It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is There A Conspiracy Of Atheists To Overthrow Christianity?

page: 25
10
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Okay,
I concede,
You and Riley win.
I give up.
Fight is over.
Happy now?
Would you two please get off my back now, and find something else to do?




posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I formally apologize for having opened this thread topic and theproverbial can of worms that came with it.
Although to some degree, it has been very educational for me. Thanks to one member who accused Christians of having their heads buried in the sand and being readers and believers of only one book; I began a course of study that has led me into some of the most enlightening information of my life. This would include The Sumerian Texts, The Apocrypha and even some side studies into what various other religions believe and why. I, for one do not ever want to be considered ignorant or 'stuck-in-the-mud.
I even began to study evolution more thoroughly, the theory of Relativity, The Big Bang, etc.
I have been a busy girl. And it is all thanks to you guys, so this thread has not been a total loss for me. I have come away, far more educated. Has this thread made me want to scream and pull my hair out? Yes!
But I would also like to thank Madness and Riley for pointing out to me that there are more than one group of Atheists. I was ignorant of this fact. In the future I will strive to have my facts more in order before wildly posting, as I can see how it can be frustrating to those who do understand the other-side-of-the-coin.
My apologies if I have offended anyone. That was not my intention. At times when some of you thought I was trying to be offensive, it was actually my dry humor. Not everyone understands it, so I will try to keep that in check.
I hope to remain a long term member here and a mature one. So, I think this would be a good time for me to bow out of this thread.
I feel that AshleyD has done a wonderful job of giving mature and informative answers, and if she would like, I would be happy for her to continue doing so.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by sizzle
 


it's alright, we're all human on this board
...well, unless bigfoot is posting in the Crypto section without us knowing it.

apology accepted.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Mr. Harris has said "the foundation of all real science, is the very antithesis of religious faith." So what does Harris have faith in? Himself thats what. One can choose to have faith in Science as I do but Atheists like Harris go even further, they make Science something it can not be. That is a set of constructs that not only explain everything but prove it in the process.

How many times has Science made discovery that were disproved by Science years later. I still have faith in Science as I do in God but I WILL NEVER have faith in Religion. I am not now nor will I ever be the Christian other Christians want me to be which should give Atheists some idea what little chance they have getting any Christian the kind of human species they want them to be.

in his article titled "Science Must Destroy Religion", you will find even more dogmatism that any evidence that doesn't fit evolutions theory one does not change the theory but rather, proclaim that something is wrong with the evidence so they either manipulate it or use language defining it more fitting to the postulates for "chance" and "mutation" or they simply throw it out.

Worse has been done and all one has to do is re-call the "Piltdown man" caveman

Atheism has taken its cue's from its most vocal leaders and has a sneaky slimey stealth strategy for getting its followers into the mainstream of our politics, our Government and our Media. It has a liberal agenda


"making religious certitude look stupid will be exploited, and we'll start laughing at people who believe...We'll laugh at them in a way that will be synonymous with excluding them from our halls of power."


Harris also who has many Atheists as "groupie's" for the anti god movement, has made it more then "in style" to bash Christians, his paranoia, his hatred and "faith specific anger has been expressed in statements like this one he made recently

"some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them."


This is how they view us?

Perhaps if I were to corner Harris and ask him to elaborate being more specific, he would surely see why I was asking and most likely allude to muslim extremists, or at least the old standby "the crusades" or the "salem witch trials" where Religion was used once again and once again it wasn't MY religion and it wasn't GOD's fault.

When it comes to insulting GOD, Atheists find no shortage of excuses and question as many tenets of what They deem a God should be, asking questions about why a so called loving God would do this or that as if they knew anything about love in the first place as they insult mock and demean people of faith with there usual vitriol and "in your face" arrogance rich with as many expletives as one can imagine. Harris is one of this movements High Priestess and she has come within smelling distance if endorsing genocide of us who are Christians when he says such idiotic and plane stupid comments I would expect a little more intelligence a little more tolerance from the so called scientific community.

