Who has more sex Atheists or Religious people?

[Mogi67]

well animals didnt get together and decide some of them should engage in homosexual behaviour. and they arent acting out on unnatural impluses because animals are purely instinctual. so sometyhing that is instinctual is natural and NOT unnatural



ya well that same book says eating shellfish is "an abomination" and not as you suggest (it'll be spoiled by heat) ..it uses the same word for homosexuals: "abomination". so I dont see how you can accept one without the other. and quoting from scripture is not proof of god's intent. observable evidence is much more telling of god's design; therefore since homosexuality is NOT unnatural therefore it's not a sin

Romans 1:26- "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones."

you should have quoted the next passage as well:

Roman's 1:27: "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

god seems to be saying that the natural use for women is as objects of sex. we all know they're more than just the sum of their parts right? .....right? how the hell is it that I'm far more enlightened than god? I'm just a mortal whereas god is well ..god, how can he be so stupid if he's god? I mean you'd have to be pretty dumb to dismiss women as merely as objects of sex

also if you believe homosexuals are unnatural because of that passage then you simply must follow suit with what the same passage says you should do with gays and their supporters:

"1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them"

so they should be put to death?



so animals just came up with homosexuality on their own? and man just so happened to witness this and thought to themselves "hey that looks like fun!"

you simply cannot avoid this. homosexuality is too present in the animal world to dismiss it as "unnatural". therefore the whole argument against homosexuality from a christian standpoint falls apart like a deck of cards during an earthquake

and do you really truely believe god to be crippled by human frailities like intolerance, fear and hate? commanding people to be put to death for being true to themselves doesnt sound like an omnipotent being. it sounds more like very human sentiment: fear/hate/intolerence. if this is your god then he's a shitty god




it's completely irrational as there is absolutely basis for saying that. I could easily say MONKEY FISH BUTTERCUP as an explanation for the origins of the universe and that's just as valid as saying "a supreme being did it"




you = religion, not you. and yes religion does try to impose their will on society; same sex marriage, abortion etc etc etc



religious people attack non belief just as vehemently. and what's worse is that they're inappropriately smarmy about it. this is the problem with debating politics and ideas; it's not polite discourse

Stern, you don't know what the **** you're doing. Leave theology to people who know what they're talking about, which does not include blackout.

 

[No Limit]

Probably. I'd say believing in or completely doubting any idea without evidence (IE: having faith) sounds retarded to me. Not that I typically care. It is most certainly ****ed up for the people who do that and for any hypothetical being that asks people for it. As long as your religious views don't result in you being an asshole I'm pretty apathetic towards the situation.

Probably?

PROBABLY?

Come on bro, you are lying to yourself.

It's not a matter of "probably" but ok, lets pretend it is. So you don't agree with me that religion is ****ing retraded. You agree that it's probably ****ing retarded. Do I have that right?

 

[Eejit]

I'll assume blackout no longer responding to me means he's having a crisis of faith

 

[blackout]

umm. . no the fact that I'm not responding means I had to go and eat dinner.

besides how do you expect your silly arguments to give me a crisis of faith?

anyway I don't even care anymore, this is going nowhere.

 

[No Limit]

umm. . no the fact that I'm not responding means I had to go and eat dinner.

besides how do you expect your silly arguments to give me a crisis of faith?

anyway I don't even care anymore, this is going nowhere.

So lets just review all the things you ignored in this thread.

First you said the reason your religion was right and the others weren't were personal experiances you had while reading the bible. Turned out that was just you reading passages from the bible, nothing special about that. I can read and quote passages from the Quran and the argument would be the same that you made. You had no revolations or any kind of magical experiance as you originally implied.

Stern pointed out to you that God made homosexuality. If God made it why would he consider it to be wrong?

You never explained how faith in religion is different from faith in superstitions.

So not having explained any of that what do you do? Take your ball and go home. Typical. You can answer some basic questions about your faith but that doesn't matter to you, by God you believe it because it must be true even if it makes absolutely no sense and can't be backed up by any kind of logic.

