Are Atheists Air Brushing History?

page: 7
24
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:34 AM
link   

I see the accusation of, 'Murdering Christians.' It tends to make everyone think that the rest of you folks' hands are clean.

that was the whole point. I get so tired of this constant title being hung on the necks of Christians, because of things, that may or may not have been done by Christians, hundreds of years ago.
I was just making the point, that if Christians are guilty by association or ancestry, then so is the rest of the world. You can't have it both ways.




posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin


I think they can, as long as it's not public. Maybe they should do it like your mate Matthew suggested might be an option - 'in thy closet'. If you all did so, you might have found Teddie Haggard in there.


HA HA HA HA HA !!! You nut HA HA


Yeah sad that money has to be paid for his defense or did the pedo actually pay for the services.

haggard lol

- Con



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by sizzle

I see the accusation of, 'Murdering Christians.' It tends to make everyone think that the rest of you folks' hands are clean.

that was the whole point. I get so tired of this constant title being hung on the necks of Christians, because of things, that may or may not have been done by Christians, hundreds of years ago.
I was just making the point, that if Christians are guilty by association or ancestry, then so is the rest of the world. You can't have it both ways.


Ahhh that's what you were up to hehe clever girl

Nice idea Sizzle



- Con



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Yeah sad that money has to be paid for his defense or did the pedo actually pay for the services?


Are we talking about Haggard or NAMBLA here?


As far as I know, the ACLU just defended NAMBLA from prosecution for being implicated in the death of the kid for expressing their opinion. I assume that the pedo had normal rights for legal representation.

I don't think any right minded individual would do any more than the ACLU did - defend their right to speech. They certainly didn't condone their position on ages of sexual consent etc.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


Even more so,
How much do you want to bet that a certain segment of people here, won't even acknowledge that survey? I have tried it before. I think it is because it would take away one of their weapons of mass destruction.
(dry humor)

[edit on 22-3-2008 by sizzle]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Yeah sad that money has to be paid for his defense or did the pedo actually pay for the services?


Are we talking about Haggard or NAMBLA here?


As far as I know, the ACLU just defended NAMBLA from prosecution for being implicated in the death of the kid for expressing their opinion. I assume that the pedo had normal rights for legal representation.

I don't think any right minded individual would do any more than the ACLU did - defend their right to speech. They certainly didn't condone their position on ages of sexual consent etc.


No I am talking about the guy that was suing to get conjugal visits and to me,, if I'm not mistaken, that shouldn't be done much less having the courts time wasted with such a frivolous law suit. I tried to find the website and it's gone but Ill look elsewhere. They had the docket number and the court too.

I am beat here Melatonin I think I get some sleep

Nice talkin with ya Mel'

- Con



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I support the free will of every individual, be they atheist or religious.
I don't support the idea that this picture is totally black or white.
There are many subtle variations, which is why the arguments put forth
by either side will eventually cause as much harm as good, and
result in losing 10 people for every 10 that see the truth of it or agree.
It ends up being a break even. I dunno about you, but I want to
be part of winning souls for Christ not just break even. To do that,
I have to make sure I'm not unfairly judging those who don't know
Him yet.

For this reason, I think the argument against atheism as a world view
is the equivalent of banging your head against a "cold, stone, wall,"
because those who don't fit the stereotype will be totally discouraged as
an automatic defense mechanism, just as we are discouraged from
atheism for the same reason.

As a result, I do believe the way to win this argument is entirely different
than what we may think it is. Find a verse about salvation. Focus on it.
Claim it. Name the person to receive it. Stand on it in faith. Grin.


This is infinitely more successful simply because people love to be loved, and hate to be hated.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by sizzle


Just to keep you happy this chocolate festival, sizzle...

1. How many of you are Anglo? - Sorta, bit of celt, probably bit of norse etc

2. How many of you are descendants of immigrants from another country? - No, but depends how you view it. Most people are in some way.