I submit that the over exagerated and bombastic trumped up, mocked up and embellished views we see so often expressed by Atheists, more specifically like Harris are, in fact "instructions" given as sophomoric opinions expressed by this "I, ME, MY" fundamentalist Atheist and you are no less the same as he is madd. Sam Harris has said so many vitriolic soundbytes I see so many atheists using as a mantra, that many wonder why it isn't proper to describe him as "a punch in the face waiting to happen"


Richard Dawkins, an extremist militant atheist, refers to, "religious idiots like Bush and anyone who voted for him." Most Atheist's who did vote for him, will naturally overlook the fact that he has called them an idiot too because it is the kind of convoluted logic they seem to espouse or to take from his own biology vernacular dissecting the comment with "he was talking about RELIGIOUS Idiots" so that doesn't mean me" Well I disagree, he was talking about people who voted for him, religious or not. So he has called a hell of a lot of people idiots.

Dawkins with his cute little brittish accent with its rich vocabulary and almost feminine sounding tone, waxing poetic has he ponitificates his explanation of evolution describing it as something beautiful something elegant like a sinnewy suspension bridge conjuring up images of the golden gate looking so majestic at dusk. He mesmorizes his audience and I am astounded by his command of the language, his clever wit and his incredibly astute sense of humor. This is not a man that one could overlook as no threat to the Christian.

He is EXTREMELY and I mean EXTREME IN THE STRONGEST SENSE OF THE WORD INTELLIGENT. No,, I am not one of his converts, I am simply being honest and anyone who is would agree, this man is one brilliant biologist. I have known many educated idiots and I'm sure most of you have too. This isn't an educated idiot, what he is however is an educated Atheist and that is where he makes the BIGGEST mistake in my opinion and ill borrow the Atheist own logic for keeping Religion out of Government, Atheism should be kept out of Science.

Not the people or the philosophy,, gee this is one time when what Atheism is or isn't really needs to be defined. I can say keep it out of science and I can just hear them arguing saying it isn't a philosphy,,where I would just answer WHAT EVER THE HELL IT IS, IF IT WAS NON THING THEN WHY ARE YOU TELLING ME WHAT IT ISN'T? It seems unless they can tell me what it is, exactly without opening a can of worms, WE will call it what we think it is. Some think it is a religion and others a philosophy while some here have called it a single position. I don't care what you call it, it has no business being an opinion then. If it is an opinion then it has no business being a science.

That is my point, that Atheism is inavariably tied to evoluton and evolution is Atheisms Science. A determined exercise to disprove god by attacking gods creations, downplaying them with words that make fun of there own science with words like "negative mutation" and "chance" or natural selection" rather then intended design" . That we came about by happenstance just an accident etc. Think about it?? Who would embrace such a thing and claim it as their own?

Well its terminology isn't really about making sense of egoistic praise of biology but more to insult it by going deeper and mocking creation by stealing its Gods copyright or his intellectual property and re-distributing it to the public domaine as junk that just happened without reason, without cause and without purpose. This isn't a problem for theists as the Atheist proclaim in so many attempts I have seen where we are seen as having to "depend on religion" for we are weak and just can't handle the fact that we just may be that un-important to nature. When ever I have said anything about Atheism's opinions about this or that, most arguments I get from them are "Atheism doesn't have an opinion etc. Well then neither does "Nature" and Neither does Biology. What it has is the same thing Atheists fear the religous right getting into our Politics has. It has INFLUENCE by the thoughts and ideas we have about life and our philosophy of life. That is why Atheism is nothing more then the Religion of evolution dressed up as the Science of Biology to discredit Gods creation. Well we can't say that MAN made the universe and Atheism will be DAMED if God is going to get the credit so lets just say it all "Just Happened" Nothing can be so absolutly assinine. It has to have an ego the size of Dawkins to even consider such a idea.

