/sci/ - Science & Math

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that raping kids is bad.

>>3260428
There is a passage that says when a female can be married and pregnant, something like "as soon as the flower blooms" which is a metaphor for "old enough to bleed, old enough to breed".

>/sci/ - Science & Math

On the whole the religious teachings provide a good way of life for a lot of people and it is a good message for how to behave. Just because it doesn't work with 100% of people does not mean that the 99% that are good christians have not benefited from this. Very few prriests are child molesters. Hundreds of Priests are good people.

>>3260428
>>3260438
Not all of the bible is correct and a lot of it is supposed to be interpreted figuratively. The entire first half of the Bible does not even mention Jesus at all.

Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.

Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.

Do you grasp the jist of the arguments from the priests, and what it is based on?

>>3260450
>>3260450

Oh so the ten commandments are to be taken 'figuratively', that's a good one.

>>3260455
How does that seem in any way strange to you? have you never met a Christian who didn't take the bible entirely literally?

>>3260449
For example, what a good age is for selling your daughter, and how many cows to trade her for.

Or you should kill off all of an enemies males(including babies), and old women, and rape and enslave the young females.

Classy.

>>3260455
I said some parts of the bible, not all. The 10 commandments are to be taken literally, but they are not completely clear so people interpret them differently.

>>3260462

I have heard of religious people who take adam and eve figuratively, but it's hard to imagine 'the laws of god' being interpreted 'figuratively'.
If you are actually going to tell me the ten commandments are not literal, then the Christian religion morality is as relative as the nihilists.

>>3260464
It was written in an age where people were not so enlightened. Some parts of it are bound to be horrible. Morality has come a long way since then.

>>3260465
>not completely clear
but they are completely arbitrarily picked from 67.
>>3260468
and it's in no way relevant to our current model of ethics.

>>3260465
You are cherry picking the stuff to follow but you still dont understand the issue.
What in you makes the choice?
Since people claim religion gives you morality but you just flat out stated that you yourself pick and choose wich ones to follow it is not the bible that teaches you your morals since you already have them to make the choice of what to choose in the bible.

>>3260468
>It was written in an age where people were not so enlightened.

What an excellent reason to depend on it for instructing morality[sarcasm].

>religion thread
>science board
>OP confirmed for angry, neckbearded troll

>>3260465
>>3260465

>The 10 commandments are to be taken literally

No shit, that is why i fired that counter-example at you.
No where in the 10 commandments does it mention child molestation evil. In fact it stays clear of the whole rape thing, as well as torture and slavery.

Your pathetic defense of bible morality using the excuse of stories not to be taken literally can't explain that.

>>3260469
Jesus said to love your neighbor as you love yourself. If everybody followed this and was completely selfless, the world would be a better place.

>>3260472
Because people have a natural sense of right and wrong.

>>3260473
I am not actually a Christian. I am agnostic. However, I do not deny that some parts of the bible have valuable teachings and contain good advice about morality.

>>3260481
Timothy said no woman shall teach a man, and women must remain in silence in the presence of men.
even if the bible wasn't hopelessly contradictory and cruel it would just be a book about morality. The idea that it is to be lived by, in its current form, is insane.

>>3260484
Timothy is not Jesus. Nobody takes it literally. We are sensible enough to know which parts of it are valid and deserve obeying.

>>3260497
>We are sensible enough to know which parts of it are valid and deserve obeying.
Cognitive dissonance much
also, what you seem to be saying is
>the bible is not a book of morality
>using my morality I have found parts that aren't cruel
>therefore the bible teaches good morals

>>3260481

>If everybody followed this....the world would be a better place

That is assuming people love themselves, but furtherstill that is little reason for why the bible is good. Practically every ethical theory EVER, YET ALONE "IF EVERYONE WAS SELFLESS" would make the world better (not great, just an improvement).

>Because people have a natural sense of right and wrong.

Yeah? Prove it, because i think you will find that natural sense being contradicted in schools/streets and households across the globe.

>I am agnostic. However, I do not deny that some parts of the bible have valuable teachings and contain good advice about morality.

Figuratively, looking at a tree and a quiet stream contains valuable teaching for morality.
Don't be so dumb, use that natural sense of thought.

>>3260481
>Because people have a natural sense of right and wrong.
and?
so what do we need religion for since it doesnt offer morality is what OP was asking for and what you still havent answered.

Well at least in the religious community that I am part of, the view is that christians are as bad of people as anyone else. Some even worse, some less so. Were all people.
We do believe that the Bible teaches us to be better people, but we don't believe that we as humans are good enough to learn from it.
We do see that some rare people actually behave better because of the Bible, but we also see those that start behaving worse (those with very anti-gay sentiments for example).

>>3260449

Do you have statistical evidence that Christians, on average, commit less crimes than non-Christians?

>>3260497
Most of what is written about Jesus wasn't about, or said by Jesus.

I think one gimp even made up an entire book based on his nearly dead from dehydration hallucinatory conversation with him.

