‘Atheist Agenda’ Group Starts ‘Smut for Smut’ Campaign – myFOXphoenix.com: It’s part of a campaign called ‘Smut for Smut’ sponsored by the student group, ‘Atheist Agenda.’
“We are comparing their religious text to pr0n..” says group member Carlos Morales.
Oh, brother…
#79: Dr Dodd
“Well cry me a river you whiny little baby. What makes you think you are so special that everything should revolve around you?”
What a wonderful example of the tolerance that makes Christianity so attractive to non-believers.
I am sure that Jesus would have expressed himself in exactly those terms.
#79 – Dr Dodd,
… you might see past your own insecurity.
My insecurity??!!? That’s a good one coming from someone who believes that the supreme being, creator of the universe, needs the external validation of the sycophantic adoration of those he created.
Explain this to me, and try a little logic this time instead of platitudes with no relation to anything I’ve said.
Why would the supreme eternal being who is all knowing and therefore already knows the outcome of everything bother to actually create the physical universe instead of merely thinking about it, knowing the outcome, and determining that his knowledge of all eternity was good enough?
Why create the physical thing?
Logic please, you know logic, right? It’s the stuff you’ve failed to use in every single post on this thread thus far. You believe god gave you your brain. You must think there was some purpose for it beyond mere blind obedience.
So, why did god bother to create the physical universe when he already knew exactly in minute detail what the outcome would be?
#80-boobo-(Amusing if it weren’t so hateful, and as always, hypocritical.)
Is insults all you can manage? Maybe you can dust off the little gray cells and tell me where what I said is wrong?
Perhaps I ask too much or the impossible.
#81-fred-(What a wonderful example of the tolerance that makes Christianity so attractive to non-believers.)
You have a great economy of thought. I bet you never miss Oprah.
#82-Misanthropic Scott-(coming from someone who believes that the supreme being, creator of the universe, needs the external validation of the sycophantic adoration of those he created.)
You have this uncanny ability to come up with silly ideas then claim they are mine then argue against them.
This is no way to have a conversation.
Dr Dodd–do you not understand what a hypocrite is? Thats someone LIKE YOU who claims one thing but acts in another way.
Now, indeed, it may be “insulting” to be called a hypocrit but THE BASIS for that charge was included and that should be the “fact dispute” that you or I have wrong.
You claim to be a Christian, yet you show “no love” towards Scott. It would have been sufficient to disagree with Scott but you went to the personal. “I” can do that without being a hypocrit because I make no claim about loving my fellow man.
Too easy if you simply default to the “I’m not perfect” defense==THATS THE WHOLE POINT. YOU aren’t perfect, but further, you don’t even try to live up to it, to learn from it, to become a better person or to change what you think you believe in the failure to do so.
Scott also got a learning lesson. While he probably did not take terrible personal offense, having been the victim of such christian love for much of his life, still==its what we open ourselves up to when we offer any personal information on a blog. I avoid it not because I can be injured, I just don’t want the distraction from the point at hand.
You do this when you claim the “I”m a Christian” malarkey. You could make your point without that personal info, but you choose to include it==as a badge of honor of some sort I assume.
A badge you haven’t earned as demonstrated in this thread.
Scott–yea, the problem of evil in a universe knowingly created by the all good god. “He knows” but it is still our free will and “we” can still be punished for the universe god made. Again—the christian god, the most evil sack of shit ever created. The Dr D’s of the world are not surprising.
#83: Dr Dodd
“I bet you never miss Oprah.”
I’m sorry to disappoint you but you are wrong. I don’t even know what Oprah is. Whatever it is, I have neither seen nor heard it.
“You have a great economy of thought.”
I shall take that as a compliment, rather than the insult that I am sure you intended.
Since my heavy sarcasm appears to have passed you by, maybe I should be a little more explicit in my views.
Although I personally oscillate between agnosticism and atheism, I find the moral principles apparently expressed by Jesus in the new testament to be admirable and I’m sure that most humanists, of whatever flavor, would agree with me – whether Jesus actually existed or not is another question.
