14140 pts · February 29, 2016
Hopefully there’s an election in 2029.
I reject your accusations of bigotry, I’m against certain ideas, not certain peoples. Your accusations of anti-theism are valid though. Superstition is a shackle, chaining us to hierarchies and traditions of our ancestors. There are lessons to learn from religion, but some of what’s to learn, is when to put it aside. Monies spent perpetuating religions charities and attrocities are inseparable. "Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest"
Glad to hear you’re not religious.Good on you. No, not solely religion. Sure greed and hate play their part, but the actual resources are incidental. Religion authorizes these groups to treat outsiders as less than human. If their mission is righteous in their gods eyes, who can tell them what crimes are taboo. The pacifists and other nominal believers lend an air of reasonability to the zealots, but either explicitly or implicitly, every dollar donated validates and perpetuates the cycle.
I will expand my statement. If all the people in the world, who believe in gods and ghosts and demons and Armageddon, etc., would fucking grow up and overcome these childish fears, we wouldn’t be heading towards WWIII, and this world would be a better place.I’m sorry you only want the shiny happy bits of your religion, but with that comes a shitload of baggage. Abrahams 3 have been squabbling over Jerusalem for centuries, and every donation to their organizations, funds the fighting further.
Yep, all adherents to the abrahamic faiths are irrational in their belief in the supernatural. It isn’t bigoted to condemn irrationality. I’m not condemning people because of the religion they belong to, I’m condemning the irrational beliefs that lead to membership in these religions. I’ve explained it several times now. You might have recognized that if you weren’t irrational yourself. Maybe that horse kicked you in the head after it removed its limb.
My claim is that religious extremism adds an element of irrationality to humanity’s struggle for freedom. This article, about Israel blocking Palestinians from their “holy” site, is a perfect example of this. Your unwillingness or inability to understand this, points to you holding these extremist views as well. I don’t expect a biased individual like yourself to be able to admit you’re in the wrong, but any honest person unfortunate enough to read your drivel will certainly recognize it.
Right?! I like how I’m not a credulous buffoon too. If only more people cared about the truth of their beliefs. You’ve almost got it figured out though, you’ve just stated it backwards. Supernatural claims are not irrational just because I don’t believe them. I don’t believe supernatural claims because it is not rational to do so.Just because a belief is commonly held doesn’t mean it is rationally held. The more you are convinced of an irrational belief, the more extreme your position.
The beliefs in the holiness of certain books and the divinity of certain individuals are common characteristics uniting and defining the abrahamic faiths. These beliefs are wholly unwarranted, irrational, and to the extent each individual is actually convinced, extremist. I’ll leave you now, to ponder these things further, on this day when the Christians celebrate the return of their magic zombie savior.
Every member of an abrahamic faith, holds unwarranted, irrational, extremist, beliefs. Some are more extreme than others.
No. As we’ve agreed, there are other paths to extremism besides religion. But yes, being non religious does mean not being a religious extremist. A person can still hold other extreme positions, such as belief in a flat earth. Yes, the definition of an extremist is, “one who holds extreme or fanatical views.” The commonality of a particular belief has no bearing on the rationality of said belief either. I’m criticizing unwarranted belief, not “blaming whole groups for the actions of a few.”
I know that you never said i claimed all religious folk are murderers. I’m pointing out your bad analogy. That claim would be analogous to claiming all immigrants were murderers. A better analogy to “religious belief is irrational” might be “belief in the flat earth is irrational,” both are certainly true.Like I did say, of course not all extremism is religious, but to the extent one is religious, is the extent to which one is an extremist.Belief in the supernatural is an extreme position.
Your example would be analogous if I had claimed that the religious were all murderers, but no, I’m claiming they are irrational, and shouldn’t act childish. Of course extremism isn’t monopolized by religion, but one’s extremism is directly proportional to their religiosity. And to that degree, there’s some extremism inherent in religion. Not every member of the Catholic church would openly support priest molestation, but every cent donated to that organization continues to tacitly support it.
The struggle for resources is inherent to life on earth, but religious extremism adds an element of irrationality to this struggle that precludes compromise.
Perhaps if each side didn’t think they alone were divinely entitled to those resources, they could all come to an equitable agreement, like rational adults.
You’ve missed my point. It is the religious mindset that’s causing this petty squabble over a specific patch of desert.Cult fanatics are dangerous, whether or not their beliefs include a deity.
Or religion.
