Jeffrey Dahmer explains how atheism justified killing and cannibalism.

[Minderella]

Technically, you are correct.

I say he should be free, he never did anything.

 

[Stone]

what's wrong with believing in both creation and science? I know I do.

So do I.
It's often called theistic evolution.

 

[fuel1316]

Technically, you are correct.

I say he should be free, he never did anything.

well at the very least he shouldnt have a longer sentence than the bitches that did do it pfft

 

[Minderella]

well at the very least he shouldnt have a longer sentence than the bitches that did do it pfft

True story. I never understood that, they did the actual killing!

 

[Stone]

I think that is more towards the truth ... but "Creation Science" is the attempt to explain Creationism scientifically.

Actually, 'Creation Science' isn't a science.
The scientific method is a series of steps that begin with a premise and challenges all known aspects ( testing ) of it in order to determine a valid result ( new/more correct knowledge).
All scientific claims from laws to hypothesis are at anytime challengeable.

'Creation Science' begins with an agreed upon result and fabricates 'logic' to prove the 'result'. And that result ( the stuff of 'true believers' ) is not challenged withing the 'Creation Science' community.
This is why 'Creation Science' is often called a lie as far as being a science.

I suspect Dahmer was looking to improve the comfort of his incarcerated stay by appealing to the Christian community.

 

[The Man]

So some of these atheists murder and eat each other.
IMO we should export some to the caves of the middle east.

 

[Mercury]

Actually, 'Creation Science' isn't a science.
The scientific method is a series of steps that begin with a premise and challenges all known aspects ( testing ) of it in order to determine a valid result ( new/more correct knowledge).
All scientific claims from laws to hypothesis are at anytime challengeable.

'Creation Science' begins with an agreed upon result and fabricates 'logic' to prove the 'result'. And that result ( the stuff of 'true believers' ) is not challenged withing the 'Creation Science' community.
This is why 'Creation Science' is often called a lie as far as being a science.

..... what he said. :24:

 

[Joe the meek]

I forget what year Dahmer hit the news, but I remember when this news story hit.

One little known fact that I remember reading about the case was that in his (Dahmer's) refrigerator, there were storage bottles of men's testicles. What had the detectives perplexed was the fact that the bottles were actually arranged by days in the month, but some bottles marked with certain days didn't have any testicles in them. After the trial and conviction, one psychologist went back to interview Dahmer because they (the shrinks) couldn't figure out why almost half the days in the month didn't have testicles in them and the other half of the days did.

When asked about this and why, Dahmer replied "hey, sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't"

 

[clancy]

But he always felt like a serial killing atheist.

 

[Stone]

But he always felt like a serial killing atheist.

That's what he told us.
After 13 years of killing he suddenly gets religion while sitting in a jail cell.
Of course he felt bad about it.....probably mostly about getting caught.

 

[Stone]

So some of these atheists murder and eat each other.
IMO we should export some to the caves of the middle east.

Sending an atheist into radical fundamentalist Islamic territory is a death sentence :eek
Oh!....the irony of it all.

 

[Panacea]

I suppose it's par for the course that the brainless shit stirring messengers of religion would make claims without proof, but clearly none of the assertions in these intelligence assailing threads are supportable with any significance.

That was the whole problem with bug when it was first here. I chalk it up to trolling as the more polite alternative to saying these user names belong to a person with some sort of cognitive disability. That's not for me to say.

Damning generalizations are hard to stick to atheists because atheism is not a lifestyle, merely one aspect of a diverse range of lifestyles. Religion reaches much further into the shaping of individuals, and there's relatively less diversity therein. It's easier to make generalizations about religion based on that.

The troupe here has a bit of an uphill battle, so they stick to blatant lies they don't even actually believe. That's clear. They're spewing empty rhetoric.

 

[Tim]

This following quote was from a religious site...

Morals are concepts of what is “good” and what is “bad” and how one should behave given this; they get formed and become a tradition in a certain society for a certain period of time. The moral rules may be very different in different countries or even in the same country in different epochs. Morals are a subjective phenomenon, since most of their rules do not follow from the objective necessity and advisability. Moral rules are about how to dress, where and how much one can bare the body, what turns of speech are decent and what are not, what one should be ashamed of, what is “appropriate” to do and what is not, etc.

So to claim that atheists do not have morals is completely wrong, hell, it's a down right lie.

I am not a fence sitter, I am an atheist, period.

Yet I still have morals, hell, I have a better moral structure than my christian family. The fact that I don't believe in any god does not impact who I am or how I behave. My moral compass was never gauged on whether there was a god watching me or what his rules were. When I was a christian, I didn't kill because god said so, I didn't kill because it's wrong. So how is not believing in a god going to change my moral view on killing someone?
I could go down an entire list of morals and how believing in a god or not doesn't make a difference...

I don't see how the two are connected

 

[Tim]

BTW, I'm just throwing that out there for anyone but the trolls since I know there will be zero participation or thoughtful response by them.

 

[Panacea]

BTW, I'm just throwing that out there for anyone but the trolls since I know there will be zero participation or thoughtful response by them.

Without a doubt. All sincere efforts at purposeful debate are wasted (and we've known this long before the bug took on aliases lol) and it's a shame. Only divides people further on the matter.

 

[Josh]

So how is not believing in a god going to change my moral view on killing someone?

Morality is subjective, though. If you don't have any concept of God, or an afterlife, and you're only reason for not killing someone is morality, then you're selling yourself short on what experiences life has to offer.

I could go down an entire list of morals and how believing in a god or not doesn't make a difference...

Actually, it makes all the difference. I couldn't kill someone because of my awakening, and what I learned about life through the process of having [it].
My belief in God is what grounds me in reality, whether it be a delusion or not, it's still the reason I don't explore my mind in its entirety.

Now whether or not this makes me a horrible person in your eyes, or in the eyes of the rest of the world is irrelevant, if there is no God; if there is no God, then we are truly alone in this world and nothing matters beyond what directly effects us. So this reality and everything in it belongs to me, and what/how you experience it doesn't mean a damn thing to the inquisitive nature of people such as myself. Of course these have been abstract thoughts, but still relevant in the context of your having asked for this:

since I know there will be zero participation or thoughtful response by them

 

[Panacea]

Actually, it makes all the difference.

To you. May be important to note. Surely for some, they need a god's input to continue shaping their morality past the things their basic industries (home, school, media) teach them early on. Some do not need that at all and develop their own morality from what's out there, and surely the rest do both.

It's interesting to me that there's so much nit picking about morality and religion...seems to me personal religious choice and lack of belief in a god or gods is far more cohesive than different.

I'd wager your average atheist and your average non-fundamentalist religious individual share a lot of similar morals.

 

[Josh]

I imagine they do, too.
Later, Panacea.

 

[HK]

So as an atheist, I have the perfect excuse in that without the positive influence of a God in my upbringing, I can't help but indulge in a little light murdering?

 

[Josh]

So as an atheist, I have the perfect excuse in that without the positive influence of a God in my upbringing, I can't help but indulge in a little light murdering?

No, as an atheist you have no excuse but the one you've created to justify your inability to indulge in a little light murdering.