the fact that these verses are not offensive, and don’t conflict with your morality at all, so, I’d love to read your explanation. Thanks.

    Oh, also, sorry for the vulgar words. I wouldn’t think someone who is OK with baby-stoning and killing pregnant women would be offended by a few F-bombs, but if so, I sincerely apologize.

  73. on 08 Aug 2010 at 12:26 am 73.Observer said …

    A-T “Circumcision is by no means a substitute for condoms and for people to say it helps prevent HIV is grossly irresponsible and damaging to under educated people. ”

    You embarrass me. You jump to a reflexive idiotic comment just like the theists on this board. Try this

    http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2007/pr10/en/index.html

    That is old news. There are more recent and compelling studies as well, more oriented to het-sex, but this was the first thing to come up on the search.

    Boz- Thinking of you…

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/world/asia/08afghan.html?hp

    On the other hand, the Taliban probably understand you would do more damage to the Taliban’s enemies, civil liberal society like the Founding Fathers imagined, by letting you come back to the West, so you would probably get a nice meal, an opportunity to fuck a widow, and ticket home.

  74. on 08 Aug 2010 at 1:13 am 74.Hoatio said …

    Nose-Buster

    You embarrass me. Using the Times as a real news source. However, even a stop watch is right twice a day. Be grateful you atheist are not over there attempting to provide aid. You would get the same reception.

    Have no fear. I understand Obama and his men will be coming out with a reply apologizing to the Taliban and telling America how wonderful Islam is for the world.

  75. on 08 Aug 2010 at 6:42 am 75.Severin said …

    74 Horatio
    “You embarrass me. Using the Times as a real news source.”

    Any newspaper is more reliable source than you and Boz. They give some answers. You don’t give any.

    Usually you are the one who warns other not to change issue. This time you could not wait others to change the issue, because you entered the blind street and had no idea how to get out of it.

    But we do not forget things:
    You and Boz proclaimed killing of children and ripping of pregnant women moral. Such deeds were O.K. for you.
    You owe us some explanatin about how is it O.K., but your explanation never comes.
    As this is the very essence of this debate, if you do not give your explanations, we will all remember you as a babbler who just enjoys hearing his own voice.

    Stay in a corner of your house and repeat “aaaaaaa…”, if you injoy to talk without saying something. We do not enjoy such “debates”.

  76. on 08 Aug 2010 at 8:12 am 76.Severin said …

    44 Boz
    “That is to say, God does not delegate any authority that would allow someone to overrule His expressed commands or to compromise a divine principle.”

    I somehow missed this peace of “precious stone”.

    What you are saying here is: killing of children and rippin of pregnant women is reserved strictly for god himself!
    Humans are allowed to do such actions only if god authorizes them personally (like in many examples in Bible).

    God was VERY ANGRY with people from Sodoma. He was so angry that he burnt Sodoma with all innocent children who lived there.
    He was so angry to people generally that he flooded the whole world and killed them all (ALL, including innocent children, again).

    Why was he angry? Because people “sinned”. They worshiped some idols, fucked sheep and goats and practiced homosexual sex. Terrible “crimes”!

    He NEVER punished Hitler, Mao….for their overruling of his commands either!
    They COMPROMISED the „divine principle“, but was NOT punished!
    They PLAYED GODS, but god did not punish them!

    Remember what did god about the golden calf?
    He brutally reacted to any tiny sign of „overruling his commands“ or of „compromising the divine primciple“.

    NOT in case of Stalin, Mao…!!!

    Strange: god kills sheep-fuckers (and their children!), but stay uninterested in compromising his „divine principle“, SPECIFICALLY in case of Hitler, Mao, Stalin…
    Untypical for the god we know from Bible!

    2 possibilities are given (tertium non datur):

    a) God existed and was lunatic, selfish, unrighteous maniac, out of any logic… a ruffian without compass. He MUST have authorized tyrants to do the same deeds HE did, otherwise he would punish them
    b) Exsistance of tyrants AND existance of anythin else has nothing to do with god.

