The Atheist - Agnostic - Non religious thread

Dean wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: How can criticism be considered as a "threat"? It's the whole point about discussions. And as I said above, I rarely was outright offensive or insulting except for the cases where I was provoked or dared to be so. Why is nobody criticizing Iván for comparing Atheists with people like Hitler or Stalin? That's fairly insulting if you ask me. Still, I think that it's a valid argument in such discussions, since I can take the opportunity to voice my disagreement. People did criticise Iván (and others) for making that comparison, but he only made it in retaliation to your accusation that religion promotes violence - it was not an offensive remark, it was a defensive remark.

Then it is a combination of "knee-jerk" and "apples vs. oranges". And I didn't imply any intentionality on the part of the moderately religious people ... often people mean good, but their actions have unintended side effects.

Dean wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: What makes you think that I expect to "turn" any believers who read my posts? I explained many times that IMO changes will come from inside ... both Hitchens and Dawkins were raised in Christian beliefs and managed to decide that it was not for them. I think that my posts are balanced enough to make sense to such people, but I don't think that there is anything you could say to people like Jampa or Iván that could possibly change their minds. So I don't even try to convince them. Then why do you taunt them to change their holy scripture to remove these inconcistences and insert scientific fact in its place?

If it was holy to them, they would follow it to the letter. If the Vatican acknowledges Evolution and at the same time upholds the story of Adam and Eve, that simply seems hypocritical to me. Why not be specific and unambiguous about it?

Dean wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: Dean wrote: If the jokes are offensive to some people on this board then yes, I will object. If someone makes cookie monster jokes over Akerfeldt's singing I will object, if someone calls Metal childish then I will object, if they then go on to say that people who listen to Metal should grow-up, then I will be personnally offended. Those things happen all the time ... maybe you're easily offended? If someone says "Metal sucks, No grown ups in their right mind would listen to it, not to mention those horrible growling sounds that they call vocals" I would object, but I would not think for a minute that this is something that should be banned. It's just an opinion. I wouldn't ban those comments either since it is not that big a deal, however I would verbally rip into their argument (hi Tom ).   Deliberately causing religious offense by the way of a derogatory joke is however bigotry and is against forum rules.

The very topic of this thread though suggests that opinions which are critical towards religious beliefs might be posted. Where do you draw the line? Will I violate forum rules if I post a George Carlin clip about religion from YouTube, or the Dave Allen clip about religion?

^ I know state education in Europe and US is great but in most all Central and South America is pure cr*p and is awful, so here we pay for private education and is not SO expensive, so, there are mainly protestant of catholic schools so we can decide where to put the child, there are moderate and fanatic schools as well, so, put all "Christian"  or "religion" education in the same box is a mistake...

Trademark wrote: "Deliberately causing religious offense by the way of a derogatory joke is however bigotry and is against forum rules." You mean something like this for example Dean? "^ sure, why expose them to a world of lies when the Bible is readily available at home."

Or like "Dawkma"?

Negoba wrote: Epignosis wrote: My wife and I are also considering home schooling our children. We don't fancy them being forced to read stories about homosexual penguins when they are in first grade.   Have you actually read that book, Robert?   There's nothing sexual about it.

That's not the point.

Trademark wrote: ^ You have to admit that was a good one.

I rolled on the floor laughing.

Epignosis wrote: Negoba wrote: Epignosis wrote: My wife and I are also considering home schooling our children. We don't fancy them being forced to read stories about homosexual penguins when they are in first grade.   Have you actually read that book, Robert?   There's nothing sexual about it. That's not the point.

Trademark wrote: "Deliberately causing religious offense by the way of a derogatory joke is however bigotry and is against forum rules." You mean something like this for example Dean? "^ sure, why expose them to a world of lies when the Bible is readily available at home."

