The land of religious tolerance

[The Man]

what are you talking about...i am responding to you....who's back pedaling?

Now you present denial.

 

[Tim]

You are essentially saying that atheism will provide a utopia once religions are gone ...how is this not intolerance?
You are saying Utopia cant be achieved with religion in place and therefore again place atheism as the supreme belief.

So rob is it fair to say

Utopia{goal} can and only be achieved through atheism{belief} with the absence of all other beliefs?

I means that is what is breaks down to.

Now if we say "Utopia can and only be achieved through Islam with the absence of all other beliefs"
Is that not an intolerant statement?

Its a two way street ...Why should it only be intolerant if a Muslim makes such a statement but not those of other beliefs?

Your first mistake is that you call atheism a belief. Atheism is NOT a belief nor is it a religion.

I have never said that the world would be a utopia if religion didn't exist. Those are your words, not mine.
I have said that "Someday mankind will outgrow this madness but until then we need to put up with crap like this"
Which means that all of the religious intolerance, violence, death, etc will no longer exist. Because if there is no religion, then why would their be such things???

Another point I need to make, I have NEVER said that people should be forced to reject or abandon religion. I said that I believe that mankind will naturally progress away from it. And at that point things will be different.

 

[Stone]

............................Which means that all of the religious intolerance, violence, death, etc will no longer exist. Because if there is no religion, then why would their be such things???

.....................

I suggest you go back read my explanations as to why conflicts and confrontations would continue.

 

[Tim]

I suggest you go back read my explanations as to why conflicts and confrontations would continue.

What difference does that make at all???

I never said that the world would be a utopia if religion didn't exist.
I never said that murder would not exist without religion.
I never said that dictators would not kill their people if religion did not exist.
I never implied ANY of that.

Those are your assumptions, not mine.

I am ONLY saying that things like the burning of embassies and the murder of diplomats because someone made a movie insulting their religion wouldn't exist if there was no religion in the world.
How the hell can you have religious wars, religious killings, religious intollerence if there is no religion?

 

[Stone]

I don't see Tims view as stated earlier in this thread as intollerant

But you keep on trucking Stone

Of course not.......you agree with him

 

[The Man]

Your first mistake is that you call atheism a belief. Atheism is NOT a belief nor is it a religion.

I have never said that the world would be a utopia if religion didn't exist. Those are your words, not mine.
I have said that "Someday mankind will outgrow this madness but until then we need to put up with crap like this"
Which means that all of the religious intolerance, violence, death, etc will no longer exist. Because if there is no religion, then why would their be such things???

Another point I need to make, I have NEVER said that people should be forced to reject or abandon religion. I said that I believe that mankind will naturally progress away from it. And at that point things will be different.

Your first mistake is that you call atheism a belief.

No mistake here it is a belief...your belief is there is no god.

I have never said that the world would be a utopia if religion didn't exist.

That was someone else who continued your argument,,,they took your argument that it was a statement of Utopia.
Not good for you...as multiple members see your post differently that you do.
You refer to religious belief as a madness and even go as far as say it leads to crap.....which is an intolerant statement.

then in this post we have

Which means that all of the religious intolerance, violence, death, etc will no longer exist. Because if there is no religion, then why would their be such things???

You again show an intolerance for religion and state violence death etc will no longer exist...you blame it on religious intolerance..thus showing you actually know when to apply the term...it only harms your argument further.

Your back pedal looks good tim...grant,,but if I go back and paste the exchange your post was very clear..and when I asked for confirmation you responded with absolutely.

You tim are intolerant of all religions..rather than being selective you group them all into one with reference to madness and crap.
You spat upon all who believe in a supreme being while elevating your own belief as superior.

 

[The Man]

Here is the exchange again for convenience tim

Ahhh, just imagine a world with no religion.

Someday mankind will outgrow this madness but until then we need to put up with crap like this

So tim are you saying the world will be a better place if and when it evolves to atheism as a result of rejecting all other beliefs.

Absolutely

 

[Tim]

No mistake here it is a belief...your belief is there is no god.

That was someone else who continued your argument,,,they took your argument that it was a statement of Utopia.
Not good for you...as multiple members see your post differently that you do.
You refer to religious belief as a madness and even go as far as say it leads to crap.....which is an intolerant statement.

then in this post we have



You again show an intolerance for religion and state violence death etc will no longer exist...you blame it on religious intolerance..thus showing you actually know when to apply the term...it only harms your argument further.

Your back pedal looks good tim...grant,,but if I go back and paste the exchange your post was very clear..and when I asked for confirmation you responded with absolutely.

You tim are intolerant of all religions..rather than being selective you group them all into one with reference to madness and crap.
You spat upon all who believe in a supreme being while elevating your own belief as superior.

Back peddle? Really?

I stand by every word I have said. I am not trying to back peddle anything. I can't help if you aren't bright enough to understand or follow along.

Atheism is not an article of faith, there is NO belief system. So atheism cannot be a belief.

 

[Tim]

Here is the exchange again for convenience tim

You can quote that as much as you want and I will stand by it 100% of the time.

here are a just a few things we can look forward to eliminating once the world is religion free...

 

[Stone]

What difference does that make at all???

I never said that the world would be a utopia if religion didn't exist.
I never said that murder would not exist without religion.
I never said that dictators would not kill their people if religion did not exist.
I never implied ANY of that.