Perhaps if all adherents to the abrahamic faiths would fucking grow up, we wouldn’t be headed towards WWIII!
*alleged chosen ones
These two groups are not mutually exclusive
It might be free healthcare, but it isn’t good healthcare. Check out this video, "john oliver prison healthcare" https://share.google/oBfSE3L59bDDpXzCd
My neighbor and I are cool. We respect each other’s right to peace on their own property. We don’t complain about the other’s loud music, unless it’s at a bad time. He is particular about our property line and I respect that.If one persons cooking upsets an entire neighborhood, it makes sense to ask the one to close their windows, but he’s not obligated to do so. An entire neighborhoods practices should not be dictated by a lone jogger either. At some point, it’s on him to change his routine.
The purpose of public spaces, are for the public to have a space to enjoy themselves however they see fit, within the confines of the law. Individuals are not owed a “safe space” wherever they may roam. I don’t need an ordinance to be considerate to my neighbor, but if there is no law, I am under no obligation to sacrifice my own comfort to someone else’s. My neighbor is welcome to go back indoors and shut their own windows. If we each care to be neighborly, we can come to terms on our own.
I understand your analogy, and I agree with it, in part. If there is a noise ordinance in my neighborhood, I may be limited in when I can practice my saxophone, but if no laws are violated, the opinions of passersby matter not. My analogy was meant to illustrate the point you’ve almost grasped. Yes, everyone has the right to lawful use of public spaces. I’ve just as much right to BBQ in a public park as I do to jog through it. And if I don’t like BBQ or joggers, I’m free to find another park.
Obviously there is a point when a line is crossed. No one is entitled to a world sanitized for their own pleasure either. In the scenario presented, an elderly shut in would have just as much right to ask that nobody jog past their home during dinner time, because it makes them sad to remember a time when they could walk to a restaurant. The jogger is welcome to confine his private activity to a home treadmill, and not burden public spaces with the accommodation of his whims.
Nobody owes you an aroma free neighborhood. If you don’t like the smell of someone’s cooking as you jog past their home, find a different route.
Those are the correct pronunciations, but they are both US states, instead of cities.
Yet
Deplorable Detestable Despicable Dimwit Doofus Dottard
I would ask for the pizza’s box instead, in both scenarios.
Hopefully there’s an election in 2029.
I reject your accusations of bigotry, I’m against certain ideas, not certain peoples. Your accusations of anti-theism are valid though.
Superstition is a shackle, chaining us to hierarchies and traditions of our ancestors. There are lessons to learn from religion, but some of what’s to learn, is when to put it aside.
Monies spent perpetuating religions charities and attrocities are inseparable.
"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest"
Glad to hear you’re not religious.
Good on you.
No, not solely religion. Sure greed and hate play their part, but the actual resources are incidental. Religion authorizes these groups to treat outsiders as less than human. If their mission is righteous in their gods eyes, who can tell them what crimes are taboo.
The pacifists and other nominal believers lend an air of reasonability to the zealots, but either explicitly or implicitly, every dollar donated validates and perpetuates the cycle.
I will expand my statement.
If all the people in the world, who believe in gods and ghosts and demons and Armageddon, etc., would fucking grow up and overcome these childish fears, we wouldn’t be heading towards WWIII, and this world would be a better place.
I’m sorry you only want the shiny happy bits of your religion, but with that comes a shitload of baggage. Abrahams 3 have been squabbling over Jerusalem for centuries, and every donation to their organizations, funds the fighting further.
Yep, all adherents to the abrahamic faiths are irrational in their belief in the supernatural. It isn’t bigoted to condemn irrationality. I’m not condemning people because of the religion they belong to, I’m condemning the irrational beliefs that lead to membership in these religions. I’ve explained it several times now. You might have recognized that if you weren’t irrational yourself.
Maybe that horse kicked you in the head after it removed its limb.
My claim is that religious extremism adds an element of irrationality to humanity’s struggle for freedom. This article, about Israel blocking Palestinians from their “holy” site, is a perfect example of this.
Your unwillingness or inability to understand this, points to you holding these extremist views as well.
I don’t expect a biased individual like yourself to be able to admit you’re in the wrong, but any honest person unfortunate enough to read your drivel will certainly recognize it.
Right?! I like how I’m not a credulous buffoon too. If only more people cared about the truth of their beliefs.
You’ve almost got it figured out though, you’ve just stated it backwards. Supernatural claims are not irrational just because I don’t believe them.
I don’t believe supernatural claims because it is not rational to do so.
