Billboards Declare Prayer, Bibles Not Helping Disaster Victims

reply to post by undo


You are confusing anarchists or darwinists and atheists. Atheists are social creature just like theists. It seems you have some serious misconceptions about what atheists are.


Try this thread for an introduction.

reply to post by undo

in a purely atheistic culture, you would be one of the first to die.

Um, no. I wouldn't.
I can hold my own with atheists as well as religious types. And I have survival skills - such as using a firearm, gardening, fishing, fire-building, building construction, etc.

You are labeling "atheists" as animals, as murderers.THAT IS RIDICULOUS. Religion does not "cause" morality and compassion. EDUCATION, and SOCIAL SKILLS do.

reply to post by wildtimes


Hmmmmm . . . thanks for the DEMONSTRATION

that you are not a very high quality student of history . . . authentic history.

We already knew you had an elevated view of your capacities to rise to the top of the heap.

Perhaps the issue is much larger than the short sighted battle between atheists and christianity.

I would say, instead of going by whatever personal beliefs they espouse, decide who to donate to by studying their actions.

The time and energy used for those billboards is akin to sending the bibles. However, some people will want the bibles in the affected areas (I wouldnt, but I know some who definitely would). Even in the OP it says that no money was used, but is that really important? Money is used in exchange for time and energy. That time and energy is given regardless of the presence of a monetary exchange.

The biggest issue is charities and similar organizations using publicly gained funds for personal wealth. This happens in every arena from PETA, to "Christian" organizations, and so many others...

The issue has nothing to do with religion, but more to do with our resources (in the form of money, for most) actually going towards the causes that we wish instead of lining pockets. Honestly, the same concepts are in play with taxes the world over.

Most of our money is simply not going to where we want/need it to go, and it has nothing to do with religion or lack there-of.

I am thinking someone already posting something of the same, but these threads are essentially just rinse and repeat type reads anyway.

reply to post by BO XIAN

the Atheist dogma that man = NOTHING more than a rat, a pigeon, a radish or a rock

do people find so difficult to wrap their narrow, rigid, horribly biased little brains around? Sigh.

THAT IS NOT THE ATHEIST DOGMA.

You are impossible. You remind me of a Muslim member who is equally impossible; and a Baptist (banned) member who thought they were God's Gift to ATS.

Do some homework. Educate yourself! Then wrap your "narrow, rigid, horribly biased little brain" around THAT. THAT being: what you don't know.

reply to post by BO XIAN

that you are not a very high quality student of history . . . authentic history.

We already knew you had an elevated view of your capacities to rise to the top of the heap.

Dude, ..... LOL!!! *facepalm*

I would say that "we already knew you were a subpar professor of a field with which you have no real skill."
But that would be stooping to your own level. You have no idea what my education is, or what my 'continuing studies' are about.

So....
Bo?

STUFF IT. You are wrong. Wrong about atheists, wrong about secular charities, wrong about the Second Coming, and wrong about praying someone sober.
Wrong.
And dangerous.

reply to post by wildtimes


He said that deists aren't religious. lol
that word is used like a loaded weapon. take aim at something you don't like, call it religious, like oprah calling people who don't mindlessly worship obama, racists. if you happen to like it, you let it kiss the holy ring of darwin and be thought of as not religious.

i wonder how many hoops a person would have to jump thru before they would actually be allowed to think anything independent of the communist training cente....er i mean university, and not be called religious or nutter or even, oh i dunno, a conspiracy theorist. hehe.

wildtimes
reply to post by undo

 

in a purely atheistic culture, you would be one of the first to die.

Um, no. I wouldn't.
I can hold my own with atheists as well as religious types. And I have survival skills - such as using a firearm, gardening, fishing, fire-building, building construction, etc.

You are labeling "atheists" as animals, as murderers.THAT IS RIDICULOUS. Religion does not "cause" morality and compassion. EDUCATION, and SOCIAL SKILLS do.

educated people are the first to die in purely atheistic societies. your view of the value of your life is from a melting pot society. purely atheistic society doesn't have any such pretenses. your survival skills will not match their weaponry.

reply to post by undo

He said that deists aren't religious. lol

I think you're confusing "religious" with "having a philosophy regarding God."

DEISTS don't need religion, but they believe in God.

You and Bo really need to do some intensive research into what "atheists", "deists", "believers" and "RELIGIOUS NUTJOBS" have in common - and WHAT THEY DON'T.

Are you aware that "In God we Trust" was only added to the pledge of allegiance in the 1950s? As well as added to printed money?

Are you familiar with "DEISM"? Have you read Thomas Paine? Jefferson's Bible? ANYTHING besides the 'Holy Bible' in some random English-language version that is 'preferred' by your particular denomination?

