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.

 

Are Atheists Air Brushing History?

page: 71
24
<< 68  69  70    72  73  74 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by an3rkist


The logic you used to deduce your above observation could be used against Christianity so obviously it makes my head hurt. Tell me, if the logic you used is sound, what would stop anyone from saying that the bad things done by Christians as a group cannot be then blamed on Christianity? I merely deduced this using your above logic
.

On this I totally agree and I can't deny Religion was used to motivate a group to cause great harm. What I don't like seeing is Atheists using the mistakes the religious have made in the past to justify destroying Religious freedom for in the final annalysis Religion can't be put in jail for it. It may be a cause but if Atheism makes that charge then they are condemned to the same common distinction. I mean they can't even take credit for eliminating it then.

So if that were to happen how would we see it in the history books? That they all just vanished? Of course not and neither would anyone else. That is why the claim they have done no wrong because nothing is done in there name doesnt wash.

They continue to use that tactic anyway, but they are only impressing themselves with it while getting away with nothing. It is transparent as it is easy to convict as I have just explained.



I agree with you that atheism has done nothing good for the world, but that logic applies to Christianity, also. Christianity has done no good for the world, only individual Christians have. And likewise, individual atheists have also. (Though I personally think Bill Gates is a horrible example.)


No you still aren't getting it but I think you do now without explaining it further as I believe I covered this.

The final conclusion is this, you are more likely to get Christians to admit to wrongs done in Religions name then Atheist who will not.

It is when we hear 100,000 killed during the Salem witch trials when only 20 were actually killed we take exception to.

BTW this number thing is very tired argument and means nothing. What I think what makes this argument lag on is the Athey vs. Religion argument that will never die.

- Con



[edit on 31-3-2008 by Conspiriology]




posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Dawkins Uses Generalisations to convict he also is to be judged by the same standard he judges others. He has published the same logical comparisons that now can be used against him. He simply can't have it both ways.


I agree, except that we would have to break it down to an individual basis again.

You see, I'm only trying to point out the inherent flaw in the logic of blaming atheism for the genocides perpetrated by Stalin, Mao, or whoever: If atheism is to be blamed for them, then Christianity is to be blamed for the obvious atrocities also. By saying that atheism is to blame, you are admitting that Christianity is to blame. I think both of those are wrong: neither are to blame. It's individuals. Yes, that's not the point in this thread, but it's been a major point and I fail to see how anyone cannot see that major flaw.

As I've said, I believe faith is the root of all evil, but even someone such as Dawkins can have faith in his own beliefs being superior to that of others and use it to do evil. However, with that, I fail to see Dawkins denying that atheists have ever killed. Generalizations...maybe. I haven't seen the movie enough times to quote it or anything, but I don't remember getting the impression that he wants everyone to ignore the atheists in history who have committed genocide. Like I said, I think it'd be worth asking him what he thinks about it. But you said that's pointless, so...

[edit on 31/3/08 by an3rkist]



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by an3rkist

I agree, except that we would have to break it down to an individual basis again.


You see, I'm only trying to point out the inherent flaw in the logic of blaming atheism for the genocides perpetrated by Stalin, Mao, or whoever: If atheism is to be blamed for them, then Christianity is to be blamed for the obvious atrocities also. By saying that atheism is to blame, you are admitting that Christianity is to blame.


Lets be realistic here for a second,, you could if a Government needed to pay for attorneys each having their own to avoid conflict of interest. This would not only be too costly but would take eons,. Therefore, what they would do is combine them all in a class action suit where as a group they are all guilty. Sort of like they do when they sue an entire corporation or group.

Now if they were all involved in a religion is where they came up with the Idea that it was done in religions name so blame the religion right?

Wrong they have to blame the religious NOT the religion as I said Religion in and of itself cannot suffer for it. The only thing they can do is make it illegal to practice religion. Which is something Atheist can't do so they try to do it using methods I see all over the place designed to accelerate thier imagined reasons it will eventually vanish anyway.

Now since Atheism can't exist without religion it can only BE because religion exists. The very word Atheist acknowledges it IS a thing.

We cannot convict Atheism for the same reasons we can't for religion because Atheism cannot be punished but Atheists can. Now all they have to do is find the common distinction they all share, that would be Atheism so we either blame Atheism as a catalyst and make it illegal using the same prosecutorial logic.



As I've said, I believe faith is the root of all evil, but even someone such as Dawkins can have faith in his own beliefs being superior to that of others and use it to do evil.



I agree completely with the exception that not ALL types of faith are bad



I think both of those are wrong: neither are to blame. It's individuals. Yes, that's not the point in this thread, but it's been a major point and I fail to see how anyone cannot see that major flaw.