Dawkins is, in fact the most famous Atheist and is why he has worked so hard to create a monopoly on science that has stunted Sciences growth with the dogma of his religion of Atheism. I say when it comes to separation of Church and State, it will be Dawkins that has to be the biggest hipocrite, hiding behind a stealthy anonynimity of a religion that doesn't just claim it isn't a religion but INSISTS IN PROFUSE Anger, that it is in fact NOT a Religion!

Well,, IT IS, and if Atheism needs one thing whether they like it or not, they need handle then, they need to get a grip. I have been accused of "pushing my agenda to portray Atheists as a conspiracy of sorts to overthrow religion.

Let me prove this once and for all using Atheism most vocal wishes, requests for mankind and show you just HOW this is happening. Whether it is by happenstance or by those instrumental in an orchestrated, pre meditated plan to "get religion", Conspiracy can just "happen" I mean why not? Life just "happened" didn't it? As with many things we have seen such as fashion, hair styles, political trends that seem to start with a dynamic personality or figure, they begin to take on a life of there own and invraiably they have converts, followers, fans, you call it what you like, a group of like minded people who have it in common, have what it stands for in common and has a common enemy in common if in fact there is an enemy. It doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to figure out you can have many perpetuating a cause and a creed using people like this as "un-knowing" agents of a conspiracy merely by giving them a reason to or something to fear. It has been done before and Religion was the vehicle to use. I submit that in ANY case for this phenomena to take place, it isn't the religion that is at fault or the political agenda. It is the fear or many times a false flag that fuses that group to a common cause and a creed. Large Religious groups were used like this many times through out history. Rome manipulated the Christian to war because they were a group with a common creed and until people like boniface and constantine were used and manipulated. I see Atheists being used and manipulated the same way.

As a people of the human race, I have nothing against them, but I see them going down a road, Religion has already been down before. I see the making comments I will use against them and double standards I will use against them as I see them used against us. I see them on a daily basis borrowing the indignant intolerance and anger expressed as fashionably in style to act cool as the Atheist sam Harris "suggest" as wouldn't it be cool if an Atheist had the guts to say to the faithfull an IN YOUR FACE reply that you are proud of your athesism. Now readers like that who think mmmmmm Ill make Sam proud and BE that kind of Atheist,, yeah yeah I AM SICK OF THEISTS FORCING THERE G_D DAMN RELIGION DOWN OUR THROATS AND I AM NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!"

Someone once said that love songs are for the broken hearted. That is because they can wallow in them. They identify with them and they buy them.

The same goes for the books on Religion. Most people who are not religious, simply won't have an interest in buying them. The sam is true for the this new reason to be so determined in NOT believeing in something.

Atheist buy these books and they give them a reason to feel they are not alone and an excuse to see themselves as victims. While most here may deny it,, I encourage the to say so as i have alreadu copied an entire database of comments made here that make it a fact of there own complaints.

They are given a reason to think of themselves as "intelligent" and it must be true I mean I AM an atheist they think? and HE IS a well known scientist?

Then they are even given a comparison to not only measure how much better they are but how much smarter they are! Remember, this is a group that truly was seen as somewhat of an out cast and to some extent it would seem,, are asking for it to be treated that way again. I know this much,, it is going to be a them or us condition of that fight that is brewing currently.

They are given examples using their Science which keep in mind is deeply rooted in not only a reason to invent such a thing to explain away God as myth but is still enjoying a well guarded monopoly for its homefield advantage to influence its most impressionable recruits,, OUR CHILDREN. Kids want to be accepted they want to be liked they need self esteem and nothing can do that like being smarter then the dork Christian faither in a comparison of Science and the Bible to explain life. First, the Bible isn't a Science book. It is the explanation of the personality of a living God. It is poetry, philosophy and a warning from a God that explains why we will never be able to meet him on our own terms including the reason why but it offers a way to KNOW him via that which separates us is what brings us together and can only be described as an extention to or more then natural, anotherwords "Supernatural"


To say that faith is stupid and that the bible asks us to believe in things by faith is BUNK. it is demonstrated time and again that Faith is to know something so well you can have faith in it to begin with. They will add words to it like "Blind Faith" this however is not how our Bible functions. An example is the resurrection, The Apostle Paul says, at the time of his writings, when eyewitnesses were still alive, "He appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep" (1st Corinthians 15:6). Paul is challenging them to go prove it yourself go see and ask them.