3. How many of you had ancestors that owned slaves? - Not as far as I know. Not a working class thing in the UK.

4. How many of you are American citizens? No

Predominately where I come from they talk of murdering English barstools etc. English colonists etc etc. I have the pleasure of being apparent victim and colonist. So, on my bad days, I beat myself for the crimes of my English ancestors...



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:26 AM
link   


So, on my bad days, I beat myself for the crimes of my English ancestors...




"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven."

So uncover that light! No more self-loathing for Mel!



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
No I am talking about the guy that was suing to get conjugal visits and to me,, if I'm not mistaken, that shouldn't be done much less having the courts time wasted with such a frivolous law suit. I tried to find the website and it's gone but Ill look elsewhere. They had the docket number and the court too.


Yeah, I've just seen a few quotes found on a handful of anti-aclu websites suggesting something pedophile related, looks like BS to me. If it was the california case, it was to do with same-sex conjugal visits, and more general family visits.

But I do understand that some people find the difference between pedophiles and homosexuals hard to distinguish.


I am beat here Melatonin I think I get some sleep

Nice talkin with ya Mel'


Sweet dreams, con.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Seen from the outside


Originally posted by sizzle
reply to post by Conspiriology
 

How much do you want to bet that a certain segment of people here, won't even acknowledge that survey? I have tried it before. I think it is because it would take away one of their weapons of mass destruction.

Oh all right, here you go.

1. How many of you are Anglo?

Some in there. Not a lot.

2. How many of you are descendants of immigrants from another country?

Everybody is a descendant of immigrants from another country,even Africans. Some of my migrant ancestors were South Indian, British and probably Portuguese.

3. How many of you had ancestors that owned slaves?

Again, the answer to this question is 'everybody'. But in the shorter term, I'm happy to be able to answer 'not me' to this question. As far as I know, that is, and history indicates.

4. How many of you are American citizens?

Not guilty, yer worship

Now we're done with all that, does anyone really think the mass of material posted by our good friend Conspiriology amounts to evidence of a conspiracy to airbrush history? You could, at a pinch, call it a conspiracy to destroy religion, but even then you'd have to be very generous with your definition of 'conspiracy'.

I suppose it's a matter of perspective; if you think lobbying for rigorous separation of church and state amounts to a conspiracy against religion, then you definitely have a conspiracy here. If, on the other hand, you see it as an attempt to prevent the State getting drawn into sectarian conflict with its own citizens, you would regard it as a very right and proper precaution. I am not American. I live in a part of the world where sectarian violence is a hoary fact of life. I wholly understand and applaud your Founding Fathers' determination to keep religion out of government. I also note with approval that they have made no attempt (apart from banning Nazis and Communists) to keep it out of politics.

But even if you could, by taking quotes out of context, distorting the meaning of common words and applying various other dishonest means, make a collection of very unrelated utterances add up to a conspiracy, that still does not demonstrate that it is a conspiracy to rewrite, or even to muddle, history.

Six pages and counting. Still not a scintilla of evidence for that.

[edit on 22-3-2008 by Astyanax]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


Anglos by far are the most murderous group of people on the face of the earth. So I would surmise that if any of us have any anglo in us at all, then we probably have a murderer in the tree somewhere. Soooo. maybe we better be careful about casting those stones. Huh?



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Astyanax

Well this is not an argument against atheism, specifically. But I'd like to point out that most of the official structures such as the masonry of the government buildings of the USA, are not exactly founded on Christianity or Atheism. They are masonic and rosicrucian, which holds no official belief system, but claims ANY belief in a higher power other than yourself. Technically-speaking, the foundations of this country were laid on the masonic ideal that there is something greater than homo sapians, to which we owe our servitude in thought and action, but from which we automatically inherit free will to choose our path to follow. As a result, you'd be hard pressed to really prove that there has EVER been a true separation of church and state in the USA. Belief in a god of any kind, automatically assumes "church" because you are the temple, the vessel of your own beliefs and not the building down the street.