Technically you are right but again it would come down to groups and their causes unless it was war, then you get into war crimes and the leaders are the most guilty. This is why I wince whenever the pope says something dumb because he speaks as a Christian representative when in fact all he is doing by his acts is making Christians guilty by association judged by people who actually believe such a title as Pope is even Biblical when it is not.

Basically, he frames us.



- Con






[edit on 31-3-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


The conspiracy to airbrush history is in the God Delusion:



Dawkins goes on to explain how "religious conflicts" are mislabeled under group or ethnic strife. He cites the conflict in Northern Ireland, where the parties are labeled "Nationalists" and "Loyalists" instead of Catholics and Protestants. Likewise, Dawkins complains that the conflict in Iraq between the Sunni and Shia Muslims has been called "ethnic cleansing" instead of a "religious conflict." However, Dawkins fails to point out what part of these conflicts is truly religious in nature. Are these disputes over religious doctrines or principles or disagreements about the nature of God? If so, he should have pointed out exactly which parts of the conflicts were religious in nature. Of course these are not conflicts about religion. They are conflicts involving different religious groups, but as with virtually all conflicts, the disagreements are about power.

www.godandscience.org...



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


The conspiracy to airbrush history is in the God Delusion:



Dawkins goes on to explain how "religious conflicts" are mislabeled under group or ethnic strife. He cites the conflict in Northern Ireland, where the parties are labeled "Nationalists" and "Loyalists" instead of Catholics and Protestants. Likewise, Dawkins complains that the conflict in Iraq between the Sunni and Shia Muslims has been called "ethnic cleansing" instead of a "religious conflict." However, Dawkins fails to point out what part of these conflicts is truly religious in nature. Are these disputes over religious doctrines or principles or disagreements about the nature of God? If so, he should have pointed out exactly which parts of the conflicts were religious in nature. Of course these are not conflicts about religion. They are conflicts involving different religious groups, but as with virtually all conflicts, the disagreements are about power.

www.godandscience.org...



Yes and again, we see the same predicament, you see we cannot hold "power" accountable, but we can indict the powerful, then we find the common denominator of that people.

we know Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely

No matter who has it.

- Con



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 


speaking as someone that has actually read the book, that article is entirely full of horse manure.

try reading a book before you accept idiotic, skewed quoting to suit agendas.

if you read the book, that's not at all what it says...

if atheists are skewing the past, theists seem to be getting a head start and skewing the not so distant stuff

...hell, i've seen plenty of theists skew it so that communist atrocities now equal atheist atrocities, but that seems to be the norm on the new ATS

"Atheist Thrashing Service: where arguments don't matter anymore"


[edit on 4/2/08 by madnessinmysoul]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
we know Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely

No matter who has it.


thank you for proving once and for all that any existent god would be pure, absolute evil (unless it wasn't absolutely powerful)

oh, no, you can't take it back, you've dug yourself in already.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


madness, good try, but I'm afraid you're....oops, was gonna say something against the T&Cs....something about spraying liquid into the wind....

I think we're outnumbered, so far....there is a gang-bang going on, unfortunately.

Perhpas I'll get dinged for this post, if so...so be it! Guess it's God's will....

WW



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 06:09 PM
link   
Madness...I gave you a star! Nicely done. I will concede that Cosmotology fell into a trap there. Probably meant "absolute mortal power" and all that.


I believe that God just is. It's not about power. It's beyond power or any concept of it.

I have nothing against Atheists. Everyone has a right to their opinion and believe what they believe. I'm a very modern kind of Theist. Like, I don't mind if they attend the same schools as my kids. I would give up my seat on the bus for a female Atheist. I would enjoy sports with Atheist players. I don't mind if they eat at the same restaurants as I do. I have no problem if one is urinating beside me in the bathroom.

I think we should all learn tolerance. It's hard to have confidence in anything when you are afraid all the time. That's why they fight, scream and kick so much. They really aren't all that confident in their faith. That's why they have to thrust it down people's throats (to add to their own confidence) and get upset when people don't agree. It makes them question it themselves.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


That is a rather far stretch there madness.
Even for you.

How anyone can claim that a "high power/prime mover/god" is "evil" because there is "evil" in existence is simplistically illogical, grossly silly at worst and only conclusions that are viable if you refuse to leave behind your preconceptions and seeking forever to back them up by forever forgetting the meaning of the word objective.
Especially when you remember beyond humanity there is no good or evil.


[edit on 2-4-2008 by WraothAscendant]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
madness, good try, but I'm afraid you're....oops, was gonna say something against the T&Cs....something about spraying liquid into the wind....

I think we're outnumbered, so far....there is a gang-bang going on, unfortunately.

Perhpas I'll get dinged for this post, if so...so be it! Guess it's God's will....