What upsets me, and apparently others on this thread, is the disparity between the ideas of love and tolerance expressed by Jesus and the words and actions of too many of those who pretend to be his followers.
To summarize my opinion of religion, I can do no better than to quote Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary:-
“RELIGION, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable.”
#83 – Dr Dodd,
#80-boobo-(Amusing if it weren’t so hateful, and as always, hypocritical.)
Is insults all you can manage?
Considering your comments to me, you should not be deriding anyone for being insulting to you.
You have this uncanny ability to come up with silly ideas then claim they are mine then argue against them.
This is no way to have a conversation.
OK. So, once again, way back to your own post to me, #27, tell me in your own words what you meant by this:
you lost and don’t even know it.
Did you mean that I’m going to hell? If so, did you not mean for not being a sycophant to your god? What exactly Dodd you mean by this? Be clear. Be specific.
#86,
Scott,
Hell can’t all that bad a place. So many people keep suggesting I visit it.
>> Misanthropic Scott said,
>> Eliminationist? Sorry, I won’t wear that moniker.
No need to keep apologizing. I may not be talking about you.
The atheist eliminationists are the ones who say crap like, “Religion needs to end for society to progress.” or “Religion is the biggest killer in the world. It should be outlawed.” etc.
You need to look no further than this blog to find these eliminationists.
Don’t get me wrong. I am by NO MEANS saying that atheists are the only eliminationists or even the worst of them (now that communism is mostly history).
I am saying some atheists are just another wing of the fundamentalist phenomenon that is overtaking the globe.
This may or may not be you.
#88 – Greg,
I don’t personally recall ever seeing such phrases on this site. I’m about as antitheist as anyone here. And, even I think the way to end religion is education and persuasion, never force. I also believe we should voluntarily choose extinction by attrition or at a minimum dramatically reduced numbers of humans. Unfortunately, for most complex life on this planet, neither of these is likely to happen.
#87 – Mr. Fusion,
If heaven is full of most of the people who are so sure that they and only those who believe exactly as they do are going there (e.g. born-agains), that would be hell enough for me.
Either way though, I expect the afterlife to be just like the beforebirth. As I was for the first 13.73 billion years (minus my age), so I expect to be until the universe dies a cold entropy death (or big rip, though I’m not sure how different those two would be, one just arrives faster, IMVHO).
#89-Misanthropic Scott- I think the way to end religion is education and persuasion.
Typical liberal.
#91 – Dr Dodd,
Typical liberal.
Is that your idea of an insult? I’m not 100% typical but am definitely a liberal. So, certainly no offense taken. If you want to insult me, you’ll have to work harder.
If you want to make your point, you’ll have to actually answer some questions when asked. But, you’re just interested in throwing shit out there and seeing what sticks.
You haven’t shown any evidence of the patience, intelligence, logic, rationality, or just general smarts to have an actual debate.
So, I’ll state it again. You think I’m going to hell because I don’t sycophantically adore your god. This does not make you a good Christian. It makes you pompous, holier than thou, and at least a little bit hateful.
Your god may not appreciate your taking of his job by sitting in judgment of others.
#92-Misanthropic Scott-You think I’m going to hell because I don’t sycophantically adore your god.
No, you will be judged by God on whether you accept or reject the free gift of salvation through the sacrifice of his Son Jesus Christ.
I personally don’t judge in the context you are referring. Fortunately, there is no Godly rebuke for stating personal opinion.
This I am more than happy to do.
#93 – Dr Dodd,
#92-Misanthropic Scott-You think I’m going to hell because I don’t sycophantically adore your god.
No, you will be judged by God on whether you accept or reject the free gift of salvation through the sacrifice of his Son Jesus Christ.
C’mon Dodd. Try just a modicum of logic please. How are these two statements different? What must one do to accept such a “free” gift? Spend every Sunday in Church? Confess one’s “sins” whatever sin means? Engage in ritual mock-cannibalism? (Don’t bite the host!)