[edit on 22-3-2008 by undo]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by sizzle
Anglos by far are the most murderous group of people on the face of the earth. So I would surmise that if any of us have any anglo in us at all, then we probably have a murderer in the tree somewhere.

Everybody has a murderer in their family tree, even if they are Quakers.

Adding racism to a boiling sectarian pot is a good way to cause an explosion. Please be careful.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
i'm sorry, but i see theists whitewashing history as well

when an atheist does something bad (stalin, mao, communist baddies et al) it's because of atheism.

when a christian does something wrong, it's either because s/he's not really a christian or for some reason other than christianity.

it's a double standard

i've never seen someone actually prove that atheism was behind any bad stuff, only atheists
people
flawed beings that can do evil no matter what they believe
i've seen plenty of christians do bad things and i've never said they did it because they were christian...a christian serial killer isn't skinning people alive because s/he's a christian, it's because there's something wrong with her/his head

...and then there's the whole attempt to repaint hitler as an atheist...



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
You'd be hard pressed to really prove that there has EVER been a true separation of church and state in the USA.

Nor did I say there was. Its presence or absence is not the issue here, however, but its perceived desirability.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by sizzle
 


the genetic tree is an interesting thing. People still argue over it, 2000 years after Christ removed that particular barrier. The inherent racism of the Old Testament served a singular purpose to which we are no longer held. That purpose was fulfilled when Christ resurrected. We are all semites, blacks, anglos, mongoloids, and so on. That tree is mixed up and shaken together. We have ALL become inheritors of the promise



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by sizzle
reply to post by melatonin
 


Anglos by far are the most murderous group of people on the face of the earth. So I would surmise that if any of us have any anglo in us at all, then we probably have a murderer in the tree somewhere. Soooo. maybe we better be careful about casting those stones. Huh?


But we are not guilty of these sins in the present. And you say Anglos? What about the Ottoman Empire? I'll bet they never did such things.

Here is a quote that sums up humanity nicely:


All I am saying is that civilization crumbles whenever we need it most. In the right situation, we are all capable of the most terrible crimes. To imagine a world where this was not so, where every crisis did not result in new atrocities, where every newspaper is not full of war and violence. Well, this is to imagine a world where human beings cease to be human.


Sometimes, people make it very hard to be impartial. Have a great day!




posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   
forgot to answer the survey

not anglo
i'm an immigrant (maltese)
family never owned slaves
and i have dual citizenship, one being maltese

and sizzle...no group is by far more murderous than any other group.

want to blame the anglos?

think about it:

the hutus killed nearly or just over 1 million tutsis in less than 1/3rd of a year
the germans started the most dangerous war that ever was and committed a genocide that killed 12 million people
do i even need to bring up the mongol horde?
the third punic "war" was the worst act of mass genocide prior to ww2, that was something the romans carried out

the anglos wiped out quite a few people themselves, but they are by no means more murderous than the rest



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax

Originally posted by sizzle
Anglos by far are the most murderous group of people on the face of the earth. So I would surmise that if any of us have any anglo in us at all, then we probably have a murderer in the tree somewhere.

Everybody has a murderer in their family tree, even if they are Quakers.

Adding racism to a boiling sectarian pot is a good way to cause an explosion. Please be careful.

This isn't about racism, and please don't try to turn it into that. I think you are intelligent enough to get the point. If you are not, then I will spell it out.
In every Christian/Atheism thread, the accusation of, Murdering Christian comes up.
Never mind that the wars they speak of happened hundreds of years ago.
They want us to wear the guilt of them like an albatross, by association.
The Christians alive today, had nothing to do with it. No more than you, nor I had anything to do with murdering Jews, Indians or Blacks.
Now, do you get the point?
Or would you rather shoulder the blame for what your ancestors did?





new topics
top topics
 
24
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join