Nothing in the bible written by ANY of his disciples, because they were illiterate. The bible wasn't even created until Jesus had been dead for 200 years, and then they needed a roman emperor to okay every page and book.

Heck, Christians aren't even supposed to call themselves Christians[Matthew 24:5].

>>3260525
Actually, there is evidence of the exact opposite.

>>3260449
>Just because it doesn't work with 100% of people does not mean that the 99% that are good christians have not benefited from this.

What I am saying is that it doesn't work at all. A society doesn't get healthier because it is full of religious people.

And the crime rates for religious people in general are just as large (a bit larger actually) than non religious.

So it simply doesn't work.

>>3260420

>religious people do bad things
>therefore religion doesn't help people do good things


you're fucking retarded

>>3260529
actually, there might not be.
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/4149

>>3260545

No you are!

If religion would ACTUALLY help people to be good then less of them would be bad.

You are again saying: "Just because just as many people get tooth decay who use my favorite toothpaste than those who use none at all doesn't mean that my toothpaste doesn't work!"

That's exactly what it is saying!

>>3260526

>Matthew 24:5
>"For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many."
>Therefore Christians cannot call themselves Christians

wat?
the rest of your post made sense.

>>3260558

You need to make an overall comparison of the relatively "goodness" of both religious and non-religious people for your point to be at all valid. Very few religious people argue that all Christians are good people, they accept that there are some bad ones. They just believe that, on average, Christians are better people. This may or may not be true, but OP gives no evidence for either way.

On a side note, I think many Christians believe that being Christian is a requirement for being a good person - if you are not doing the "right" thing for the "right" reasons then you are not actually behaving morally. The "right" reason is because God says so.

Btw, I would like to add that I don't believe religion necessarily makes people better, OP's argument is just stupid.

>>3260562
>cannot
>implying I said cannot

Christians, Christ, they both mean "anointed with holy oil." It's a verb, something that happens to you. "Christ" is not a name.

>>3260586

It can be used as a name, and whether or not it is used in that way in this particular instance is an issue that you could probably debate... but why are you claiming it is not being used as a name in this instance, despite I-don't-know how many theologians, translators and scholars claiming that it is used as a name? I'm not denying that it is possible you are right, but I see no reason to believe you over the "experts".

Assuming you are right though, why does Jesus' prediction that people claiming to be Christians will come and deceive us make you think that Christians shouldn't call themselves Christians?

Also, when people say Christian these days, they don't mean anointed... they generally mean someone who believes that Jesus Christ was the Son of God.

>>3260600
It was not a name when Matthew was written, understand?

>>3260605

How are you so sure that it wasn't used as a title/name?

and still,

>Assuming you are right though, why does Jesus' prediction that people claiming to be Christians will come and deceive us make you think that Christians shouldn't call themselves Christians?

>>3260611

Because the Romans were very literate, and it was written as a warning.

k im bored of speculation now

>>3260611
>Christians shouldn't call themselves Christians?

Self-fulfilling prophecy. Honestly, it's more a problem with the willful ignorance that religious people develop. "I'm killing you to save your soul." kind of thing.

>>3260579

How can you say that?

What about the centuries the church ruled over europe? All the immorality that took place, the wars, the destruction of knoledge!

What about the countries that are ruled by Islamic law?

IF religion is the factor that makes good societies then the mentioned ones could not have existed or exist today!

IF it is due to other factors that societies become more moral, good etc. THEN religion doesn't work!

Are people really too dense to understand this?

Atheism gives no hope, no purpose it gives NOthing. It is a denial, a denial of everything humanity created in honor of their religions, gigantic statues of gods? STUPID! awesome churches and cathedrals? USELESS! art? RETARDED!. If atheism isnt a pessimistic circlejerk where the person who insults a religion or a view point the hardest is crowned as smart then please tell me what is the point of this atheist movement? Atheism isnt productive, a negative cant be productive.

>>3260656

tl;dr: The test has already been made! Religion had all the necessary recources, the power and support to build a good scoeity. They failed miserably.

>>3260659
trololololol

But seriously, that believers throw a No True Scotman is no surprise.

>>3260663

continued:

And what you (>>3260579) are saying is equal to say that we don't really know that fascist, totalitarian regimes are bad.

All we have are several examples from the past.

How is the same not true for religions like Christianity and Islam?

>>3260671
Stalin was an atheist and his atheistic regime persecuted religious people, he let 60 MILLION people die horrible death. This huge ammount of deaths can cover your picture about 6 times. And Stalin was just one of the many atheist rulers, Mao and Paul Pot were even greater mass murderers.

>>3260682

So what?

Nobody is claiming that atheism makes people good/better.

Why should it? Atheism doesn't contain any values of its own and is just a response to theism.

So we can both agree that neither theism nor atheism does make people better or more moral.

It's other things. Like moral philosophy, knowledge about the human condition, general education etc.

>>3260682
Stalin was a dictator, and they tend not to be nice to their citizens no matter what they believe, religion or no.

That about covers your argument.

