In other words an I have friends talk… for sure he has never even come close to discrimination, that is unless he was on the giving end.
Of course not. You don’t hate the sinners, you just hate the sin. Just like I said. You’re no different from the people you’re attacking; just flip-sides of the same coin.
And yes, your disrespect of Christians and Muslims most definitely is intolerance, the same way that anti-gay bigots are being intolerant when they say that homosexuality is a mental illness and they’re trying to “help” the sinners lead a better life with their intolerance and insults. I honestly see no difference between you and them at all.
My only hope is to get you anti-religious bigots to stop making tolerant atheists like me look bad. Because I don’t care what someone believes as long as they aren’t hurting anyone else, and say the same thing to bigots that I’m saying to you. Your desire to insult them and their beliefs doesn’t help anything besides maybe making yourself feel better. But it only makes the rest of us look like jerks.
Ok, then you need to revise your claim, since many religions don’t believe that. In fact, there are many Christians who believe that it’s how you act that determines whether you go to Heaven or Hell and not belief. And then of course, there are religions that don’t have an after-life, like Buddhism. So you earlier said that all religions are a force for intolerance and hate, and you’ve now already revised that to just be the ones that punish sinners for not believing. That’s a big difference.
Moreover, I think you’re missing the point, since they aren’t saying they’re the ones who make the determination of who gets punished. They believe their god does this, so you’re attacking them for what they’ve been told their god will supposedly do. And hey, what if they’re right? If Yahweh or Allah really will punish you for not believing in them, are Christians or Muslims part of an evil force simply because they properly understood what happens when we die? That’d be like if I warned you not to put your finger in an electrical socket and you then blamed me for getting shocked. Not that I’m saying Yahweh is real, but I can’t prove he’s not, so why attack someone for believing something that might be true?
And of course, you’re stuck with the hypocrisy of doing exactly what you’re attacking them for doing, because you’re attacking them for what they believe and not what they do. But if you think it’s wrong of them to say that you’re evil for not believing, then that also means you’re wrong for saying they’re evil for believing. How is this any different, besides that they believe you’ll be punished after you die for being evil, while you’re saying we need to make them stop believing these things while they’re still alive? i fail to see the difference.
And honestly, I can tell exactly where this conversation is going, and you’d just be better off if you just said: People who do bad things are bad and people who do good things are good. Because there are good and bad people in every group, and you have to judge people based upon what they do and not what they believe. And like I said, people create their god in their own image; and if someone is intolerant and hateful, they’ll be that way regardless of their religion. So you can rail against religion all you want, but even if you converted everyone to atheism it won’t change a damn thing. Because it’s not religion that makes people good or bad, it’s good and bad people who make religion that way.
Dear Allegra Kirkland. I don’t want to watch O’Reilly. Doing that is your job.
Again, attacking religion and not believers. Yes, this is exactly like a Christian who says that they love the sinner and hate the sin. Yes, by attacking the beliefs of people I am acting in similar ways to believers. I don’t attack Christians for saying that. I also will fully acknowledge the argument that my belief that religion is evil is a belief, and thus a religion, etc. etc.
I guess, what I am trying to say, is that despite the fact that I despise religion, I think the best approach to Syrian refugees is to welcome them with loving arms. Despite the fact that I feel that the world would be a better place without Christianity or Islam, I still count many Christians amongst my friends.
In short, despite this rant about beliefs, and my opinion that having opinions on religions is fair, we almost certainly have no difference of opinion on policy. In light of that, I am sorry for coming across as a dick.
He’s already found it, and it pays him very well teaching the “unsophisticated thinkers” how to boil their blood and frost their asses.
Refugees and sophisticated thinkers.
2 Likes
It’s like Farkas lecturing little kids on how to avoid bloody noses.
1 Like
Southern or American Baptist?
1 Like
Wow. That actually worked out better than I anticipated. But just so you understand, the problem with what you’re doing is that you can’t separate someone from their belief or lifestyle. So when someone attacks homosexuality as a mental illness, they’re attacking the person because that’s who they are. Similarly, you can’t say that a serial killer is a good person besides the fifty people he raped and murdered, because he’s still a person who raped and murdered fifty people and therefore not a good person. So if you’re denouncing someone’s religion, lifestyle, or choice of murders; you’re also denouncing who they are.
And the point remains: You should judge people based upon what they do, period. And moreover, you should judge them as individuals and not on the group they’re in. Believe it or not, but Catholics don’t reject science and they’re one of the biggest religions in the world. Yet they’ve supported evolution for years and also accept the Big Bang. And the main difference is that they say God caused it to happen, and science can’t prove otherwise. I’ve also seen Hindus make the same claim, accepting the proof of science and then crediting it all to their gods.
And I personally don’t have a problem with that. If someone teaches their kids that God created everything in six days and evolution is a trick from the Devil, that’s a problem since it’s in defiance of known reality. But if someone accepts science and then says their god is the one who made it happen, I can’t prove otherwise and don’t really have a problem with that…just as long as they don’t expect it to be taught in school. And that’s because my attitude is that people can do whatever they want, as long as they’re not hurting others. Life’s too short to go around pissing people off needlessly.
Lancing it is much quicker and painless!
I’d like to see a 10,000 or more Native Peoples’ March on the Washington NFL team’s headquarters and stadium during a nationally broadcasted game!
Nah, lecturing is easyer, and I’ve got better things to do with my time. Besides, they don’t pay me enough to care, only to see and talk to them!
I see. I guess the problem I have is that I see no difference between the Jesuit priest who taught me evolution’s belief in a god and that of Ben Carson, who believes God made the world in six days. It all just ends up being degrees of magical thinking, all to justify a system of obedience.
My broader point is that “loving the sinner and hating the sin” is not only acceptable, but necessary. To use the example you brought of the Christians who feel homosexuality is wrong. If they truly loved the sinner, they would act like my late grandmother-in-law. A lifelong, devoted Catholic, she felt and said on occasion that homosexuality was wrong. She still welcomed into her house her son’s husband, and visited them frequently. This is what it means to love.
I truly believe that religion, and Islam in particular, is wrong. However, I welcome refugees with open arms, and would certainly welcome them to live in my neighborhood.
Why can’t Christians do the same?