Obviously you are NOT familiar with actual "atheism", have never interacted with them, have not learned that they are perfectly moral, nor that RELIGION DOES NOT CAUSE MORALITY.

gha

reply to post by undo

educated people are the first to die in purely atheistic societies.

LOLOLOL!!! WHAT?????

You also need to learn the difference between "secular" societies and "anarchist, psychopathic" societies...
wow.

amazing.

i wonder how many hoops a person would have to jump thru before they would actually be allowed to think anything independent of the communist training cente

OMG. It blows my mind that people think "atheism = communism", or that 'liberal = marxism.'

Tragic.

reply to post by Serdgiam


I gave you a star for figuring it out. Yes the issue is about donating to those who actions you most align yourself. It doesn’t matter if they are religious or not as long as you approve of what they are using those funds for. At one time there was little choice in which you donated to as they usually went through 3 or 4 routes now there is choice. If people like the idea of bibles and rosaries being sent in lu of food or shelter by all means go that route however if you’re like me and think there are more important things those funds should go to due diligence in choosing is a must.

Also as you said these threads ultimately deteriorate some faster than others it is the nature of the beast.

reply to post by wildtimes


lack of religion does not encourage morality, other than laws designed to do things like this:

reply to post by undo

lack of religion does not encourage morality

Religion does not encourage morality, either. Compassion, empathy, common sense, and putting oneself in the shoes of another, however, DO encourage morality. No 'religion' required.

RELIGION DOES NOT CAUSE MORALITY.

Man here i thought Theists or whatever people who hate Atheism(yup hating for having no believe, it stupid i know) on ATS would be evolved a better understanding of what Atheism is.

Sadly i gave them too much credit.

Grimpachi
Also as you said these threads ultimately deteriorate some faster than others it is the nature of the beast.

Indeed.

Why do you feed it?

I think a real issue facing society is the use of labels as dismissive end-notes. Instead of a fight between who "gives" more between atheists and christians, I think it would be amazing to see these organizations actually work together to achieve even greater heights instead of tearing each others foundations apart.

Its not limited to the religious/non-religious sector either. It is a tactic that is in play in almost every part of our world wide culture. Instead of wasting time, energy, and resources to berate religion with billboards, the atheists involved could have used that to help. Even if it was just a small percentage, it still might make a world of difference for a family or two. And the same goes for those sending the bibles. Instead of that, the time, energy, and resources could go into educating the people affected to be self-sufficient under the auspices of the teachings of their religion. Meaning, help those who are unable, but willing, to help themselves. To teach them how to fish instead of just throwing fish at them.

In my opinion, it is a pervasive problem that some use to their personal advantage, at the expense of others. Regardless of the banner waved, the actions are what matter. This tactic is used everywhere, EVERYWHERE, and the only thing needed to keep it going is keep people fighting amongst ideological lines in the sand so they are too busy to see the beach is slowly being destroyed.

reply to post by undo


Honestly now you are trying to say the bible is the holder of morality. I beg to differ religion is highly immoral.

There’s a lot more where that came from.

reply to post by undo


If God/s exist, then wouldnt you think that "morals" would be engrained deeply enough to not be affected by the labels we choose to use?

Meaning, that they would exist regardless of belief, or lack of belief, in whatever creator put them there in the first place?

atheism is lack of belief in a higher power, who has various names like god, your higher self, ra, jesus, jehovah, allah, buddha, krishna and so on. belief in a higher power does not preclude morality, i agree with that. but lack of belief in a higher power, does not preclude morality either.

the problem is, where there are no rules regarding the sacredness of human life, governments become monsters. they just do. if the psychopaths always rise to the top, and your particular psycho leader thinks humans are just collections of cells and that's it, his scientists will do things like, take bets on whether the traditionally religious ukranians would descend into cannabalism in order to survive whilst being starved to death in their own homes. he surrounded the entire ukraine with troops and wouldn't let anybody out, nor any food in. millions were starving to death enmasse, women children babies the elderly. see, their just collections of cells responding to stimuli.

reply to post by Serdgiam

Why do you feed it?

Well in this thread I am already vested. It started out civil enough but around page 6 it fell apart. Look I just had a major surgery to reconstruct damage from an IED 7 years ago I can’t go out I hate watching TV canceled cable years ago anyway. This is mild entertainment. On this site my alter ego comes out and it’s the only place I am vocal about atheism.

Most threads I post to bring things to light. This is one of the very few I participate in after the fact.

reply to post by undo



That's a strawman and slippery slope rolled into one. Read the bible there have been plenty of leaders following gods will partaking in genocide.