>>3260692
An atheist has no reason to be moral. If they do not believe in even the possibility of god then they see that they have no purpose and no reason to do anything. Why not just be completely selfless for your entire life?
A religious person at least believes they are being judged. This alone is incentive enough to try to be a good person.

>>3260693

OP here.

But if his argument is that atheism does not make people generally better then his example is right, isn't he?

It does demonstrate that atheism is not sufficient to make people good. Maybe not conclusively but I think we can all agree on that anyway.

So - why does the cruelty of religion not demonstrate the same thing?

And what good came out of atheist dictatorships? Nothing. Atleast the christians build giant wonderful Churches with beautiful art in it.

>>3260682

>>Stalin was an atheist and his atheistic regime persecuted religious people, he let 60 MILLION people die horrible death. This huge ammount of deaths can cover your picture about 6 times. And Stalin was just one of the many atheist rulers, Mao and Paul Pot were even greater mass murderers.

Did you even read the OP?

>>And saying that non-believers do bad stuff too is asinine because NOBODY is claiming that nonbelief is producing better people.

The more I deal with religious stupidity the more I am tempted to conclude that Stalin had to dispose of them because they behaved like the religious people in this thread.

They were probably pulling the same socially backwards, anti-science bullshit back then that they're up to today. And creationists, flat earthers, pro choicers, whatever, they NEVER STOP until they get their way. THEY leave us with no choice but to exterminate them. What did they expect?

>>3260682
Pol Pot killed less people than Stalin did. I think your figure for Stalin is overestimated.

>>3260699

>>And what good came out of atheist dictatorships? Nothing.

See pic.

>>3260696
>A religious person at least believes they are being judged. This alone is incentive enough to try to be a good person.

You just claim that. History and data demonstrate that this simply isn't true.

And since many of the things people get judged for aren't even immoral (like being gay or eating pork) this only further adds to the construction of an unhealthy society.

>An atheist has no reason to be moral.

If he is nothing else than an atheist and has no values then sure you are right.

>>3260696
>This alone is incentive enough to try to be a good person.
Apparently not, since, you know, religious people still commit crimes and stuff. More than non-religious people even.

>>3260701
my parents lived in a soviet country, and the soldiers would randomly search your house for religious objects and if they found one they would either kill you(they had the right to) or they would destroy it and ask you to give them money and they wouldnt say a word. This hardcore anti-theist dictatorship died with stalin the later soviet dictators were alot more easier on the religious.

>>3260698
Neither theism or atheism statistically improve peoples lives by themselves, but theists do often object to the sciences and knowledges that could.

What I always find funny is when people say "Don't blame the religion! It's just the fundamentalists who do the bad stuff!"

Doesn't that mean that the religion in question has BAD FUNDAMENTALS!?

Being a fundamentalist humanist never causes such pronlems...

>>3260698
Neither theism or atheism statistically improve peoples lives by themselves, but theists do often object to the sciences and knowledge that could improve the lives of everyone because they feel science is an affront to their beliefs.

>>3260713
I do not know the statistics but I think it improbable that most religious people would act like this, particularly since they consider they might be punished with being sent to hell.

>>3260708
European countries were always succesful when they were religous and when they became secular they were always discovering, advacing in science and inventing new things.

>>3260732
Like I said before, taking all of a religions texts literally is not a good way to behave. You have to use your better judgement and pick the right parts.

>>3260722

I agree it's brutal, but look at the US. Christians are relentlessly pushing creationism, even secretly teaching it in some public schools. They have actual concentration camps for gay teens:

http://www.reddit.com/r/troubledteens/comments/hk0xy/a_gay_teen_describes_her_experience_at_a_utah/

They suppress stem cell research and cloning research, they have rewritten textbooks to present a Christianized version of US history:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

They are getting away with absolutely everything they can, secure in the knowledge that we won't stop them and they can never be punished for it.

It's asinine and I don't think anyone would be doing anything wrong if they removed these people from society.

>>3260682

The death toll for Stalin is between 10 and 20 million.

Apparently religion is correlated with pulling numbers our of your ass, eh?

>>3260735

Well then you know what you have to do, right?

Go and learn those statistics. Report back.

>>3260465
>>3260455
>mfw you say 10 commandments
>mfw OP is bad troll and gets so many replies

>>3260735

Then riddle me why catholic priests raping boys is not a rare occasion if they are afraid to be judged? It isn't any rarer than people in any other profession raping kids. So how can this be? Aren't all these priests subject to the kinds of practices and "divine knowledge" that should make them better? Doesn't this at least conclusively demonstrate that the catholic method doesn't work AT ALL!?

And I could multiple examples like this.

For example the rate of unwanted pregnancies and abortions is even higher in the christian population than in the rest of the population.

And there aren't less religious people in prison for doing crimes either!

Your mentality that the fear of punishment will make people better simply has been proven wrong! Look at the statistics for the death penalty for example!

>>3260765
It is a rare occassion. It is very rare.