These people not only now think they have a intellectual advantage but are encouraged to "rub it in our faith's" Yet Science and in particular "Biology and its central theme "evolution" is by defintion, contingent on faith whatever your core belief is but more then that IT DEPENDS ON IT.


“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural…we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” (Harvard University Professor of zoology and biology - Richard Lewontin):


Having said that I am expecting to have my assertions "corrected" by Atheist's who refuse to be corrected when it comes to their deliberate mission to attack and decontextual the Bible in their efforts to confuse and ridicule its readers of faith.

Harris and Dawkins are making lots of noise and are having an effect on young people that if they are not now the Christian right would be alarmed at such statements

in a quote from

"According to a recent Newsweek poll, only 37% of Americans would vote for an otherwise qualified atheist for president." Yet, what is his response? Elsewhere, he looks forward to a time when "making religious certitude look stupid will be exploited, and we'll start laughing at people who believe…We'll laugh at them in a way that will be synonymous with excluding them from our halls of power" (emphasis added).[iii] Actually, Mr. Harris must be thrilled at the progress that atheists are making since a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll conducted in March 2007 has 48% answering "Yes" 48% answering "No" and 4% answering "Don't know/other." Apparently, religious people should not keep atheists from our halls of power but atheists should keep religious people from our halls of power—two wrongs... www.squidoo.com...


I got to get to work here I have a big meeting to attend, the atheist chapter in my area are going to adopt some plans for city council meetings. I just can't wait to hear this one. I crack up being the mole in that idiotic group of reprobates. Someones got to do it.

Call it a mission from God if you like Madd


- Con


[edit on 15-2-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by sizzle
 


it's alright, we're all human on this board
...well, unless bigfoot is posting in the Crypto section without us knowing it.

apology accepted.


Oh Brother,, umm just what do you think she is apoligising for ?

I ask because I have no idea and won't accept her apology as none is needed she has nothing to be sorry about. It would have been big of you to say the same thing.

Desperate as it is for you to accept it,, I realize saying she has no reason to apologize doesn't send the same message does it, I mean after all

Your posts don't do FOR the Christian they do TO the Christian

she has done nothing TO you, yet you accept her apology.

it is again,,

typical

- Con

[edit on 15-2-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Atheists don't need to conspire to overthrow Christianity... the extremeists and funnymentalists are (as in Islam) doing a wonderful job of it on their own.

[edit on 15-2-2008 by grover]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by grover
 


Hey there good buddy..........

Look at the numbers of god-haters vs Christians in the media. There is a conspiracy of anti-GOD in the media. The mighty tyrany of the minority with big mouths, big hate, an agenda, and access to the masses.......



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Apologies for not reading the thread, but Atheism to me seems like the new 'fad' among religious types (the ones that want popularity and power) - as after all, if you're an atheist you not only get to debate on issues of religion, but you get the freedom of not being subservient to a set code of beliefs (well, other than that God doesn't exist).

It's in my earnest opinion that there may indeed be a conspiracy, but when i look at things realistically it seems it would be extremily disorganised - kinda like autonomous political activists in that respect.

Then again, perhaps there is some means for groups of atheists to communicate that i am not aware of (although i have my suspicions, mostly to do with the internet).

It would be reasonable to assume that if it turned out that atheists indeed were using the internet as a method of directing their so-called... Well, what could you call it?

An Ideology?

I think an Ideology will do for now - but anyway;

Directing their so-called Ideology, then it might turn out that christians would either;

A: Call for the internet to be restricted, therefore giving the political establishment an appropriate reason to start nationalising (or federalising) the ISPs.

or

B: Call for the internet to be boycotted, which would result in no more christians for the online atheists to bi#ch @.