Another bait post targeted at Christians however my psychic powers tell me I will be the one to get in trouble for even replying. Frankly, I'm exhausted with this nonsense and after today probably won't be returning as an active poster for a while. Even after NGC's thread all that really changed is now people have been going to my U2U box to taunt me so they don't get in trouble in public. I didn't want to say anything and am not going to name names or report anyone but you know who you are. I'm tired of it.

I've only been here for four months. If you look back at my older posts when I was brand new, it was nothing but serious discussion, turning the other cheek, and attempting to use a kind word to turn away wrath. I can't tell you how many U2U's I received asking me how I remained so calm and friendly when people would refer to me as delusional, a liar, addressing me with overt sexual tones and vulgarity, accusing me of having 'blood dripping fangs' (and not because of something I said- only because I was a Christian), been called a murderer (I won't even kill a bug on my kitchen floor but pick them up and gently place them outside), etc. The list goes on. Over the last few weeks I finally got sick of it and exhibited the 'No More Mrs. Nice Guy' mentality.

I don't think a day has gone by this last week where I wasn't U2Ued by a mod or got in trouble on a thread. Weed, it may be your perspective there is a 'gang bang' going on against atheists. And you know what? You might even be right. But it is disheartening to be met with piss and vinegar every time I log in. So many Christians have U2Ued me over the past few months telling me they could not take this place anymore and I did everything to comfort them, to talk them into staying, or to encourage them to come to me for help when it gets to be too much. Now I feel like a hypocrite because I want to take the same course of action I spent so many hours trying to talk other people out of.

I'm sorry you feel victimized, Weed, but if you think that is rough you would probably be in tears to see the stuff I've been called on the board and in U2U (And yes, it has provoked me to tears a few times). I'm nothing special though- I've seen other Christians endure the same thing and know Con gets U2U taunts as well. Maybe you haven't seen what we've seen. Just last night I got ripped a new one again for being a creationist even though I used nothing but humor to diffuse the situation and even resorted to apologizing just to ease tensions once again but it was to no avail because the person just kept going on at full speed. It's exhausting. I've often joked that this place makes me lose my 'sweet disposition' but at this point there is no more losing left to do. It is simply 'lost.'

If you perceive it to be a 'gang bang' it's because people typically unite after being attacked constantly. I used to think Conspiriology was a complete spaz when I first met him on here (and he knows this already) until finally seeing exactly what caused him to seem that way after having to put up with the same thing. We are baited left and right but when we say something in return, it's all on us. I get a U2U and feel like asking, "My God! Did you not just see what that person said to me in ten comments before I finally blew!?! Or how they troll me around from thread to thread!?!" Instead, I just take all the blame so it doesn't look like I'm trying to excuse my actions by pointing the finger and simply offer an apology.

But I'm done now. I don't report others or run crying to someone for help because I don't want to get anyone in trouble but I'm frustrated at this point. When I get a verbal spanking, it's tempting to reply with all the links to comments the person said against me before I finally flipped or to forward the U2U taunts I receive showing just exactly what led up to whatever it was that got me into trouble but I'd rather just take it on the chin and be the bad guy instead of looking like a cry baby. So I try to take the high road, apologize to whoever it was I offended via U2U and/or on the offending thread, only to have them start the same garbage with me in another thread or via U2U.

I finally put someone on ignore this morning (a feature I hate and refused to use) until I finally realized I could not take their antagonistic behavior anymore and their twisting everything around to make look like the victim while I was a jerk. The provocation and private antagonism ends here and now.

The 'turning the other cheek' thing is something I once thought I had mastered until joining this place. Now, after reading your comment and this one I am about to submit, people from opposing sides might see us like this:



...and such a view might even be justified. I was hoping we could all come to an amicable agreement, try to see what the other side goes through, and be civil to each other. There are two specific threads I am aware of targeted to atheists and possibly a third if you consider my evolution thread (although I understand evolution and atheism are not mutually exclusive). In contrast, there are hundreds of threads and comments bashing Christianity. The vast majority of threads in this forum are about Christianity. Some of them are excellent threads that raise fabulous points and are fun to participate in. Others are nothing but nonsense and baiting.

Anyways, sorry about my rant. I just want you to see what is really going on including behind-the-scenes jabs that we have to endure but didn't want to fuss over. When there is a thread about Christianity, we can discuss the religion even amid personal attacks. But in a thread about atheism, the atheists take the entire thread as being an attack and how us Christians are the big bad meanies.

No hard feelings but I'm exhausted now and it takes a lot to finally get to me. Take care.