>>3260765
>yfw you realize that this "catholic priests raping children" is a hoax created by the government so the church loses popularity and scientist can do immoral researches like cloning

>>3260768

No, it isn't. You're probably using an extremely lax definition of rare.

You don't give a shit about the victims. What you care about is the church's reputation.

>>3260768

> In 2004, the John Jay report tabulated a total of 4,392 priests and deacons in the U.S. against whom allegations of sexual abuse have been made.

>>3260778

You see this? Christians never take responsibility. They never admit when wrong about anything. They invent elaborate conspiracy theories in order to deflect blame rather than conclude that their religion is the greatest modern bastion of stupidity.

>>3260768
It is statically average. How the religions treat their priests who fuck children is immoral and evil. Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>>3260779
I do care about the victims. Rape is horrible and I would not wish it on anybody. Those individuals responsible deserve to be punished, but this should in no way affect the reputation of the entire religious organisation as it was just a coincidence that these individuals happened to share that particular belief.
There are many rapists who are not catholics. Catholic rapists make up a small minority of all the rapists in the world.

>>3260768

"Rare" is a relative term.

It isn't rarer than anybody else doing it - thus the religion doesn't work in preventing it! And I wouldn't call it rare at all considering all the horrible data we have today. I would go so far as to describe criminal organization devote to the sexual enslavement of children!

Look at the picture: This is the kind of abuse that the Church has practiced and concealed for centuries! The pope himself and many others knew about it but didn't ifnorm the police!

All of this proves that the catholic practices simply don't work in making people behave morally better - otherwise this organization would not be so evil.

And I didn't even start talking about the millions of deaths because they won't let people protect themselves from AIDS!

>>3260792
How the religions treat their priests who fuck children is immoral and evil. Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>>3260790
>implying its not true

>>3260793
The catholics believe contraception is immoral. They are not forcing anyone not to use it, they are simply advising them.

This is what I love about theists. Not only do they refuse to improve themselves, they literally block out anything that endangers the lattice of self-delusion cradling their egos.

Sure, you could pull a mea culpa and just admit you like shitty, dumb games for little kids. You could own up to your limitations. You could internalize the criticism that you deserve and attempt to better yourself. You could even merely examine your life in light of the criticisms others raise against you. Any one of those would be a reasonable reaction.

But religious people aren't reasonable. So they say "atheists just wanna spoil everything" and dig their heels in, lashing out at anybody who wonders what the fuck they are doing. You literally consciously alter your perception of others to validate your choices.

When on the wrong side of facts, the adaptive, sane person changes their stance. Why do theists refuse to do this?

I think it has to do with that old devil, the ego. Since theists are by nature weak and unhealthy, physically and mentally, they have nothing in them to build a viable identity around.

>>3260792

>>I do care about the victims.

Scroll up. You've spent 100% of your time in this thread defending the chuch and 0% of the time defending the victims.

>>it was just a coincidence that these individuals happened to share that particular belief.

Costanza.jpg

>>3260804
How the religions treat their priests who fuck children is immoral and evil. Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>>3260810
Why did you post that twice?

>>3260804

>>The catholics believe contraception is immoral. They are not forcing anyone not to use it, they are simply advising them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7014335.stm

>>"The head of the Catholic Church in Mozambique has told the BBC he believes some European-made condoms are infected with HIV deliberately.
Maputo Archbishop Francisco Chimoio claimed some anti-retroviral drugs were also infected "in order to finish quickly the African people".

What now? Is this false? Is it a conspiracy against Catholics, planted by their enemies? What excuse is it this time?

>>3260809
I presumed that it goes without saying that the victims were innocent and did not deserve what happened to them. We did not need to discuss it because I presume that we all agree on this issue.

>>3260812
I kinda want you to answer it in the context of how that is a good moral religious behavior committed by practically every religion there is.

>>3260815

>>I presumed that it goes without saying that the victims were innocent and did not deserve what happened to them. We did not need to discuss it because I presume that we all agree on this issue.

That's beside the point. I am not suggesting you don't know this, just demonstrating that your personal priorities favored running damage control for the church. If I had brought this up earlier you'd likely have spent more posts pretending to defend the victims for plausible deniability. That is why I waited until now to point out the pattern in your posts.

>>3260814
Well he is wrong. He has no evidence of that. He should test his theory. You would only need to find a few new condoms and test them for HIV infection. None would be found and he would realise he is incorrect in saying that.
This does not mean that all catholics are wrong, or that all catholics are liars. He is still only one man and you can not judge millions of people by the actions of one person.

>>3260810
>>3260821

The religion is not doing anything. It is individual people who are choosing to do these things.

>>3260804

Are you trolling me, fucker?

Either a religion makes people behave better or it doesn't.

Tell me what is better behavior:

1. Educate people during an epidemic about the risks so they protect themselves.

2. Telling them that condoms are evil and shit like this which WE KNOW caused hundreds of thousands to die.

If you choose 2 and are religious yourself (which I am starting to suspect) then this only further proves my point.