Those are your assumptions, not mine.

I am ONLY saying that things like the burning of embassies and the murder of diplomats because someone made a movie insulting their religion wouldn't exist if there was no religion in the world.
How the hell can you have religious wars, religious killings, religious intollerence if there is no religion?

I never said that the world would be a utopia if religion didn't exist.
I never said that murder would not exist without religion.
I never said that dictators would not kill their people if religion did not exist.
I never implied ANY of that.

I didn't claim you did in those words.
You claimed betterment of humanity.
You're only removing one rationale for hating while core issues still exist.

Those are your assumptions, not mine.

No....that's your spin.

I am ONLY saying that things like the burning of embassies and the murder of diplomats because someone made a movie insulting their religion wouldn't exist if there was no religion in the world.

That's not what you claimed in past comments........specifically, you claimed betterment for humanity.
History has shown elements of atheism to be destructive, as has history shown elements of religion to be destructive.
The elimination of religion only guarantees future conflicts and confrontations wouldn't be using religion as a rationalization for conflict and confrontations. You are only editing the rationalization, not the underlying issues.
Power, nationalism, politics, arrogance, envy, environmental issues, perceived survival to name a few.

How the hell can you have religious wars, religious killings, religious intollerence if there is no religion?

You can't....you call them 'other reasons for wars, other reasons for killings , other reasons for intolerance'........you merely update the names of conflict and confrontation. Crimes would no longer carry religious stigma....but crimes, abuse, conflict and aggression will still occur.
Your 'betterment' merely trades off one rationalization for groups of others.
Soviet Union was an example. Those that accepted state atheism did not enjoy 'betterment'.
Cambodia was a killing ground with a large portion of it's population destroyed and the rest at risk.
I'm not claiming that's a norm of atheism......I'm pointing out that because it has happened....it's a future possibility and your claim of 'betterment' ignores history and future possibilities.
You are making a claim that addresses specifics, but denies the realities of absolutes.

The morality and ethics of mankind has to change for betterment to occur.
Your argument only addresses the replacement of belief systems, not the the improvement of the moral and ethical codes of a civilization.

 

[robdawg1]

This is EXHAUSTING

 

[Stone]

You can quote that as much as you want and I will stand by it 100% of the time.

here are a just a few things we can look forward to eliminating once the world is religion free...

(edited for brevity)

I notice there are no photos concerning the brutality of nations involved with promoting state atheism.

Can you give any rationale for not admitting, that among atheists there also exists people...leaders....capable of incredible cruelty? Lacking acceptable morals and devoid of ethics?

 

[Tim]

This is EXHAUSTING

:24:

Tell me about it. I swear to god that I could explain this to my 5 year-old easier than these two clowns.

 

[Stone]

This is EXHAUSTING

Copy and paste discussions are usually pretty shallow to start with.

Visual rhetoric

 

[Tim]

I notice there are no photos concerning the brutality of nations involved with promoting state atheism.

Can you give any rationale for not admitting, that among atheists there also exists people...leaders....capable of incredible cruelty? Lacking acceptable morals and devoid of ethics?

Of course atheists can be cruel mother fuckers. Just as religious people can.
But every example I posted above were BECAUSE of religion and the intolerance created by it.

Please show me where an atheist kills because of their belief... Oh, that's right, atheism isn't a belief system based on articles of faith... it's the lack of belief.

 

[Stone]

:24:

Tell me about it. I swear to god that I could explain this to my 5 year-old easier than these two clowns.

Of course you could, she's 5 years old and hasn't a clue as to what you're talking about and not enough experience in life to realize there's a lot more 'to the story' than what her daddy tells her.


And that would be called indoctrination.

 

[robdawg1]

you two hack eachother to pieces in every thread I read...y'all must be best friends...LOL. Like grumpy old men type bert and ernie friends

 

[Stone]

Of course atheists can be cruel mother fuckers. Just as religious people can.
But every example I posted above were BECAUSE of religion and the intolerance created by it.

Please show me where an atheist kills because of their belief... Oh, that's right, atheism isn't a belief system based on articles of faith... it's the lack of belief.

The old Soviet Union was notorious in defending their belief in a void of religious beliefs.
As was Pol Pot.
Mao, too.

( semantics )

 

[Stone]

you two hack eachother to pieces in every thread I read...y'all must be best friends...LOL. Like grumpy old men type bert and ernie friends

No....I just like to argue

 

[robdawg1]

The old Soviet Union was notorious in defending their belief in a void of religious beliefs.
As was Pol Pot.
Mao, too.

( semantics )

as far as i know these examples left religiong alone they just attacked anyone who seemed a challenge to their authority.

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

talks about how he was doing an ethnic cleansing and his killings were based on what gov't you supported in the past or what ethnic background you were more than what religion you were

The Soviet Union did not offically outlaw religion, but they did have a pro athiest policy. Their primary concern was control, total control, and no outside thoughts or ideas were aloud. The persecution was never soley about religion it was simply about domination of thought and mind and body!

so Atheism as an intent to war has never been proven. It is simply a part of a larger, more dangerous desire for total power and control.

You can see where wars have been started simply and soley based on religiong (cruesades, inquisistion, our current war(s))