 

[blackout]

just because you can't see the logic doesn't mean it's not there. and I still fail to understand how sterns' odd argument is proof that God created homosexuality. besides even if I can't proove God, so what. the fact is I want to believe, so I will. what do you want me to do? not belive in God?

 

[Sheepo]

Probably?

PROBABLY?

Come on bro, you are lying to yourself.

It's not a matter of "probably" but ok, lets pretend it is. So you don't agree with me that religion is ****ing retraded. You agree that it's probably ****ing retarded. Do I have that right?

Okay, please explain to me why an evil and tyrannical god is so much more improbable than a benevolent and merciful one. There isn't any reason. We (most people) reject the idea that there could be a god who wants us to kill innocent people because we're human beings and our instincts/morals tell us that it's wrong. It's a horrifying thought, so you put it on this pedestal of more retarded than regular nice gods which is one retarded step above your view of absolutely no divine force. There's no definite evidence proving any theory more than another, you just have this ranking based on your emotional reaction to each concept. And yeah, it seems like religion is probably retarded to me, because I've never experienced anything of the sort. Doesn't stop me from respecting other people despite my difference in opinion with them rather than shouting about how ****ing retarded they are and desperately hoping that one day I can actually have some way to know for sure that what I believe is right. And for the record, I think organized religion is absolute horseshit.

Edit: lol blackout. 'The logic is just too deep for you man, so I won't even bother explaining it'.

 

[No Limit]

just because you can't see the logic doesn't mean it's not there. and I still fail to understand how sterns' odd argument is proof that God created homosexuality. besides even if I can't proove God, so what. the fact is I want to believe, so I will. what do you want me to do? not belive in God?

God created animals right? Many different animals engage in homosexual activity. That means homosexuality is natural and God created it. What is there for you not to understand?

So you believe because you want to believe? That's it? That's your argument?

And yes, that's exactly what I want you to do. At the least don't believe in the bible. You want to pretend there is some God out there, fine. But don't pretend the bible has anything to do with him.

 

[No Limit]

...

Your argument keeps boiling down to well you can't prove it so it could be true, no matter how absolutely insane your idea is. As long as you can't prove it it could be true.

To show you how ****ing retarded that argument is lets use this as an example.

If you give me $1,000 today if I ever win the lottery I will give you half of it. Would you take that deal? Why not? It only costs you a thousand bucks. And you can't prove that I won't win the lottery in the next year, so it could be true. The reality is if you took that deal you would have to be ****ing retarded to do so, no?

The subsurface of the moon if you dig deep enough is filled with hot lesbians. You can't prove it so it could be true.

The government causes earthquakes with a secret earthquake machine. You can't prove otherwise so it could be true. Better get your tin foil hat.

The fact is you can make any retarded argument you want and you are claiming that we don't have a right to call it retarded because as long as it can't be proven wrong it could be true. Its a stupid argument and if you are truly not understanding this you need to think a bit harder.

 

[CptStern]

just because you can't see the logic doesn't mean it's not there. and I still fail to understand how sterns' odd argument is proof that God created homosexuality.

how do you explain homosexuality in animals? god created animals, he created their behaviour, their instincts, their raison d'etre. they didnt choose homosexuality; it's part of their extinct:

homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them...

... A new review made in 2009 of existing research showed that same-sex behavior is a nearly universal phenomenon in the animal kingdom, common across species.

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

 

[blackout]

the effects of evil entering the world from the fall. why is that so difficult to understand?

 

[No Limit]

So animals can sin and be evil? I thought we already established that they can't.

You also keep ignoring what makes your religion special.

 

[CptStern]

the effects of evil entering the world from the fall. why is that so difficult to understand?

you mean adam and eve's expulsion from the garden of eden led to homosexuality in animals? that homosexuality was the evil let loose by adam taking a bite of the apple? and that it spread like some virus into the animal kingdom?

 

[Sheepo]

Your argument keeps boiling down to well you can't prove it so it could be true, no matter how absolutely insane your idea is. As long as you can't prove it it could be true.

To show you how ****ing retarded that argument is lets use this as an example.

If you give me $1,000 today if I ever win the lottery I will give you half of it. Would you take that deal? Why not? It only costs you a thousand bucks. And you can't prove that I won't win the lottery in the next year, so it could be true. The reality is if you took that deal you would have to be ****ing retarded to do so, no?