My point is that if there is an atheist conspiracy, i don't really think i can see what the BENEFIT of it would be.

p.s; let this be a lesson - look before you leap.



[edit on 15-2-2008 by Throbber]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Faith is so anachronistic it's not even funny any more. Science doesn't pretend to be perfect, as religion does. Science wants things it has discovered to be debunked, as it means we're learning and getting closer to the truth of the world. Religion was first constructed as an emotional and legal crutch of societies, in order to keep people in check. Read the bible and see if it doesn't read like a list of things one should and shouldn't do, with the courts and jails replaced by God and hell.

Humanity doesn't need religion. Humanity needs science. The sheer amount of progress humanity has made since religion started to take more of a back-seat in society (and especially the classroom) should be quite a testament to that.

You don't need faith in science for it to make sense - it's logical in its nature and action. Nothing is taboo in science. It's not contradictory in nature. It doesn't teach hatred or bigotry, and it doesn't judge. Religion is the opposite.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by dave420
 


I want to make a comment on your paragraph on progress, purely because i have a special interest in progress and the debate would be pleasurable.

In medieval times, when lords and ladies wooed one another and brought stampeding terror to peasant-folk all over europe, the only relatively safe place to be was in a church, abbey or monastary - otherwise you literally belonged to your local land-owner.

In those times, Religion really did give people a sense of freedom.

Not only that, but it also contributed quite dramatically by having followers scribe down local events, so it did miracles for the academic field of history.

Religion in itself has nothing wrong with it - it can provide as much knowledge as science does in some instances.

I don't disagree that science has provided us with far more technological advances than religion has, but a lot of the medieval mathematicians found sanctuary in the folds of religious authority - if they didn't, they'd probably find themselves making seige engines for some ambitious lord or other.

If it wasn't for the single fact that Religion has, in the past, proved itself to be a boon to progress instead of an obstruction, i would say down with religion.

It's just that nowadays Religions seem as Hypocritical as everything else does.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Throbber
 


I'm looking forward to discussing this with you! Please realise I'm not "having a go" at you, or anyone (apart from the church
) when I write this, and I encourage responses, as this is something that is really important to me.

Churches offering sanctuary was due to their function as social places, not because of their inherent religiousness. Those were the days before the police and authorities who specifically protect us these days.

Religion can't provide as much knowledge as science, as it offers some things up as untouchable truths. That means they can't be studied. That means the learning is limited. Science has no such taboos - everything can be investigated, and possibly overturned, to the sound of applause, not booing and cries for execution. Just look at the Catholic church harassing the astronomers of old. The Church forbade them from releasing their findings. That's limiting our knowledge, not helping it.

I agree that the church doesn't always hinder learning, I'm just pointing out that through its very nature it is opposed to specific learning, when discussing its most sacred of truths.

Religion has not proved itself as a boon to progress. Far from it. It's shown us time and time again that it doesn't want people learning stuff that threatens its position. It has a massive conflict of interest that science simply does not, nor can, have. Religion is intrinsically angled against science, and science is our future.

Science is not hypocritical. Religion is.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by dave420
 


Correction, we've been shown time and time again that there are people within the church who are interested in protecting their positions - which makes me think of Game Theory and how everyone goes to confess in church, even though the father might be a right gossip.

I think an important question to ask is "Is society ready to go without religion?".

I do see numerous advantages to living in a society without Religion, such as the fact that people cannot any longer point out the fact that your religion is flawed insidiously and therefore you are an infidel.

You could say that i'm simply worried about the fact that if we do away with one Religion, what will become of the others?

It would be difficult to get people to renounce a faith they're willing to blow themselves up for, for example - and i for one would not want to be the one to talk to them about it.

It's my belief that if somehow we did manage to Do away with Religion in a way that conflict would NOT erupt because of pressure from others whom actually quite like their Religions, we would attain something akin to world-peace, or at least we'd all have a shared faith in realism and science.