  77. on 08 Aug 2010 at 8:14 am 77.Severin said …

    Sorry: piece, not “peace” (of “precious stone”)

  78. on 08 Aug 2010 at 1:58 pm 78.Anti-Theist said …

    73; Circumcision is by no means a responsible way to combat HIV. When Christians wanted to push for prayer in school they tried to call it a moment of silence; but it still amounted to them taking away our constitutional rights. These reports seem like another attempt of Christians pissing down our legs and telling us it’s raining. If a consenting person wants to be circumcised for any reason I can respect it. I myself am happy to have had the procedure. But performing genital mutilation on unconsenting children is wrong. You would never enter an infected person trusting that your circumcision would protect you from HIV

    71; I love how self proclaiming Christians try to live outside the OT. If you claim to be a Christian you have to read and believe the bible people.

    (2 Peter 20-21 )”Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.”

    (Matthew 5:18-19 ) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

    (Luke 16:17 )”It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.”

    (Matthew 5:17 )”Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.”

    If you don’t believe in and follow the bible you’re not Christian; maybe you’re a deist and you don’t even know it.

    71; If you’re planning on spreading your beliefs please consider the pain and suffering that follows. Christianity is a sick cult and is rightfully used as such by charlatans. Below I’ve included a story of what your missions really accomplish.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33356826/

  79. on 08 Aug 2010 at 2:30 pm 79.Bishop said …

    Read Acts 15 AntiTheist. Maybe you do not realize there is a NT and therein laws that were given by man to the Jews but not to Gentiles. You could also read this from Romans. We are all law breakers are incapable of keeping the law which is why Christ came to man.

    “For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision is counted as uncircumcision.

    Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision?

    And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law?

    For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh;
    But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God. What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because to them [the Jews] were committed the oracles of God.”

    Romans 2:25 -3:2

  80. on 08 Aug 2010 at 3:14 pm 80.Anti-Theist said …

    That’s great! Now Christians have no life laws or directions to follow. This means a son can marry his father’s former wife, or a brother can marry his sister, or an uncle can marry his niece since the NT never talked about these issues.

  81. on 09 Aug 2010 at 1:16 pm 81.Bishop said …

    Wow!, so that is what you got out of the above scripture? There must be print under what I am able to read since I don’t see any of that.

    Try reading Matt 19 on marriage directly from Jesus.

    The Bible speaks of atheist as well, the hatred of Israel and the war coming one day against Israel. Eerie huh?

    Reagarding laws. What laws do atheist have to follow? You guys having nothing! Would it be that all you guys are just really good people?

    Hey how about this as a test. Why couldn’t a son marry his fathers former wife if they are consenting adults? Isn’t the new definition which will be coming be two consenting adults of any sex, relation of even numbers?

  82. on 09 Aug 2010 at 3:50 pm 82.Anti-Theist said …

    1. ‘’Try reading Matt 19 on marriage directly from Jesus.’’

    Jesus doesn’t discourage inter-marriage in Matt:19; how about this

    Genesis 38
    8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Lie with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so he put him to death also.

    ‘’Regarding laws. What laws do atheist have to follow? You guys having nothing! Would it be that all you guys are just really good people?’’

    Everyone follows the law of man; even Christians. All of the laws in the bible were written either by the deceitful, or the genuinely insane.

    1. ‘’Hey how about this as a test. Why couldn’t a son marry his father’s former wife if they are consenting adults? Isn’t the new definition which will be coming be two consenting adults of any sex, relation of even numbers?’’

    The laws of man (your peers) have covered these issues.

  83. on 09 Aug 2010 at 4:47 pm 83.Bishop said …

    “The laws of man (your peers) have covered these issues.”

    Really? What about gay marriage? That use to be against the law. The laws of men murder baby boys in China as part of the law. So with your rationale that is OK. Great, atheist believe killing baby boys is OK.

    But you didn’t answer the question.

    Why couldn’t a son marry his fathers former wife if they are consenting adults?

    Why is intermarriage wrong if it is consenting adults? Isn’t the whole argument on gay marriage that people are attempting to keep apart people who love one another? I never understood how a piece of paper keeps people apart but nevertheless.

    Maybe atheist like to control peoples bedrooms?