The subsurface of the moon if you dig deep enough is filled with hot lesbians. You can't prove it so it could be true.

The government causes earthquakes with a secret earthquake machine. You can't prove otherwise so it could be true. Better get your tin foil hat.

The fact is you can make any retarded argument you want and you are claiming that we don't have a right to call it retarded because as long as it can't be proven wrong it could be true. Its a stupid argument and if you are truly not understanding this you need to think a bit harder.

No, not at all. The fundamental force through which the universe was created and is sustained differs a little from durr hurr maybe microscopic unicorns live in my pancreas. One concept can be speculated at endlessly and with infinite explanations without ever coming to any definitive conclusion because it exists outside our concept of reality and the others are just silly examples of breaks from the logical realm and the scientific properties of the universe. Not to mention the irony of you mocking me with this makes no sense since you're belittling my defense of the idea of faith (I have no faith) while you go on having complete faith in the fact that there is no divine entity in the universe.

 

[No Limit]

I am not mocking you. But the argument you are making is absurd. Well the bible can be real. Those other things you are saying are durr hurr maybe could happen. What qualifies you to make that determination? We don't have evidance for either. And if your argument is that it's not retarded because you can't prove other wise then all those things you just classified as retarded (durr hurr) can't be retarded because of your logic.

 

[Sheepo]

Look, you can argue something meaningful, or you can shut up. The number of times I've said retarded in this thread as if it actually has any concrete value for the discussion blows my mind. No, the magical things you said can't be disproven. Yes, I find them to be retarded. Funnily enough, two posts ago I stated that I do find religion retarded so what you're even arguing with me I have no idea (not that that's new, I go point by point when I'm countering all your posts but all you seem to manage to do is find some huge main idea that typically isn't there and proceed to call it ****ing retarded and support that with several fallacious analogies). I've never supported your any other faithful person's retarded beliefs. All I'm saying is that if you think yours are better than other peoples' you're deluding yourself.

 

[No Limit]

So religious beliefs are retarded yet my non religious beliefs are no better? Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing at this point?

And Im sorry you get your panties in a bunch because I used the word retarded. Would ****ing stupid not hurt your feelings as bad?

 

[Krynn72]

No Limit makes me sad. What a terrible person for religious people (and anyone else for that matter) to meet. You're only solidifying their beliefs by being such a major dickface No Limit. You should really learn how to not be a such a terrible person if you want to show people their faults.

 

[Sheepo]

And you are wrong, I would be extremely respectful if you wanted to have a serious discussion.

Hahaha, remember that man? Shit was hilarious.

Stop being condescending. Stop cursing. Stop being an asshole.

So young, so naive ;(

So religious beliefs are retarded yet my non religious beliefs are no better? Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing at this point?

And Im sorry you get your panties in a bunch because I used the word retarded. Would ****ing stupid not hurt your feelings as bad?

Both are matters of faith over fact, sounds pretty '****ing retarded'.

I'm not offended by it, it's just meaningless. "Your honor, my client should be acquitted on the grounds that the evidence presented against him is totally ****ing bullshit." Ignoring the fact that how retarded you might think something is has no bearing on the issue, '****ing retarded' itself says absolutely nothing at all.

 

[No Limit]

No Limit makes me sad. What a terrible person for religious people (and anyone else for that matter) to meet. You're only solidifying their beliefs by being such a major dickface No Limit. You should really learn how to not be a such a terrible person if you want to show people their faults.

Yup, because as we saw in this thread religious people are quick to realize their faults as long as you are super nice to them.

And the fact I made you sad breaks my heart, you need a hug?

Hahaha, remember that man? Shit was hilarious.

I was respectful to our religious friends in this discussion. I was even respectful to you (whereas you called me a moron on top of other things). I'm sorry you guys can't handle the fact I like to point out that believing you will get 72 virgins for blowing yourself up is ****ing retarded. Could I do it in a more subtle way? Sure, but we saw how well that worked out for others. Bottom line is you can't reason with religion because religion, well, is ****ing retarded.

So young, so naive

Lol, did YOU just call me young and naive?

I'm not offended by it, it's just meaningless. "Your honor, my client should be acquitted on the grounds that the evidence presented against him is totally ****ing bullshit." Ignoring the fact that how retarded you might think something is has no bearing on the issue, '****ing retarded' itself says absolutely nothing at all.

Well if all I had done is say "****ing retarded" and left it at that you would make a great point. Except that's not what I did, I followed it up by explaining why it's ****ing retarded. Yet you chose to hang on to this one word as if I had committed some mortal sin for saying it when now you come in here and say you agree.

 

[Tyguy]

I started to slowly back away from this thread when the bible verses entered the equation. I think the point was made, let him bask in the putrid glory of ignorance until he's ready to join the ranks of us sinners.

 

[Krynn72]

Yup, because as we saw in this thread religious people are quick to realize their faults as long as you are super nice to them.

I didn't say to be super nice to them, all I said was to not be the biggest dickhead in the world about it. And yes, we were having a fairly legitimate discussion about the issue, which is what changes peoples minds. Until you came in and stunk up the place with your enormous blathering stinkhole you call a mouth which just ended the dispute by strengthening his resolve and irritated him to the point where he just left, leaving the matter unresolved. When was the last time calling someone "****ing retarded" helped your cause? I bet it was back in junior high school with your idiot friends thinking you're so cool now for saying such a 'ballsy' thing. If you think you have any such friends here on hl2.net, I'm afraid you're sorely mistaken.

 

[Sheepo]

Yup, because as we saw in this thread religious people are quick to realize their faults as long as you are super nice to them.

And the fact I made you sad breaks my heart, you need a hug?

I like how you tell yourself that you're trying to help people 'realize their faults' instead of pointlessly condescending and bashing another person's beliefs so you can feel superior. And yeah, if being respectful and friendly doesn't work, switching to contemptuous and obnoxious is guaranteed results.

I have to know, do you have any reason for trying so hard to sound like a condescending prick, at all?

I was respectful to our religious friends in this discussion. I was even respectful to you (whereas you called me a moron on top of other things). I'm sorry you guys can't handle the fact I like to point out that believing you will get 72 virgins for blowing yourself up is ****ing retarded. Could I do it in a more subtle way? Sure, but we saw how well that worked out for others. Bottom line is you can't reason with religion because religion, well, is ****ing retarded.

I called you an asshole before the whole thing started, and you're kidding yourself if you don't think you earned it then. Throughout this whole thing you've been the most obtuse, condescending, point missing poophead I've ever had the misfortune of arguing with. I directly went through every single point you made and responded in kind with a counterargument. Half the time I daresay you didn't even bother to read more than I small chunk of what I wrote and then you usually narrowed all my ideas down into a single point which usually missed what I actually said by as wide a margin as possible. You don't take the time to explain yourself or understand others, always prompting for the oh so compelling "I mean come on, that's ****ing retarded" no matter how many times I explained to you my reason for disagreeing, you never felt the need to actually respond to that.

Lol, did YOU just call me young and naive?

No, try again.

Well if all I had done is say "****ing retarded" and left it at that you would make a great point. Except that's not what I did, I followed it up by explaining why it's ****ing retarded. Yet you chose to hang on to this one word as if I had committed some mortal sin for saying it when now you come in here and say you agree.

I don't agree with you. Your ideas are based in faith. But if you would like to see some of your fine and elaborate explanations for your respective beliefs on the mental health of my ideas, here you are.

IT IS ****ING RETARDED. Again, we are talking about people that think if they blow themselves up God will reward them with 72 virgins. It's ****ing retarded. Yet you keep insiting that it's actually possible that this is true because we can't prove otherwise. There are a lot of things you can't prove otherwise but those things a lot of the time are ****ing retarded.

THIS ****ING RETARDED. LET ME RESTATE THE IDEA REAL QUICK. NOW LET ME ONCE AGAIN STATE THAT THE IDEA IS ****ING RETARDED. YOU THINK THIS MIGHT BE POSSIBLE BUT OBVIOUSLY NOT BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY SAID ****ING RETARDED.

Probably?

PROBABLY?

Come on bro, you are lying to yourself.

It's not a matter of "probably" but ok, lets pretend it is. So you don't agree with me that religion is ****ing retraded. You agree that it's probably ****ing retarded. Do I have that right?

Hey, hey, what you just said is ridiculous. But can we, for the time being, concede that what you just said is what you meant to say? Huh? Can we agree that the words you just typed you actually agree with?

To show you how ****ing retarded that argument is lets use this as an example.

If you give me $1,000 today if I ever win the lottery I will give you half of it. Would you take that deal? Why not? It only costs you a thousand bucks. And you can't prove that I won't win the lottery in the next year, so it could be true. The reality is if you took that deal you would have to be ****ing retarded to do so, no?

The subsurface of the moon if you dig deep enough is filled with hot lesbians. You can't prove it so it could be true.

The government causes earthquakes with a secret earthquake machine. You can't prove otherwise so it could be true. Better get your tin foil hat.

The fact is you can make any retarded argument you want and you are claiming that we don't have a right to call it retarded because as long as it can't be proven wrong it could be true. Its a stupid argument and if you are truly not understanding this you need to think a bit harder.

Hey, hey, let me give you some completely bullshit examples that clearly differ fundamentally from the actual issue at hand. Okay, well now that you see that I've given you a list hyperbolic fallacious analogies, will you concede that it doesn't negate anything you've said at all?

 

[Raziaar]

I didn't say to be super nice to them, all I said was to not be the biggest dickhead in the world about it. And yes, we were having a fairly legitimate discussion about the issue, which is what changes peoples minds. Until you came in and stunk up the place with your enormous blathering stinkhole you call a mouth which just ended the dispute by strengthening his resolve and irritated him to the point where he just left, leaving the matter unresolved. When was the last time calling someone "****ing retarded" helped your cause? I bet it was back in junior high school with your idiot friends thinking you're so cool now for saying such a 'ballsy' thing. If you think you have any such friends here on hl2.net, I'm afraid you're sorely mistaken.

Well said Krynn.

 

[Jintor]

I for one would love to continue this discussion sans the name calling.

I appreciate that you feel strongly about this, No Limit, but being that confrontational about this sort of thing is just counter-productive.

 

[Tyguy]

come on guys, we're all friends here...now shake hands

 

[No Limit]

If this discussion wasn't about christianity but about Islam if I had said "thinking you will get 72 virgins for blowing yourself up is ****ing retarded" nobody would even think twice about that statement. But when I applied it against christianity suddenly I'm a total dickface (love that term BTW).

The point is wether you believe that blowing yourself up will get you 72 virgins or wether you believe that Jesus Christ was God's son who died for your sins your beliefs are both totally insane. We saw the argument boil down to "i believe it because I believe it". I do not take this issue lightly and I love to provoke Christians. Is that the right way to go about it? I don't see why not when being nice to them leads to the exact same road. But with that said I have no problem discussing the facts even if I'm a bit dickish in the process, the problem is these people do not want to discuss facts. You guys try to blame that blackout left this discussion on the fact I was mean by calling religion ****ing retarded. That's not why he left, my responses had nothing to do with it. He left because he couldn't address simple questions wether those questions came from me, Stern, Eejit, Tyguy, and countless other members that challanged him on the most basic questions.

Funny thing is you can call lots of things ****ing retarded and nobody gives a shit. Muslims. Members of the tea party. Sara Palin. Etc, Etc, Etc. But if you say it about Christianity suddenly you're an asshole that turns people away. Give me a ****ing break. I never called anyone in this thread retarded, infact I made clear that I do not believe christians are retarded. But I did call the religion that, because that's exactly what it is. And otherwise smart people fall for this bullshit for reasons I can't understand (none of us do).

 

[No Limit]

Hey, hey, let me give you some completely bullshit examples that clearly differ fundamentally from the actual issue at hand. Okay, well now that you see that I've given you a list hyperbolic fallacious analogies, will you concede that it doesn't negate anything you've said at all?

But they don't differ. You have absolutely no proof that if you are gay you will burn in hell for eternity. Or that if you pray you will go to heaven for eternity. The same goes for hot lesibians burried deep inside the moon. Your excuse for why religion might be rational is that we can't prove that it's not. That's called proving a negative which is not a valid argument, EVER. You are sitting here judging that Jesus Christ being lord and savior dying for our sins is more realistic than hot lesbians in the moon, but you don't have any evidance for eighter. So what are you making that judgement on? They are both based on total bullshit.

 

[Stigmata]

If this discussion wasn't about christianity but about Islam if I had said "thinking you will get 72 virgins for blowing yourself up is ****ing retarded" nobody would even think twice about that statement. But when I applied it against christianity suddenly I'm a total dickface (love that term BTW).

That's completely unfair for two reasons. One, it's tactless, and I can't believe you expect a rational debate to spring forth from insults and whitewashing. Two, it's generalising, assuming that someone adheres to extremist viewpoints simply because they adhere to the title. All this does is project an image of willful ignorance and unchecked aggression, which are not exactly the best qualities to display when you're trying to get someone to see something your way.

I think Christianity is a monumentally misguided and stupid set of beliefs. I don't think Christians are stupid, on an individual level. This is the distinction that will make or break your argumentative success.

 

[15357]

No Limit, the belief in God is kinda like a political belief, like that misguided thing about how "free speech" should be a right.

Believing in freedom of speech and believing in God are the same thing, albeit with slight variation in the degree of retardation.

If God was retarded, No Limit, if God himself (I was joking, btw) was retarded, that would actually justify many things.

 

[Krynn72]

If this discussion wasn't about christianity but about Islam if I had said "thinking you will get 72 virgins for blowing yourself up is ****ing retarded" nobody would even think twice about that statement. But when I applied it against christianity suddenly I'm a total dickface (love that term BTW).

The point is wether you believe that blowing yourself up will get you 72 virgins or wether you believe that Jesus Christ was God's son who died for your sins your beliefs are both totally insane. We saw the argument boil down to "i believe it because I believe it". I do not take this issue lightly and I love to provoke Christians. Is that the right way to go about it? I don't see why not when being nice to them leads to the exact same road. But with that said I have no problem discussing the facts even if I'm a bit dickish in the process, the problem is these people do not want to discuss facts. You guys try to blame that blackout left this discussion on the fact I was mean by calling religion ****ing retarded. That's not why he left, my responses had nothing to do with it. He left because he couldn't address simple questions wether those questions came from me, Stern, Eejit, Tyguy, and countless other members that challanged him on the most basic questions.

Funny thing is you can call lots of things ****ing retarded and nobody gives a shit. Muslims. Members of the tea party. Sara Palin. Etc, Etc, Etc. But if you say it about Christianity suddenly you're an asshole that turns people away. Give me a ****ing break. I never called anyone in this thread retarded, infact I made clear that I do not believe christians are retarded. But I did call the religion that, because that's exactly what it is. And otherwise smart people fall for this bullshit for reasons I can't understand (none of us do).

Oh look at No Limit! Hes such a victim! We would have made these posts against you in any of those cases you suggest, if we were having a civil discussion that you ruined. Its one thing so say "Tea Party members are ****ing retarded" when just normally posting with no Tea Party members in sight. Its another when we're actually having a discussion with someone from the other side. We don't get that very often here on hl2.net, so naturally we don't like it when you barge in mouthing off your inflammatory remarks and ruined the whole damn thing.

And before you go "oh I SEE SO ITS OK UNLESS WE'RE TALKING THEN?!?!?!"

No. We just ignore you usually. Every time I've seen you in a thread about religion I ended up thinking less of you. I just don't point it out, because it doesn't usually bother me. This time it did.

 

[Jintor]

I think Christianity is a monumentally misguided and stupid set of beliefs. I don't think Christians are stupid, on an individual level. This is the distinction that will make or break your argumentative success.

This.

No Limit, the belief in God is kinda like a political belief, like that misguided thing about how "free speech" should be a right.