Just because a belief is commonly held doesn’t mean it is rationally held.
The more you are convinced of an irrational belief, the more extreme your position.
The beliefs in the holiness of certain books and the divinity of certain individuals are common characteristics uniting and defining the abrahamic faiths. These beliefs are wholly unwarranted, irrational, and to the extent each individual is actually convinced, extremist.
I’ll leave you now, to ponder these things further, on this day when the Christians celebrate the return of their magic zombie savior.
Every member of an abrahamic faith, holds unwarranted, irrational, extremist, beliefs. Some are more extreme than others.
No. As we’ve agreed, there are other paths to extremism besides religion. But yes, being non religious does mean not being a religious extremist. A person can still hold other extreme positions, such as belief in a flat earth.
Yes, the definition of an extremist is, “one who holds extreme or fanatical views.” The commonality of a particular belief has no bearing on the rationality of said belief either.
I’m criticizing unwarranted belief, not “blaming whole groups for the actions of a few.”
I know that you never said i claimed all religious folk are murderers. I’m pointing out your bad analogy. That claim would be analogous to claiming all immigrants were murderers.
A better analogy to “religious belief is irrational” might be “belief in the flat earth is irrational,” both are certainly true.
Like I did say, of course not all extremism is religious, but to the extent one is religious, is the extent to which one is an extremist.
Belief in the supernatural is an extreme position.
Your example would be analogous if I had claimed that the religious were all murderers, but no, I’m claiming they are irrational, and shouldn’t act childish. Of course extremism isn’t monopolized by religion, but one’s extremism is directly proportional to their religiosity. And to that degree, there’s some extremism inherent in religion.
Not every member of the Catholic church would openly support priest molestation, but every cent donated to that organization continues to tacitly support it.
The struggle for resources is inherent to life on earth, but religious extremism adds an element of irrationality to this struggle that precludes compromise.
Perhaps if each side didn’t think they alone were divinely entitled to those resources, they could all come to an equitable agreement, like rational adults.
You’ve missed my point. It is the religious mindset that’s causing this petty squabble over a specific patch of desert.
Cult fanatics are dangerous, whether or not their beliefs include a deity.
Or religion.
Perhaps if all adherents to the abrahamic faiths would fucking grow up, we wouldn’t be headed towards WWIII!
*alleged chosen ones
These two groups are not mutually exclusive
It might be free healthcare, but it isn’t good healthcare.
Check out this video, "john oliver prison healthcare" https://share.google/oBfSE3L59bDDpXzCd
My neighbor and I are cool. We respect each other’s right to peace on their own property. We don’t complain about the other’s loud music, unless it’s at a bad time. He is particular about our property line and I respect that.
If one persons cooking upsets an entire neighborhood, it makes sense to ask the one to close their windows, but he’s not obligated to do so. An entire neighborhoods practices should not be dictated by a lone jogger either. At some point, it’s on him to change his routine.
The purpose of public spaces, are for the public to have a space to enjoy themselves however they see fit, within the confines of the law. Individuals are not owed a “safe space” wherever they may roam.
I don’t need an ordinance to be considerate to my neighbor, but if there is no law, I am under no obligation to sacrifice my own comfort to someone else’s.
My neighbor is welcome to go back indoors and shut their own windows. If we each care to be neighborly, we can come to terms on our own.
I understand your analogy, and I agree with it, in part. If there is a noise ordinance in my neighborhood, I may be limited in when I can practice my saxophone, but if no laws are violated, the opinions of passersby matter not.
My analogy was meant to illustrate the point you’ve almost grasped.
Yes, everyone has the right to lawful use of public spaces. I’ve just as much right to BBQ in a public park as I do to jog through it.
And if I don’t like BBQ or joggers, I’m free to find another park.
Obviously there is a point when a line is crossed. No one is entitled to a world sanitized for their own pleasure either. In the scenario presented, an elderly shut in would have just as much right to ask that nobody jog past their home during dinner time, because it makes them sad to remember a time when they could walk to a restaurant.
The jogger is welcome to confine his private activity to a home treadmill, and not burden public spaces with the accommodation of his whims.
Nobody owes you an aroma free neighborhood. If you don’t like the smell of someone’s cooking as you jog past their home, find a different route.
Those are the correct pronunciations, but they are both US states, instead of cities.
Yet
Deplorable
Detestable
Despicable
Dimwit
Doofus
Dottard
I would ask for the pizza’s box instead, in both scenarios.