  84. on 09 Aug 2010 at 5:44 pm 84.Severin said …

    70 Bishop
    “We are all law breakers…”

    Maybe you are. I am not.
    The highest law I ever broke was the speed limit. I did not fing any punishment for that in the Bible.

  85. on 09 Aug 2010 at 5:45 pm 85.Severin said …

    Sorry, the last one was for 79 Bishop!

  86. on 09 Aug 2010 at 6:00 pm 86.Severin said …

    81 Bishop
    “Reagarding laws. What laws do atheist have to follow?”

    Laws given by parliaments of our countries, international laws our countries ratified in our parliaments…
    Don’t you follow them?

    Or, should we follow the laws from the Bible, for example: stone a “consumed” bride?

    Such things are prohibited by law in my country.
    How about yours?

    And, yes, did you obey Jesus’ words from Matthew 21 you suggested us to read:
    “21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.”

    Did you sell everything you had and gave to the poor?

  87. on 09 Aug 2010 at 6:19 pm 87.Severin said …

    83 Bishop
    “Why couldn’t a son marry his fathers former wife if they are consenting adults? Why is intermarriage wrong if it is consenting adults?”

    I live in Europe, and it is not forbidden in my country. I am positive, I read the law a few minutes ago.
    I do not know the laws in your country.

    Also, I personally do not see anything wrong in such a marriage, if people are consenting.
    I do not see anything wrong in marriage of people of same sex, if they like it.

    Homosexual marriages are not legal in my country, but in many countries they are legal.

    What is your problem?

  88. on 09 Aug 2010 at 6:25 pm 88.Severin said …

    83 Bishop
    “Maybe atheist like to control peoples bedrooms?”

    I can not recognize your problem.
    If anyone ever wanted to control peoples bedrooms, ALL religions did! No exception!
    All religions ever wanted to have total control over the entire pople’s life, including their sexual life.

    Are you trying to say that atheists are responsible for lack of freedom, or what?

  89. on 09 Aug 2010 at 6:40 pm 89.Severin said …

    83 Bishop
    “Great, atheist believe killing baby boys is OK.”

    Where did you find it?
    Do you think if you write something it is automatially true?

    So, if I write you are an idiot (which I will not), it will make my statement true automatically?

    I do not know about you, but some believers (christians) here, after I said killing of children and ripping of pregnant women were immoral, asked me WHY is it immoral.
    They also asked me why is incest immoral.

    Do you consider killing of children and ripping of pregnant women moral, as some of your fellows christians do?

    Do you find incest is O.K.?

  90. on 09 Aug 2010 at 6:42 pm 90.Hoatio said …

    “I live in Europe, and it is not forbidden in my country.”

    Um, Europe is not country.

    “And, yes, did you obey Jesus’ words from Matthew 21 you suggested us to read:”

    Um, Sev, ah, Jesus told the rich young ruler to sll all he had, not Bishop. When the atheist interpret the Bible not telling what may come up.

    Sev, I was told to pay a very large escrow which you must do as well. LOL

  91. on 09 Aug 2010 at 8:55 pm 91.3D said …

    90.Hoatio said …

    “I live in Europe, and it is not forbidden in my country.”
    Um, Europe is not country.

    Um, he did not say Europe is a country, you dingleberry.

  92. on 09 Aug 2010 at 9:01 pm 92.Xenon said …

    Severin,

    Europe is a continent, not a country. Even wiki can handle this great paradox.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe

  93. on 10 Aug 2010 at 5:13 am 93.Severin said …

    90 Horatio,
    Thank you, Horatio.

    I still live in Europe, and it is still not forbidden in my (European) country.

  94. on 10 Aug 2010 at 5:43 am 94.Severin said …

    90 Horatio
    “Um, Sev, ah, Jesus told the rich young ruler to sll all he had,…”
    Thanks again, but please show me where did I say that Bishop wrote the a.m. verse?

    The Bible does look like written by a moron, but I know it was not Bishop.

    Please learn to read! I said (#86):
    “And, yes, did you obey Jesus’ words from Matthew 21 you suggested us to read:…”

    Many thanks to Xenon too!
    You guys are so kind!

  95. on 10 Aug 2010 at 6:20 am 95.Severin said …

    Horatio, Xenon,
    It looks like “uh”, “ah”, “um”, “LOL”… are your best „arguments“ in this debate.
    These are exclamations, gentlemen, not argumens!