If the claims of the religious people would be true then almost every one of them would be a moral exemplar from whom we could learn a lot about being a good person.

This is not true - thus religions fail.

>church does something bad
ALL CHRISTIUNS ARE EVIL DESTROY CHRISTENDOM DURRR

>isaac newton was a christian scientist who revolutionised the human world view
LOL DERP WHO CARES IT DOEST MATTER AT ALL HIS CHRISTIANITY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT

>>3260815
How the religions treat their priests who fuck children is immoral and evil. Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

I kinda want you to answer it in the context of how that is a good, moral, religious behavior committed by practically every religion there is.

How can you defend them?

>>3260824

>>Well he is wrong. He has no evidence of that. He should test his theory. You would only need to find a few new condoms and test them for HIV infection. None would be found and he would realise he is incorrect in saying that.
This does not mean that all catholics are wrong, or that all catholics are liars. He is still only one man and you can not judge millions of people by the actions of one person.

He's the archbishop of the Catholic church in Africa.

The Archbishop.

Besides which, you're the one who made a statement about what all Catholics believe re: condoms. You said it here:

>.>>The catholics believe contraception is immoral. They are not forcing anyone not to use it, they are simply advising them

I was only contradicting you, showing you an example of a very high ranking Catholic official lying to Africans about condoms in a way that will get millions of them killed.

Unless you accept that the church bears some responsibility for this, you condone it.

>>3260830

BUT IT IS CLAIMES THAT THE RELIGION MAKES THE INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE BETTER!

SINCE IT DID NOT SUCCEED IN SO MANY CASES WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE INITIAL CLAIM IS WRONG!

What the fuck is religion for if it has not fucking impact on individuals or society whatsofuckingever!?

>>3260822
I would not pretend. I honestly do care about the victims.
Just to clarify, I am not religious. I am an Agnostic.

>>3260792

The entire Catholic church is corrupt - they attempted to cover up so many instances of abuse and silence/discredit those who accused.

Sure, it's the fault of the priests and nuns who did those things.
But when their bosses help them get away with it, their bosses are just as guilty.

>>3260830
>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

It pretty much IS the religion that is being immoral and malevolent there.

>>3260836

>isaac newton was a christian scientist who revolutionised the human world view

Lol, you think Isaac Newton lived recently. You must, because if you understand that he lived in antiquity, you'd know he couldn't really help being a Christian.

>>ALL CHRISTIUNS ARE EVIL DESTROY CHRISTENDOM DURRR

This is characteristic Christian dishonesty. They cannot argue reasonably with their opponents only flail, foam at the mouth and misrepresent them. This is because they are deeply inferior garbage creatures.

The highest ranking church officials are involved in this shit. So yes, anyone who continues their membership in the religion under that leadership is guilty by association as they contribute to their power base.

>>3260839

>SINCE IT DID NOT SUCCEED IN SO MANY CASES WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE INITIAL CLAIM IS WRONG!

This so very much.

>>3260840
>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

It pretty much IS the religion that is being immoral and malevolent there.

>>3260837
I will not defend rapists. I agree with you. They deserve to be punished.

>>3260838
The responsibility lies with that single man, and that single man alone.

>>3260839
It comforts them and provides meaning to their lives. It provides a way to live and a reason to do things.

>They cannot argue reasonably with their opponents only flail, foam at the mouth and misrepresent them.
>This is because they are deeply inferior garbage creatures.

>>3260836
>>3260848
>>3260857
so much hypocrisy

>>3260845
Millions and millions of normal good catholic people were unaware of it and would not have condoned it if they had known. A handful of people at most were the ones who made these decisions.

>>3260850
You do not need to keep posting everything repeatedly. I am reading all of the posts.

>>3260855
>It comforts them and provides meaning to their lives. It provides a way to live and a reason to do things.

So it makes them more happy? Fine with me.

That wasn't what we were fucking talking about though! I was saying that the religion fails at making people better (in the sense of morality).

So we agree on that or what?

>>3260855

>>The responsibility lies with that single man, and that single man alone.

He is the leader of the entire church in Africa. In light of this, your answer is unacceptable. You are only trying to minimize damage to the church at the expense of millions of africans who will die as a result of the head of the church's statements.

>>3260839

>>It comforts them and provides meaning to their lives. It provides a way to live and a reason to do things.

Religion is a want, not a need. It is essentially a hobby taken too seriously and forced into areas of life where it doesn't belong. It can and has been banned in nations like China, which have benefited enormously from it. Compare their student performance to ours. Let's not pretend that isn't related in any way to domestic anti-science, anti-education efforts. Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTyMg9OgF0s

>>3260855
>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

YOU DO -NOT- SYMPATHIZE WITH THE VICTIMS, BECAUSE YOU DEFEND THE IMMORAL BEHAVIOR OF THE RELIGION THAT CREATES MORE VICTIMS.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT KIND OF PERSON YOU ARE?!

>>3260863
This is a good point here. As much as we condemn a religion, we must also realize that adherents to that religion are not simply guilty by association. Moreso, members (such as deviant priests) may reflect upon that religion, but are not necessarily cause to decry it.