If we did away with religion too early, wouldn't this more or less be the reverse of progress?



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD


Yes! I finally had it last night in another thread. lol No matter what the thread is about, we cannot engage in a discussion without someone throwing in the same arguments over and over again. Eventually a mod is going to think I'm a spammer or auto-responder bot.

It's impossible to have an intelligent mature discussion about something like the rapture, Bible codes, Christian persecution in the world, or something of that sort only to hear the same ignorant objections: Jesus never existed! Watch Zeitgeist! Jesus is taken from the stories of Krishna, Horus, and Mithras! The Bible is unreliable! The canon was arbitrarily chosen by men! I would love, love, love to discuss something without having to prove my beliefs before being allowed to discuss them. Now I can simply refer them to my signature and actually *gasp* discuss the threads topics without the repetitive argument interference.


Ashely, that is a great idea and I think I am going to make one myself only add something else to it I have been working on for the past few months. I have also got rather bored with correcting the same dogmatism atheists bring to the table while they whine about theists for being "right" all the time yet they don't see themselves becoming as ignorant, as guilty of the same things they accuse religion of.their worldview of a planet without religion where some have expressed eliminating us because of our belief or renouncing our religion or else.

Forcing a closet Christian so to speak.

It is like I had said to you before when I tell of Madds tunnel vision using the same arguments over and over. I don't buy the embellished bull that Christians are forcing all there "code" from ther creed down there throats because it simply doesn't happen that way. I mean they have knocked at my door maybe a handful of times and if I shut the door,, GUESS WHAT HAPPENS,, THE GO AWAY!

Madd has proven he does'nt shut the door, he SEEKS THEM OUT on his own volition his own determined motivation to assault them with the same verbal attacks the same sarcastic "challenges to their worldview" and THATS what he is about and THAT is why this thread sizzler has apologised for as if she has been beaten into submission by an overzealous boorish biobabbling bunch who don't know when to quit are the true definition of "pushing any ideology down ones throats"

If they had their way, Religion would be illegal and when they GET their way, history has shown time and time again that is just what happens.

Then regimes take place that serve the state while they commit crimes of mass murder they love to blame religion for but they claim no blame for they are not doing it in the name of anything as if doing it in the name of anything has anything to do with who they are as a group.

It's WHAT they are as a people that is the point.

To be more specific,,

they are Godless.

pity

- Con



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave420


Science is not hypocritical. Religion is.


Black meet Kettle. Science isn't but Scientists are.

Then again lets talk about it without hiding behind Science as the foundation for your argument lets call you what you really are.

YOU are not a scientist as many of you seem to think, you are not a biologist so it is easy to see why you willingly accept a biologist biobabbling bunk when you hear it especially when that biologist also happens to be the high priest of the Atheist Religion. Oh yeah it IS a religilon and the supreme court has said so.

You are an atheist and atheists are as hypocritical a bunch as I have ever seen in any other religion whether it is one that has a god or not.

I would be the first to admit our church is full of hypocrites.

We can always use more,, so anytime you want to join us you are welcome to Mr Perfect

- Con



[edit on 15-2-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Ashely, that is a great idea and I think I am going to make one myself only add something else to it I have been working on for the past few months. I have also got rather bored with correcting the same dogmatism atheists bring to the table while they whine about theists for being "right" all the time yet they don't see themselves becoming as ignorant, as guilty of the same things they accuse religion of.their worldview of a planet without religion where some have expressed eliminating us because of our belief or renouncing our religion or else.


Imagine how tired they are of the constant, incessant yabbering from YOU about how they're all "Godless" or have no moral values or how every bad thing in history was because of atheism, etc. There's no new arguments in this debate. And of course the "they want to kill us!" thing. Holy hell, I'm tired of seeing that crap, and I'm further from an atheist than any of you.


The religious are hardly innocent of what you're laying at the atheist's feet here. As I said, no new arguments with this topic.