    Your efforts to discredit me by putting in my mouth the words I never said are also not arguments, but are typical trick used by swindler debaters (demagogues) when short in arguments.

    Don’t you know it better, gentlemen?

    For example, why don’t you try to explain YOUR statement that ripping of pregnant women and killing of children is O.K.?

    You can use as many „uhs“ and „ahs“ as you wish, but an argument sounds something like this: „Killing of children is O.K. because_________________ „

    Please fill the blank! Support your own claims!
    Do not allow us to consider you empty babblers/demagogues!

  96. on 10 Aug 2010 at 9:56 am 96.3D said …

    86.Severin said …

    And, yes, did you obey Jesus’ words from Matthew 21 you suggested us to read:
    “21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.”
    Did you sell everything you had and gave to the poor?

    No, they only follow the Bible where it is convenient to them, or lawful under the codes of their home country. Whenever these is something that isn’t convenient for them to follow, like selling their Cheetos or the computer that they play World of Warcraft on in their mom’s basement, they can’t be bothered with it.

    Which makes it obvious that they really don’t believe in God, just superstition. If they believed God they would believe that God’s laws superseded man’s laws, and they would have no problem doing time for killing homosexuals or people who work on the Sabbath, because they would know they were going to heaven for it.

    Unfortunately, there ARE some psychos for whom that is the case, for example the nutcases who bomb abortion clinics; but not these bozos. They’re just here to spout right-wing talking points.

  97. on 10 Aug 2010 at 1:03 pm 97.Boz said …

    If you don’t like God’s judgements you need to take it up with Him. No Christian, I know of, believes killing babies is not worng. The killing of innocent life and the judgement of God on a society are hardly the same thing. Not to mention, God is the giver of life and has the right to take it when He deems it necessary.

    The Christians are the group attempting to stop such crimes by man today. I have never once seen an atheist do the same. Check that, I do know of one small group of atheist.

    Why is it the atheist are outraged about God’s judgment on a horrid society that was warned for centuries but the atheist do nothing today?

  98. on 10 Aug 2010 at 1:06 pm 98.Boz said …

    “Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor,”

    You guys did recognize the tense and to who Jesus was addressing correct? He didn’t even turn around and say it to His disciples. Jesus is not earth today, the Holy Spirit indwells us. Use the Bible properly

    To quote Sev, “just because you say something does not make it true? lol.

  99. on 12 Aug 2010 at 1:39 pm 99.Anti-Theist said …

    1. “If you don’t like God’s judgments you need to take it up with Him.”
    2. God does not literally exist; only a book and people who are too smart to believe in Santa reading it. God is not judging anything; people who write things like the following statement do.
    3. “ No Christian, I know of, believes killing babies is not wrong.”
    4.
    5. “The killing of innocent life and the judgment of God on a society are hardly the same thing.”
    6. That is a matter of perception. If your family was murdered and a priest said it was god’s wrath for fags you would understand.

    “ Not to mention, God is the giver of life and has the right to take it when He deems it necessary.”
    God does not take life. In the event life is taken due to religion, its murdering humans that take it.

    “The Christians are the group attempting to stop such crimes by man today.”
    There are no Christians in existence today; only people who do not follow the bible and claim to be Christian. You would all be burned as heretics by the men who wrote the bible.

    “I have never once seen an atheist do the same. Check that, I do know of one small group of atheist.”
    Thank you for correcting yourself on this one, I’m getting carpel tunnel.

    “Why is it the atheist are outraged about God’s judgment on a horrid society that was warned for centuries but the atheist do nothing today?”
    We are not outraged by a fictitious character; we fight against the believers of the fictitious character trying to control our freedoms and brainwash our children.

  100. on 12 Aug 2010 at 4:14 pm 100.3D said …

    There are no Christians in existence today; only people who do not follow the bible and claim to be Christian. You would all be burned as heretics by the men who wrote the bible.

    Except for Fred Phelps and the people who tie gays to the back of their car bumpers. They still aren’t going as far as the Bible wanted them to, but they would get an A for effort.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply