Two Ex-GTMO Inmates Appear in AQ Vid

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
202

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

    1. and 6. are pretty clearly following my viewpoint. Only 1 of the 6 definitions follows yours
      No, I really do see cults of personality like Stalin, Mao or whoever as being just as bad as organised religions for exactly the same reasons.

  2. refers to two ‘mystic’ (to keep this short) systems as examples. I actually claim that one for my arguement.

  3. Doesn’t really define anything. “Religion is the practice of RELIGIOUS beliefs!” Ok…

  4. Is a problem for atheists. Why? Because, going by this, most (if not all) atheists are actually religious! If not religious in their atheism, maybe they’re religious in “fighting prejudice.”

That’s nonsense. If you want to hold to this as your definition, then you’re pretty much talking about every single non-apathetic person in the world when speaking of the religious.

The real point is that Stalin, Mao etc didn’t kill because of their atheism, Stalin went up against the church because it had power, not because of its beliefs.

No, they were not killed because of their beliefs, they were killed because of their power. They were powerful because they were a large group with pretty homogenous views who would follow what their leaders said over what the dicator said.

You’re trying very hard here not to use the word “beliefs.” “Homogenous views(go ahead, you can say beliefs)”…“over what the dictator said.” Why, what was the dictator worried about? So the dictator was worried that the “views” (beliefs. I swear, the word won’t hurt to say) of the [u]religious[/u] people would cause them to question what he said? I agree!

No I don’t think that the progress in the past was due to the religion, the religion was a biproduct of the human psyche at that stage. Without the religion progress would have been faster becuase people would have been raised to question things.

Based on? You just said religion was a byproduct of the human psyche “at that stage.” How could society have progressed any other way, then?

[/quote]

OK, I got it, you actually don’t know what a belief is. The point of belief is that you take something on faith without proof. This is why atheism is different, it says I don’t believe in God because there is no proof.

Homogenous views do not have to be beliefs, they can be based on something factual.

Society could have progressed in totally different ways had more people accepted that there is no god earlier. It didn’t and I am sure that if you were able to model it you would get religions far more often than you would get atheist rational groups.

This backed up by things like the cargo cults where you can actually see religions that have developed from nothing in the last 50-60 years.

203

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

You’re trying very hard here not to use the word “beliefs.” “Homogenous views(go ahead, you can say beliefs)”…“over what the dictator said.” Why, what was the dictator worried about? So the dictator was worried that the “views” (beliefs. I swear, the word won’t hurt to say) of the [u]religious[/u] people would cause them to question what he said? I agree!

No I don’t think that the progress in the past was due to the religion, the religion was a biproduct of the human psyche at that stage. Without the religion progress would have been faster becuase people would have been raised to question things.

Based on? You just said religion was a byproduct of the human psyche “at that stage.” How could society have progressed any other way, then?

OK, I got it, you actually don’t know what a belief is. [/quote]

So, what, the atheist tyrant took action because the religious were devoted to the scientific method? We’re talking about religious being persocuted here…

204

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Society could have progressed in totally different ways had more people accepted that there is no god earlier. It didn’t and I am sure that if you were able to model it you would get religions far more often than you would get atheist rational groups.[/quote]

Then what’s your point, if I may ask? If it wasn’t in human nature to progress in any other way, what are you basing your super society of atheists on on?

205

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
By the way push, you might want to review the bet, I wouldn’t want you to have to give up masturbating over your gun collection.

The claim was that more people had died under states claiming atheism than had died under states claiming Christianity not because of.

Take the bet then. I’m taking your wife to this resort, btw.

She’ll love it there. I bet she’ll text you some photos on her cell phone so you can vicariously take part in the festivities.

Don’t go ordering the viagra yet grandpa,

Send me the pic and I’ll tell you whether I’ll need the Viagra or not.

you obviously haven’t properly read the original claim. We are talking of deaths under a given ideology not due to.

Either way is fine with me. I win convincingly regardless.
[/quote]
Really? You think that if you add up everyone who has died in the last 1400 years in a Christian country you will get less than 180,000,000 people (a generous punt at how many people died under Mao, Stalin, Lenin and Pol Pot.)

Even going the other way the numbers are going to be pretty close with 25 million dieing in Africa due to Aids since 81, 4.5 millions dieing in a year in Ethiopia due to starvation, 10 million dieing during the crusades, another 10 million dieing during the Spanish Conquest,

A half million indigenous Brazilians being wiped out by the Portuguese Christians, man I am not digging that deep and the numbers are mounting up here.

LMAO! Man if you only knew her you would know how hard that made me laugh. Not bad schoolboy Spanish either? You speaky the lingo or is your nurse translating for you?

How comes you are having to fantasise about my wife to get some blood flowing in your withered aging todger? Pictures of big guns not doing it for you anymore?

206

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

You’re trying very hard here not to use the word “beliefs.” “Homogenous views(go ahead, you can say beliefs)”…“over what the dictator said.” Why, what was the dictator worried about? So the dictator was worried that the “views” (beliefs. I swear, the word won’t hurt to say) of the [u]religious[/u] people would cause them to question what he said? I agree!

No I don’t think that the progress in the past was due to the religion, the religion was a biproduct of the human psyche at that stage. Without the religion progress would have been faster becuase people would have been raised to question things.

Based on? You just said religion was a byproduct of the human psyche “at that stage.” How could society have progressed any other way, then?

OK, I got it, you actually don’t know what a belief is.

So, what, the atheist tyrant took action because the religious were devoted to the scientific method? We’re talking about religious being persocuted here…

[/quote]

No he took action with anyone who didn’t agree with his proto-religions beliefs regardless of what they were. It was not just the religious who were persecuted.

207

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Society could have progressed in totally different ways had more people accepted that there is no god earlier. It didn’t and I am sure that if you were able to model it you would get religions far more often than you would get atheist rational groups.

Then what’s your point, if I may ask? If it wasn’t in human nature to progress in any other way, what are you basing your super society of atheists on on?

[/quote]

That humans have a tendency to build religions to explain things but once you get past that tendency they are capable of some pretty amazing things.

To be fair even with those tendencies they are capable of amazing things but this is in spite of the religion not because of it.

Mozart’s requiem is an amazing piece of music because it is an amazing piece of music not because it is relgiously inspired.

208

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
It was not just the religious who were persecuted.[/quote]

Well, yeah. State Atheism wasn’t kind on anyone. But, it certainely did target the religious.

209

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
That humans have a tendency to build religions to explain things but once you get past that tendency they are capable of some pretty amazing things.

To be fair even with those tendencies they are capable of amazing things but this is in spite of the religion not because of it.

Mozart’s requiem is an amazing piece of music because it is an amazing piece of music not because it is relgiously inspired.

[/quote]

I guess we’ll have to disagree. I’ve already put forth what I wanted to say, and would rather not get caught up in repeating myself over and over.

212

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
He also praised Muslim beliefs and has been quoted as saying Germany would have been better off as an Islamic state than a Christian one.[/quote]

speaks volumes for Islam, I might add.

214

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

How comes you are having to fantasise about my wife to get some blood flowing in your withered aging todger? Pictures of big guns not doing it for you anymore?

I’m not fantasizing about your wife because you still haven’t sent the pics we agreed on to consummate the wager.

Now head over to the Sexy Wives thread on SAMA and do your duty. Me cuesta esperar. Apresurar.

By the fuckin way, what does AIDS and starvation in Africa have to do with the alleged malignant actions of Christianity? Although I don’t admire your intellect it still floors me with some of the crap you puke out here on PWI trying to make your various cases. You put yourself in the same ballpark as Lixy.[/quote]

I thought I was pretty clear on that one. The Catholic Church condems the use of condoms, this has made a bad situation far worse in Africa.

By the way, still think Hitler was an atheist?

“His life is only of this world, and his spirit is inwardly as alien to true Christianity as his nature two thousand years previous was to the great founder of the new doctrine.”

“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”

– Adolf Hitler

“[Hitler] carried within him its teaching that the Jew was the killer of God. The extermination, therefore, could be done without a twinge of conscience since he was merely acting as the avenging hand of God…”

– John Toland (Hitler’s biographer)

You make me laugh but you really are clueless.

215

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

LMAO! Man if you only knew her you would know how hard that made me laugh. Not bad schoolboy Spanish either? You speaky the lingo or is your nurse translating for you?

I actually have two nurses. Twins. Yes, they do a lot of translating for me.

[/quote]

Don’t look very Latina, very nice though! I hope you are taking your blood pressure tablets. You don’t want to go straining your ticker at your age.

217

Ok so the fact that he was raised a catholic and lived as a (pretty warped) Christian and claimed to be a christian throughout his life shouldn’t lead me to think he was a Christian then?

To be fair the guy was fruit loop nuts and inconsistant with what he said throughout his life, I don’t blame Christianity for that but to claim him as an example of the evils of atheism is a bit of a stretch.

218

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
I thought I was pretty clear on that one. The Catholic Church condems the use of condoms, this has made a bad situation far worse in Africa.[/quote]

And? Catholicism is a voluntary association. If one doesn’t buy into the idea that sex shouldn’t be seperated from the possibility of procreation, through outside means, one is free to screw whatever moves with or without contraception. Swiss Guard hit squads aren’t going to show up on one’s doorstep Taliban style.

The Hitler thing really doesn’t need to be argued. Nazism wasn’t a state religion or atheism. You could find members from atheists to the religious among the Nazis.

219

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
I thought I was pretty clear on that one. The Catholic Church condems the use of condoms, this has made a bad situation far worse in Africa.

And? Catholicism is a voluntary association. If one doesn’t buy into the idea that sex shouldn’t be seperated from the possibility of procreation, through outside means, one is free to screw whatever moves with or without contraception. Swiss Guard hit squads aren’t going to show up on one’s doorstep Taliban style.
[/quote]

I think you are missing the point, the catholic church which is the source of education for many in Africa is against condoms this is a problem in that men have unprotected sex with prostitutes or lovers pick up HIV then go back and give it to their wife who then has children born with HIV.

Obviously the message about condoms seems to be getting home a bit better than the no sex outside message but for the Catholic church to continue to preach nothing more than abstinance is either stupidity or callousness.

[quote]
The Hitler thing really doesn’t need to be argued. Nazism wasn’t a state religion or atheism. You could find members from atheists to the religious among the Nazis.[/quote]

But other people are arguing that it was state atheism.

220

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

I think you are missing the point, the catholic church which is the source of education for many in Africa is against condoms this is a problem in that men have unprotected sex with prostitutes or lovers pick up HIV then go back and give it to their wife who then has children born with HIV.
[/quote]

So Catholics must adapt their thinking to the consequences of other’s people risky behavior. No. Blame the people themselves. Also, is there a Catholic army keeping atheists from providing all this education and condoms galore?