>>3260863

>>Millions and millions of normal good catholic people were unaware of it and would not have condoned it if they had known. A handful of people at most were the ones who made these decisions.

Those who continue to support the church leadership now that they know must bear partial responsibility.

Atheism gives no hope, no purpose it gives NOthing. It is a denial, a denial of everything humanity created in honor of their religions, gigantic statues of gods? STUPID! awesome churches and cathedrals? USELESS! art? RETARDED!. If atheism isnt a pessimistic circlejerk where the person who insults a religion or a view point the hardest is crowned as smart then please tell me what is the point of this atheist movement? Atheism isnt productive, a negative cant be productive.

>>3260857

>>Implying that's a misrepresentation

>>3260865
For some people I think it makes a difference, but in general it probably does not. I think we all have a deeply rooted sense of morality despite whether we are believers or atheists.

>>3260863
>Millions and millions of normal good catholic people were unaware of it and would not have condoned it if they had known. A handful of people at most were the ones who made these decisions.

Are you really so dumb and keep missing the point or are you trolling? Come on man - pay attention.

The point is that it is claimed, advertised really, by many that religion makes a society and people in general more moral.

If we see that people who were constantly (almost every day of their lives actually) exposed to that religion and was subject to its practices etc. COMMIT ON AVERAGE JUST AS MUCH (if not more) DISGUSTING, HORRIBLE, TOTALLY IMMORAL CRIMES THAN OTHER PEOPLE - WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE CLAIM THAT RELIGIONS MAKE PEOPLE BEHAVE BETTER IN GENERAL IS FALSE!

>>3260866
It should not be banned. People should be free. They all deserve the right to be able to believe whatever they want to believe.

>>3260877

See:

>>3260707

But yeah, totally. Statues and churches are as valuable as putting the first man in space, taking the initial step to making our species space faring, multi planet, and persistent in the universe on a geological timescale.

I'm sure a church is just as valuable as that.

>>3260882
>For some people I think it makes a difference,

Nobody fucking cares what you think, you tool

Back it up with evidence or piss off!

Can't believe you have been derailing this thread for so long if your actual stane on the OP is "meh kinda true but not totally 100% of the time!"

Yes I mad

>>3260872
No. No partial responsibility.
Responsibility for any act likes solely with the person or person's who committed it.

>>3260871
>>3260882
>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

YOU TWO DO -NOT- SYMPATHIZE WITH THE VICTIMS, BECAUSE YOU DEFEND THE IMMORAL BEHAVIOR OF THE RELIGION THAT CREATES MORE VICTIMS.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE YOU ARE?!

>>3260887

>>It should not be banned. People should be free. They all deserve the right to be able to believe whatever they want to believe.

No. It has become too problematic. No matter how harmless you, personally are, it doesn't stop others like you from doing stuff like this >>3260748

We need that to stop. We do *not* need religion. It is a want, and a hobby, without which life will go on as usual except no more concentration camps for gay teens, no more efforts to inject creationism into public school classrooms, no more opposition to stem cell/cloning research, no more efforts to Christianize the history taught to our students, no more indirect genocide of africans by way of misinformation regarding condoms, no more safe havens for pedophiles, etc. etc.

We can and must pursue the Chinese model. The church has earned it.

>>3260898
>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

PUTTING A PEDOPHILE INTO DIFFERENT GROUPS OF CHILDREN IS -NOT- AN IMMORAL ACT?

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!

>>3260888
you know that it was staged? nobody actually flew into space soviets used this lie as propaganda to show everybody that communism is better than capitalism. same goes for the moon landing.

its all a lie. and this is where atheism leads to making lies acceptable.

>>3260898

>>No. No partial responsibility.
Responsibility for any act likes solely with the person or person's who committed it.

No, partial responsibility resides with those who knowingly support their leadership in spite of their crimes. Do not contradict this, genocide and pedophilia supporter.

>>3260908

>>you know that it was staged? nobody actually flew into space soviets used this lie as propaganda to show everybody that communism is better than capitalism. same goes for the moon landing.

>>3260790

>>3260900
The religion itself has no behaviour, just like a law or code of conduct has no behaviour on its own. It is people wo have behaviour. I have already stated that I do not agree with their actions and I believe that the people responsible for the crimes deserve punishment.

>>3260898

Ok lets say I know that somebody is about to murder my neighbour and I could call the police but I don't...am I not partially responsible for letting it happen.

Let's then say the criminal is part of an organization that protects him and he is free to murder more people. I happen to buy bananas that this organization sells. I know about them protecting murderers and that they do it partially with my money. Yet I keep buying their bananas.

You saying I would be totally guiltless then?

>>3260905
Then ban actions such as those. Do not ban religion itself.

>>3260877

I love these kinds of comments.

The religious, backed into a corner, nothing else to say but sling insults and be agressive.

Whelp, guess I'm an ARROGANT ATHIEST, right?