[edit on 4/2/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Come on now everyone. Gang Bang's aren't very Christian, or Muslim, or any other religion for that matter. When we are talking about decent god fearing folk can we leave Gang Bangs out of it.
I don't think any religious types would ever been involved in that kind of filth!
Gang Bangs are for the porn industry, period.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


twas but a joke, i thought this thread could use some lightening up. see, i'm not even wearing my serious face

->


but honestly, i've found that the conspiracy here often tends to be both sides airbrushing, but the theistic side seems to be a bit more malicious about it and it tends to set double standards

example: inquisition
theist says it's not a christian thing (even brings up the "vatican doesn't count" sometimes) because jesus didn't say anything about doing it

example 2: communist atrocities
commies were atheists
atheists did it

see the double standard?
not believing in god says absolutely nothing about killing people.

but i tire of ATS, it's become quite the thrashing service for atheists since the demise of the pastafarian Major.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Must be great to be able to excuse yourself by saying you were just joking when called on something.



but honestly, i've found that the conspiracy here often tends to be both sides airbrushing, but the theistic side seems to be a bit more malicious about it and it tends to set double standards


I would say spin doctoring.
And calling someone's spiritual beliefs "Imaginary Friends" is not malicious?
And double standards?
But of course I expect you to say that on the simple fact your a patriot for your religion.
You must forget to whom you are typing to.



example: inquisition
theist says it's not a christian thing (even brings up the "vatican doesn't count" sometimes) because jesus didn't say anything about doing it

example 2: communist atrocities
commies were atheists
atheists did it

see the double standard?


Flip those statements and you have the exact same statements you have been making.
Double standard?
Might want to not cast stones when your just as guilty.

And yes I do seem to remember Stalin purging religious people for being religious and not totally committed to the state which was an atheistic state.

You can play semantics all you want but at the end of the day while he was not going around screaming that he was killing for atheism.
It was still atheism killing.



not believing in god says absolutely nothing about killing people.


Neither does believing in a god.



but i tire of ATS, it's become quite the thrashing service for atheists since the demise of the pastafarian Major.


Funny that both sides now feel ganged up on.


And yes I will "thrash" your patented illogic til I get removed.
As I did against Major as before her spiteful childish self got banned.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by WraothAscendant]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:06 PM
link   
I will say this. I have only been here since February and I have never seen such vile things in writing to or against Christians. I have contemplated leaving this site on various occasions, all because of That. But I'm not leaving! You guys can give me all the crap you want, and I'll take it from you.

But you need to cut the crap and I know what you're up to. There is definitely bias here and I'm not the only one that's noticed it. This act needs to get cleaned up and cleaned up now.

I'm here...now take it out on me you chickens! I dare ya.

Expel me now from this elementary grade school! Perhaps there's a different door we all need to enter and let this one slap us in the proverbial butt as we go. Swing on - big door.

I_R

And right on Wraoth!

[edit on 4/2/08 by idle_rocker]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by idle_rocker
 


Sorry, idle....

This is a thread accusing atheists of 'airbrushing' history....most laughable because only the 'winners' are in a position to 're-write' (my term) history!!

A few recent books, trying to point out the inconsistencies of religious texts, and all of a sudden, we see this thread?

I say it's about time, these liars are called out!!!! AND, when I say liars, I mean the preachers and prophets who claim to 'know' God...all they really 'know' is the Almighty Dollar!!!

WW



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


No, certain atheists attempts to paint religion as a evil thing is what spawned this thread.
Actively ignoring the fact that mankind has killed for a great many ideologies including atheistic agendas.
Blaming religion for what mankind does for a great many things and then proceeding to try to make their religious beliefs come out smelling of roses.

That is the problem.

And while I am at it:


I say it's about time, these liars are called out!!!! AND, when I say liars, I mean the preachers and prophets who claim to 'know' God...all they really 'know' is the Almighty Dollar!!!


Yes because there is no one that truly believes those things and actively avoid greed.
Rrrriiiiiggggghhhhhhhtttttttttt..................
Any more illogical statements?

[edit on 2-4-2008 by WraothAscendant]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Well I have not been impressed. If you want to rale on the money changers, rale on them! Not on those of us who practice true Christianity and try to live our lives as Jesus would want us to live.

No one is trying to hurt anyone. Everyone of us feel for our fellow man. I have made great friends here and would hate to leave, but this has got to stop.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


Well, Wraoth, you and Idle seem to agree with me, at least as it pertains to the greed aspect of many 'so-called' men of god....

Or did I mis-understand?

WW



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I agree that there are some and they have strewn bodies throughout history.

BUT.
That is not religion in general.

That is greed and it infects ALL of mankind's endeavors to varying degrees.

And I think that any group/religion that spends soo much time trying to attack others while trying to hide their own faults is extremely telling.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by WraothAscendant]



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 68  69  70    72  73  74 >>

log in

join