Oh, that Numbers! *laugh track*

 

[Danimal]

I called you an asshole before the whole thing started, and you're kidding yourself if you don't think you earned it then. Throughout this whole thing you've been the most obtuse, condescending, point missing poophead I've ever had the misfortune of arguing with. I directly went through every single point you made and responded in kind with a counterargument. Half the time I daresay you didn't even bother to read more than I small chunk of what I wrote and then you usually narrowed all my ideas down into a single point which usually missed what I actually said by as wide a margin as possible. You don't take the time to explain yourself or understand others, always prompting for the oh so compelling "I mean come on, that's ****ing retarded" no matter how many times I explained to you my reason for disagreeing, you never felt the need to actually respond to that.

This paragraph, right here, sums up No Limit's exsitance on the internet.

 

[15357]

Oh, that Numbers! *laugh track*

I'm just trying to show him that all "beliefs" are fundamentaly the same; they all depend on what sets of ideals you have.

 

[Yuri]

The point is the bible is supposed to be infalible. No matter how moderate or how extreme of a christian you are in the end your religion is based around this book. Without it you wouldn't be a christian. Yet the entire book is filled with bullshit that no sane person could believe. So why in the world would you base your world view on such a book even if you are picking and choosing what you will believe?

Different levels of extremists and moderates have different levels of how ****ing retarded their beliefs are. But in the end they are still ****ing retarded because they are based on a book that no sane person could take seriously because it is filled with countless errors yet it is supposed to be the word of God.

What legitimate philosophies? That you shouldn't kill and rape? That you should treat people good? You need the bible to tell you that? Or is it the part that says you should hate homosexuals? Or the part that says you shouldn't eat shell fish and slavery is perfectly ok?

Out all those you pick the ones that make sense and then ignore the ones you don't think make sense. So why do you need the ****ing book in the first place? In the end you are deciding how you will live your life yourself ignoring much of the book anyway.


No, it represents the bible which is the basis of their religion. If your religion is based on a book that can't be taken seriously why do these people take it seriously skimming over the parts they don't like while insisting the parts they do like must be true. And no it's not intolerant or bigoted. Do you consider people that call the tea party ****ing retarded bigoted? No? Why not?

Anyway this is a lot of writing for the morning, I rushed through it. Im gonna get some work done now.

Everything you have pointed out about religion is anecdotal and does not and cannot represent all religion. Here, I'll do this.

Religion:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

It doesn't matter how many examples of immoral activities or ignorant thought can be attributed to a religion. There is no way to state that "religion is retarded" without being disrespectful to legitimate belief systems and moral codes which individuals and groups have set up. It is offensive and intolerant, and there's never a place for it.

But the argument has moved on, and instead you are now invalidating sections of the Bible, concluding that these fallacies make Christianity invalid. Good question: Why would Christians base their faith on a book with sections they ignore, sections which can be undeniably awful? I think this can be compared to other respected forms of thought, from scholars, scientists, philosophers, or polititians. Usually, no one agrees entirely what is said or taught by any of these people, so why should a religious text which includes MANY sections from MANY authors be an exception? I think most Christians don't rely on the Bible alone, but rather the teachings and interpretations of their church and community, saying that every Christian is only a Christian if they strictly adhere to every word of the Bible is just untrue.

I've avoided the argument about the validation of deities, but it may be relevant to the original dispute. I think you may define religion as a literal belief in a supernatural being. This is probably true of many people, but others may instead think of their deity, or fantastical religious stories, in a metaphorical sense. Maybe God represents their conscious and tells them to stay humble, while a story about a superhero getting his hair cut reminds people that bitches be schemin', watch yo back.

But seriously, I think you take religious beliefs too literally and stereotype based on ignorant and malicious people.


Stern didn't respond, so...
WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF THE ORIGINAL IMAGE?

 

[Danimal]

^ Word.

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

come on guys, we're all friends here...now shake hands

shake dix

 

[Stigmata]

This is an accurate interpretation of No Limit's argumentative style.

 

[Jintor]

I'm just trying to show him that all "beliefs" are fundamentaly the same; they all depend on what sets of ideals you have.

I'd like to think that there's a universal set of human rights we all agree that people should have, but alas, you are correct.

 

[No Limit]

I think Christianity is a monumentally misguided and stupid set of beliefs. I don't think Christians are stupid, on an individual level. This is the distinction that will make or break your argumentative success.

Which is exactly what I said.