>>3260915

>>The religion itself has no behaviour, just like a law or code of conduct has no behaviour on its own. It is people wo have behaviour. I have already stated that I do not agree with their actions and I believe that the people responsible for the crimes deserve punishment.

No, you are completely ignoring that religion has content, that it has specific moral admonitions which can be good or bad. Scripture condones slavery, genocide, marrying one's rapist, etc.

And it is invalid to deny any causal connection between belief and actions. Your reasoning is faulty and has been rejected.

>>3260915
>The religion itself has no behaviour, just like a law or code of conduct has no behaviour on its own.

But a law, code of conduct and religion can INFLUENCE a person's behavior.

I am not seeing extremist jainists flying planes into buildings or raping kids.

>>3260914
Do you really believe they had the technology to fly a man into space in the year 1950? Are you retarded?

>>3260930
Morality comes from religion, not the other way around.

>>3260915
>Instead of having them arrested, they move them to another group of victims.

PUTTING A PEDOPHILE INTO DIFFERENT GROUPS OF CHILDREN IS -NOT- AN IMMORAL ACT?

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!

>The religion itself has no behaviour,

THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR PROBLEM, LADY?

>>3260907
Yes it is immoral. But this is not a whole group of millions of religious people. It is one person. Or at most, a few people.

>>3260922

>>Then ban actions such as those. Do not ban religion itself.

Your request has been considered, and denied.

>>3260933

>>Do you really believe they had the technology to fly a man into space in the year 1950? Are you retarded?

You've never seen a rocket launch? You think every nation on Earth with radio telescopes didn't track the capsule from the moon and back?

>>3260937
THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

>>3260918
I personally would not interact with what I knew was a criminal organisation, and I personally would have called the police. However, you would indeed not have committed any crimes.

>>3260935
Nope.
Religion has ben used to enforce morality that is an attempt at making the human being better .

>>3260933
>thinks first man in space was in 1950

>>3260952
That is exactly what I said.

>>3260945
1950's fool everybody was still recovering from the atheistic mass murderer war everything was in ruin, but they somehow managed to build a rocket to fly into space for no reason. LOL

>>3260938
You are not the one in control. I am thankful for this. I would not want my freedoms limited.

>>3260950
>>3260950
>>3260950

Wow...ok since your own moral code is fucked up I guess there is no reason to keep talking to you.

>>3260962
Who says his moral code is fucked up? You?

Morality is subjective. His moral code may be fucked up compared to yours. Your moral code likewise may be fucked up compared to everyone else's.

>>3260957
You said that religion created morale.
It's wrong. Morale comes from philosophers, thinkers.
Religion was a way to apply morale on people with no education.

>>3260961

>>You are not the one in control. I am thankful for this. I would not want my freedoms limited.

Give it a hundred years. And your freedoms apparently include putting gay teens in concentration camps. I don't know if that's a freedom anyone should have.

>>3260972
Thinkers create a list of rules, yes? We call these morals.

What cause have we to obey these morals? Unless there's a reason why we should obey the rules, the rules have no power. What gives the rules power? A fear. A fear of retribution...religion. Do you see?

>>3260977
I am not in favour of putting anyone in concentration camps. I believe everyone should be free to express whatever sexuality they have and not be persecuted for it.

>>3260983
Yep.
So you don't say that religion created morales, yes?

Ok, so
>Morality comes from religion, not the other way around.

is wrong

Religion comes from Morale

>>3260950
DESPITE MY DERISION, HARRIET KEEPS FIRING OFF CLICHES WITH STARTLING PRECISION.

LIKE A SNIPER USING BOLLOCKS FOR AMMUNITION

FAITH IS THE DENIAL OF OBSERVATION SO THAT BELIEF CAN BE PRESERVED.

>>3260961

>>You are not the one in control. I am thankful for this. I would not want my freedoms limited.

>>3260969

No. The purpose of morality is to enhance the well being of sentient creatures.

Letting people be murdered instead of preventing it does not achieve this goal.

Thus it is immoral.

Piss off with your moral relativism shit!

>>3260969
>Morality is subjective
No, it's not, fuck off nihilist faggot.

>>3260988

>>I am not in favour of putting anyone in concentration camps. I believe everyone should be free to express whatever sexuality they have and not be persecuted for it.

Yet other Christians are doing it. No matter what you personally say, they keep right on doing it.

If you're a better person than that, fine, don't take it personally if religion's banned. It's not because of anything you did, but it's necessary so that everyone else's rights can be preserved.

>>3260991
I have heard that before. It is from a poem made by that funnyman with no shoes. My housemate showed me it.

If murder is committed the murderer is 100% responsible. Failure for a neighbor to call the police does not make them a murderer. I have already stated that I personally would call the police.

>>3260935

>Morality comes from religion, not the other way around.

Keep telling yourself that.

>>3260983
>Fear tactics = morality.

How come brave people have fought for what they thought is right despite all the terrors they had to face in order to do it?

Because people can understand that doing good things should be done because they are good and that is enough.