Forcing a closet Christian so to speak.


Jesus did mention something about prayer in a closet. Speaking of closets, hey, you know it's not atheists who have created such a pleasant thing as the closetedness of many homosexuals. I'm sure you'll find a way to blame Stalin and through him every atheist in the world.


It is like I had said to you before when I tell of Madds tunnel vision using the same arguments over and over. I don't buy the embellished bull that Christians are forcing all there "code" from ther creed down there throats because it simply doesn't happen that way. I mean they have knocked at my door maybe a handful of times and if I shut the door,, GUESS WHAT HAPPENS,, THE GO AWAY!


You don't live in the United States, I take it? We actually have stats that forbid anyone who's an atheist or agnostic from holding office here. It's way beyond saturday morning unwanted visitors. If it were just JW's or Mormons knocking on my door in the morning, I would be ecstatic.


Madd has proven he does'nt shut the door, he SEEKS THEM OUT on his own volition his own determined motivation to assault them with the same verbal attacks the same sarcastic "challenges to their worldview" and THATS what he is about and THAT is why this thread sizzler has apologised for as if she has been beaten into submission by an overzealous boorish biobabbling bunch who don't know when to quit are the true definition of "pushing any ideology down ones throats"


Well, first, there's a HUGE difference between your doorstep and a public forum on the internet, you know? Don't want to see an atheist in a bad mood? Don't open a thirty-page thread accusing atheists of being part of a global plot to massacre Christians or whatever. You're the one opening the door.

As for the rest of your very, very, very long sentence here, I would suggest you save your sympathy for someone more deserving than Sizzle.


If they had their way, Religion would be illegal and when they GET their way, history has shown time and time again that is just what happens.

Haven't seen much indication that your camp is terribly different.


Then regimes take place that serve the state while they commit crimes of mass murder they love to blame religion for but they claim no blame for they are not doing it in the name of anything as if doing it in the name of anything has anything to do with who they are as a group.


You know if you're going to (once again) accuse all atheists of being genocidal maniacs, you could at least learn to do it with grammar.


It's WHAT they are as a people that is the point.

To be more specific,,

they are Godless.

pity

- Con


Well, to be fair, I feel pity for you and your bankruptcy of gods, as well.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox


You know if you're going to (once again) accuse all atheists of being genocidal maniacs, you could at least learn to do it with grammar.






"According to a recent Newsweek poll, only 37% of Americans would vote for an otherwise qualified atheist for president." Yet, what is his response? Elsewhere, he looks forward to a time when "making religious certitude look stupid will be exploited, and we'll start laughing at people who believe…We'll laugh at them in a way that will be synonymous with excluding them from our halls of power" (emphasis added).[iii] Actually, Mr. Harris must be thrilled at the progress that atheists are making since a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll conducted in March 2007 has 48% answering "Yes" 48% answering "No" and 4% answering "Don't know/other." Apparently, religious people should not keep atheists from our halls of power but atheists should keep religious people from our halls of power—two wrongs... www.squidoo.com...


Pretty much shoots Madds assertion there are only 2000 or so atheists all to hell doesn't it.

My grammar? what is that fox,, " if all else fails attack grammar?" desperate isn't something I would have thought coming from you.



Well, to be fair, I feel pity for you and your bankruptcy of gods, as well.


You feel? ha ha that's a good one. One should'nt flatter themselves so. The only thing Atheists like you feel is self aggrandizement

By the way getting tired of me doesn't seem to stop you or mad from jumping into fray does it.