Must one stop reading about evolution in your sect? How about the big bang? Are these threats to your insecure god or is s/he OK with them?
May one eat pork, shrimp, and lobster in your sect? How about meat on Friday, and if so, when did that change?
May I work for a bank in your sect or is money lending still outlawed?
Lastly, am I allowed to think in your sect? How about engaging my logic circuits? I bet not. In fact, given your statements so far on this thread, obviously not.
But, please, if you check back, do answer how the two statements above are different. That is the crux (so to speak) of this point.
#93: Dr Dodd
“No, you will be judged by God on whether you accept or reject the free gift of salvation through the sacrifice of his Son Jesus Christ.”
There is so much in that sentence that I don’t understand.
How do you know that I will be judged by God? Have you spoken with him/her/it? And don’t tell me that it says so in the Bible – that doesn’t help me in the slightest.
By the way, if I were a supreme entity that had built the universe and its contents, I should be most insulted to be referred to as “Him”, which is a sexual designation for one half of any animal species. Much more respectful would be “It”.
What is this free gift of salvation of which you speak? Salvation from what exactly?
As for “sacrifice of his Son Jesus Christ”, let us assume for one moment that some guy called Jesus actually existed about 2,000 years ago and was executed because he was apparently a nuisance to either the Romans or the Jews or both. Now, can you please explain to me, in terms that I can understand, what on earth that has to do with me in the year 2010 C.E.?
Finally, can you explain to me the detailed biology of the designation “Son of God”? Because that makes no sense to me whatever.
#94-Misanthropic Scott- am I allowed to think in your sect?
Well, you’re not thinking a lot now so anything would be an improvement.
>>What must one do to accept such a “free” gift?
A free gift is a free gift. The only thing required is to accept Christ. The rest of your list is optional.
As far as who is going to Hell I really can’t say. But, now that I think about it I probably haven’t done you any favors by telling you the secret of avoidance.
When your turn comes to stand in front of the “Big Guy” you now won’t be able to use the “I didn’t know” defense.
You gotta hate it when that happens.
#95-fred-How do you know that I will be judged by God? …And don’t tell me that it says so in the Bible – that doesn’t help me in the slightest.
Interesting deception. You want to stack the deck by disallowing the best history book of the day?
It’s like me asking you to prove the French Revolution happened without the benefit of a modern day history book.
Nice try though.
#96 – Dr Dodd,
Well, you’re not thinking a lot now so anything would be an improvement.
I’m not thinking??!!? You’ve piled crap on top of crap on top of crap without even successfully being able to interpret your own crap and answer specific questions about it.
I was wrong. God didn’t give you a brain. Nor did your genetics.
And, I’m not interested in using your didn’t know defense, which from everything you’ve said wouldn’t have worked no matter what. As I said, if I’m wrong, I’m going to try my best to punch your sadistic, literal bastard of a god in the nose.
#97 – Dr Dodd,
You want to stack the deck by disallowing the best history book of the day?
History book? Wow. You are about as far from reality as you can get.
So, the plagues were literally true in what passes for your brain? The parting of the sea?
This is your idea of history?
So, in your infallible bible, which story of the freeing of the Hebrew slaves is correct? The Moses story of Exodus? Or is the Tanakh correct in that Cyrus the Great freed the Hebrew slaves and gave them monotheism in the form of Zoroastrianism?
http://tinyurl.com/yfaarx4
What about the obvious contradiction that the bible states that the universe (and earth) were created after the rise of agriculture? What do you have to say about the historical accuracy of a book that puts the age of the earth as less than the age of agriculture?
What about the historical accuracy of the following?
Adam and Eve (the only two people on the planet) had two sons. The end.
How exactly do you explain the historical accuracy of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel with the observable fact that there actually are people on the planet today?
Think!! If you’re capable of it at all, think.
You have not done so on this thread yet.
#99: Scott
“How exactly do you explain the historical accuracy of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel with the observable fact that there actually are people on the planet today?”
Oh, that’s easy – it’s a bit like “tits all the way down”, except that here it is “incest all the way down”.