>>3261003
I have already stated twice that I am not religious.

>>3260999
nice

>>3260969

>Morality is subjective.

Not when we're talking basic, fundemental morals. Murder, rape, etc. They're intutiative. We know not to harm others, because that will bring them pain and misfortune. We as humans are more compassionate than we give ourselves credit for.

>>3261014
atheists are deluded they believe that anyone who argues for freedom of religion is a hardcore christian

>>3260983

THE RELIGION IS THE CHURCH THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION -IS-, AND WHAT YOU WORSHIP!

THAT RELIGION IS A COMMUNITY THAT SHARES COMMON BELIEFS BELIEFS THAT ARE IMPRESSED UPON THEM BY THEIR CHURCH.

-EVERYONE- IN A RELIGION IS COMMUNALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF THOSE THEY OBEY.

"I WAS JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS/THE BELIEFS OF MY RELIGION" IS -NOT- AN EXCUSE!!!

>>3261017

Forgive my missuse of the english language, as a note.

>>3261014

>>I have already stated twice that I am not religious.

You defend them, so I consider you one of them.

>>3260969

Read this

>>3261019
If I were religious and then committed a crime because of what I believed then I should be held responsible.
If I am religious and a different person who shares my beliefs commits a crime then I should not be held responsible, they should.

>>3261019
no, the sacred book does not the church.
churches are just a place of worship nothing else

>>3261014

>I have already stated twice that I am not religious.

And why exactly might that be?

>>3261029
I will never defend any criminals. I just disagree with your false generalising.

>>3261035

You personally being responsible for the crimes of other people isn't OP's claim though...

>>3261038
Because people were becoming confused and misrepresenting my position.

Criminals are fucked up persons. THey , at no point, chose to be fucked up.

Also, free will is a delusion.

>>3261037

You got that backwards. The priest/church tells you what you worship, and how to worship. the book can be the same across many different churches, and the interpretations and beliefs completely different. The bible Baptists use is the same one Catholics use, but one wants to kill gays and the other tolerates them.

>>3261059
how can they tell me what to worship if its not in the book? the church itself is based on the book and its teachings even though it sometimes they dont follow it. jesus taught his followers to not harm the little ones(children) yet some clergymen do it anyway.

>>3261075
Interpretation of the texts.

>>3261044
YOUR CHURCH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPEATEDLY MOVING PEDOPHILES INTO DIFFERENT GROUPS OF KIDS INSTEAD OF HAVING THEM ARRESTED.

THE CHURCH TEACHES YOU WHAT YOUR RELIGION AND YOUR BELIEFS ARE.

YOU CHOOSE THAT CHURCH. YOU MIGHT NOT SHARE THE PUNISHMENT FOR THE CRIME, BUT YOU -DO- SHARE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACTIONS THAT YOU ALLOWED YOUR CHURCH TO COMMIT, NAMELY BOUNCING PEDOPHILES AMONG DIFFERENT GROUPS OF KIDS, BY NOT PUNISHING YOUR CHURCH.

>>3261082
It is not the congregations job to punish the church leaders.
The church leaders are still subject to the law.

>>3261075
"It's a metaphor." "You're not supposed to take that literally." "Gays are evil and must be destroyed."

>>3261087
>It is not the congregations job to punish the church leaders.

Yes it is. You're the one giving them your support in exchange for religion.

>>3261101
I will say again, I am not religious. I have never aided any religious organisation in any way.

>>3261087
>The church leaders are still subject to the law.

There's a law that says "you're not allowed to priest that has fucked children among different groups of children?"

Hmmmm, nope.

>>3261115
In that post "you" was the congregation. Sorry.

>>3261116
There is a law that says paedophiles go to prison.

>The church leaders are still subject to the law.

There's a law that says "you're not allowed to put priests that have fucked children among different groups of children?"

Hmmmm, nope.

>>3261119

The Priest did the fucking, but the church let him do it over and over and over again.

That moon landing conspiracy troll is funny, we need another post from him.

>>3260526
The passage you quoted says that false Messiahs will come (Christ = greek word for Messiah) and will decieve many. Christians are Messiahs? I dont understand what you mean.
The earliest Gospel is the Gospel of Mark and was written at around 60-70 AD then follows Matthew 80 AD Luke 80-90 AD the last one is John written at around 90-120 AD. The Gospels were ofcourse not written by the desiplces of Jesus because they were most likely illiterate, but the Gospels were passed on orally first and then later when the followers of Jesus grew in numbers they had educated people who wrote the collected teachings and stories of Christ in a book.

>>3262748
A messiah (Hebrew: {מָשִׁיחַ}, Modern Mashiaẖ Tiberian Māšîăḥ Arabic language مسيح Masih “-ANOINTED-”

IT TOOK ME 2 SECONDS ON WIKIPEDIA TO TRASH YOUR FAGGOTY ARGUMENT.

GO SUCK YOUR DAD'S WIENER FOR SOME "FATHERS MILK."

>>3262782
What was his point anyway? i dont even understand it...