- Con





[edit on 15-2-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by sizzle
I formally apologize for having opened this thread topic and theproverbial can of worms that came with it.
Although to some degree, it has been very educational for me. Thanks to one member who accused Christians of having their heads buried in the sand and being readers and believers of only one book; I began a course of study that has led me into some of the most enlightening information of my life. This would include The Sumerian Texts, The Apocrypha and even some side studies into what various other religions believe and why. I, for one do not ever want to be considered ignorant or 'stuck-in-the-mud.
I even began to study evolution more thoroughly, the theory of Relativity, The Big Bang, etc.
I have been a busy girl. And it is all thanks to you guys, so this thread has not been a total loss for me. I have come away, far more educated. Has this thread made me want to scream and pull my hair out? Yes!
But I would also like to thank Madness and Riley for pointing out to me that there are more than one group of Atheists. I was ignorant of this fact. In the future I will strive to have my facts more in order before wildly posting, as I can see how it can be frustrating to those who do understand the other-side-of-the-coin.
My apologies if I have offended anyone. That was not my intention. At times when some of you thought I was trying to be offensive, it was actually my dry humor. Not everyone understands it, so I will try to keep that in check.
I hope to remain a long term member here and a mature one. So, I think this would be a good time for me to bow out of this thread.
I feel that AshleyD has done a wonderful job of giving mature and informative answers, and if she would like, I would be happy for her to continue doing so.


Sizzle, I am glad you opened this thread. I would have never believed there was an actual conspiracy to overthrow Christianity. Boy have my eyes been opened! Now I can only come to one conclusion...there is a conspiracy by athiests to overthrow Christianity! Thank you for opening my eyes. Now that I know, I shall be better armed than ever to defend my position. Now that I know...I think I'll do something about it...Deny ignorance. And while I'm at it...I think I'll ignore it a little too.

IR



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by sizzle
I formally apologize for having opened this thread topic and theproverbial can of worms that came with it.


No need to apologize
Your thread called attention to a fairly obvious subject and there are more than enough atheists willing to argue for the sake of arguing.

As I have said earlier in this thread, the first page had numerous people saying that they want atheism to overthrow Christianity etc. Yet we continue to hear alot of 'hemming and hawing'.

Should we have to apologize for speculating what other atheists have openly said? No.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by idle_rocker
Now that I know...I think I'll do something about it...Deny ignorance. And while I'm at it...I think I'll ignore it a little too.

IR


I would think it would be the other way around and perhaps even with a twist ie: Deny ignorance is when someone accuses you of it and as usual Atheists deny it. Ignoring it just a little? I would think you would want to ignore ALL of it. But then again that wouldn't have left any room for your post then would it.

- Con



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology

"According to a recent Newsweek poll, only 37% of Americans would vote for an otherwise qualified atheist for president." Yet, what is his response? Elsewhere, he looks forward to a time when "making religious certitude look stupid will be exploited, and we'll start laughing at people who believe…We'll laugh at them in a way that will be synonymous with excluding them from our halls of power" (emphasis added).[iii] Actually, Mr. Harris must be thrilled at the progress that atheists are making since a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll conducted in March 2007 has 48% answering "Yes" 48% answering "No" and 4% answering "Don't know/other." Apparently, religious people should not keep atheists from our halls of power but atheists should keep religious people from our halls of power—two wrongs... www.squidoo.com...


Pretty much shoots Madds assertion there are only 2000 or so atheists all to hell doesn't it.


Congratulations on the shocking discovery that people are jerks, no matter the religious belief they hold



My grammar? what is that fox,, " if all else fails attack grammar?" desperate isn't something I would have thought coming from you.


I don't usually grammar-nazi online. With my spelling, and habit of starting sentences with "and" and "but,"I don't have much room to talk
I mentioned it because I had extreme difficulty figuring out what you were saying, due to the lack of punctuation.


You feel? ha ha that's a good one, one should'nt flatter themself so. The only thing Atheists like you feel is self aggrandizement


Dehumanization on a broad generalized scale, that's nice. I wonder what a guy like you has to say about Jews.

I'm not an atheist, by the way. I kind of mentioned that in the first part of the post you're responding to. Hate to break the news to you, chuckles, but one doesn't have to be an atheist to think you're being a jerk and have no basis for your rambling incoherent arguments.


By the way getting tired of me doesn't seem to stop you or mad from jumping into fray does it.


You pique my sense of the morbid.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join