This is very interesting. This remark was meant to be sarcastic about how some religious people sometimes assume that science is a bunch of lies if it contradicts scripture. It only now occurred to me that it could also be read in the way that it implies that the Bible is similar to a world of lies. Well, I didn't mean it like that - and it's obvious if you read the reply in the context of what I was replying to.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: Epignosis wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: Epignosis wrote: Never mind about the bold topic...I have lost my train of thought regarding it. Mr ProgFreak wrote: Epignosis wrote: Why would I tell my children at nine years old I am a Christian?  If I have to tell them when they are nine, I'm not a very good Christian.  I attend church weekly, pray, read the Bible, and write music with rather specific lyrics. You mean that by that age you'll already have imprinted your belief onto them? Case in point. I take my instructions about what is good and what is evil from the Bible, not from you.  It is a good thing for a child to be raised according to Christ's teachings.  As head of the household, it is my duty to teach my children to follow the directives of Scripture. If I didn't believe that, then I would be a disingenuous Christian, wouldn't I? Do you think that your children might not adopt your point of view if you left the choice to them? If so, your religion qualifies as "toxic" as defined by Dennett, and I agree. Epignosis wrote: Epignosis wrote: Epignosis wrote: The God of the Bible is the God of my household.  My children will grow up under the teachings of the Bible. "[...b]efore religious teachers get their hands on them." You clearly have a huge chip on your shoulder.  Do you teach them about evolution, and about how this directly contradicts the book of genesis? Nice loaded question there. No, I don't- for the same reasons I don't teach them about Newton's laws, calculus, or how a combustion engine operates. 1. I am not an expert in evolution. 2. It does not have any bearing on my child's relationship with Christ, which is far more important than accepting evolutionary theory. 3. As I've told you before, the Bible is not a science text, and you wish to treat it as such.  That is why your rants about how evolution contradict a mere two chapters in Genesis don't bother me a bit.  I'll repeat the question from above, adapted to this situation: Do you think that your children would adopt your religion if they were taught science first? And I'm not talking about new, speculative theories of science, but the established ones (which might include homosexual penguins). "Taught science" You meant taught how to test a hypothesis?  I meant the stuff that they teach in elementary/high school science classes in your country. I grew up taking many science classes, both in high school and college.  My biology teacher was an old man who ridiculed Christians and was very clear to point out during most classes that the Bible was bunk. I am a Christian. Epignosis wrote: ___ If you mean, "Would your children, if taken from you and raised in a school where they were taught the ins and outs of evolutionary theory, become Christians on their own?" The answer to that is: I don't know.  But it is God who drags people to Christ anyway- not anything I or anyone else tells them (John 6:44). But by the very example I (hope I) set for my children, they will make connections on their own about God.  But I teach them the Scriptures because I will have failed them as a Christian father if I don't. ___ Of course, evolutionary theory isn't a useful skill (unless you mean to be a biologist), so I don't see that as a priority for my children to learn. Evolution is a useful skill against Creationists. And I'm still not sure whether you are one ... It's a shame when so much time and effort is invested in a pursuit that does not really matter for any practical purposes. Seems to me you're more interested in converting Christians to atheism than Christians are interested in sharing the Gospel with you. Instead of teaching kids evolution, why not teach them something useful like how to balance a check book, evaluate a political speech, stay out of credit card debt, clean their living space, and skills related to their careers?

^^ It's sad that you can't see the importance of evolution.

And about that biology teacher: It wasn't wise for him to ridicule religion in class ... but if it happened because religious students confronted him with the Bible, he might not have had a choice. Which again shows that science and religion are not separate ... they are irreconcilable as long as religious people are applying scripture to science ("how the world works").


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - January 08 2010 at 12:53

Mr ProgFreak wrote: Notice that I said "in principle". Of course the practical difference between moderates and fanatics is violence, and I have said many times that I have no problem with religious people as long as they keep their religion to themselves and don't bother me with it.

You criticize the Catholoic Church for burning books, but you want to mutilate the Bible, at least has value as historixcal document.

The moderately religious people are still clinging to their literal/dogmatic foundations though. For me they will continue to be - in principle - equivalent until they manage to truly and unmistakably separate myth from ethical guidelines.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - January 08 2010 at 13:03