Religion – your views

[Johnny]

It's all very well to argue for and against atheism/religious belief, but how can you label atheism as being more dangerous than religion? Religion is accountable for some of the world's most catastrophic events. Some might argue that religion is the world's deadliest weapon.

Now you're just talking nonsense.

You're a Creationist? LoL

Nope. But at least creationists are more logical; as are Buddhists, animists, and practically the members of every other religion.
Speaking of which, got nothing to say in defence of my arguments? LoL. Then I won't bother debunking you any further.

Atheism is not a religion.

It bears all the characteristics of a religion.

By that logic, not playing football is a sport.

Buzz! Wrong. It's actually like saying that playing soccer is as much a sport as football. Read was written please. Thanks.

Atheism is a religion in which you strongly believe in science, but Patrick, highly opposed to other religions, is feels put down at the thought he might share the same name as his "opposers".

While atheism is a religion, it has nothing at all to do with science, otherwise science would prove it. Atheism is one of the strangest religions in that those who practice it don't actually like to admit they're religious. It's like a christian group that goes to church and yet is eager to stress the point that "we are not a church-related organization".

Although if they have the will to call themselves Atheists, they tend to look down on supernatural belief more than Christian's would about non-believers.

Atheists tend to be more disdainful than any other religion actually. Once that disdain is stripped away, there's nothing there- nothing at all. It's essentially an empty faith.

I wasn't arguing there, I was just saying that Atheists, if they call themselves that, a lot of the time are smug about it.

Very true.

But Johnny, if you're so against Atheism for hard-core science beliefs, then how come you're so hard-core opposed to science

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/scienc ... ition.html

that you don't even bother to pay attention to history?

http://www.historyguide.org/history.html

Why does he know so much about it? Because if you went through school, you'd have learnt it. This means either you're a nine-year-old troll, or you failed school really bad and decided to commit truancy, or you're a dumbass that passed Socials 8 by cheating.

Perhaps you should look at these definitions of science and history and then respond again. Thanks.

As for myself, I wouldn't classify myself into any religion, I kind of get my ideas from all of them (except Scientology, which is complete bullshit, it's way to obvious). I follow religions for the moralities, which in my opinion has left me with a very, very open mind. Just because good and true moralities come from a religion and someone doesn't believe in religion, doesn't make moralities stupid. I also believe in some sort of life after death, because according to the third law of thermodynamics, energy, aka your conscience, cannot vanish. I also believe in sort f "souls" because of factual witness events that have occurred:

A woman was dying on an operating table, and she couldn't see what they were doing because they had a sheet over her body. But then her heart stopped for a minute, and she saw herself floating above her body, and could see under the blanket what was going on, and she was right, and then she came back to life.

But of course, as you can tell, I'm big on Science too. I love quantum physics with dimensions, as well as astronomy. That stuff is damn interesting (and I find it easy to understand).

This is a good point of view; if you really mean this, you're actually similar to me in that you have enough of an open-mind to comprehend others philosophies, take a good look at them from a scientific point of view, and arrive at your own conclusions. But that's what I'm saying: to follow the religion of atheism, (despite what disdainful atheists themselves might say) you are forbidden to be scientific, rational, or believe in reality. You practically have to believe in fairy tales and mythology!

Now just to stress: I'm not saying all atheists are like this; I know some atheists that are very nice people and even very intelligent (outside of their religion) it's just certain individuals that take their beliefs to extremes, even going so far as to try and use "science" to justify them, which is just plain stupid.

[spiraldoor]

Look out! It’s an evil clown!

[Johnny]

Atheism is not a religion.

It bears all the characteristics of a religion.

I'm not even going to read what you've written.

Well, I did it anyway,

Fail.

First, here is Wikipedia's definition of Atheism:

Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[4] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.

That's the mildest way to put it. I would say atheism is a hate-group. If the two World Wars and Nazi Germany cannot justify this enough, then just go onto absolutely any atheist site and you'll find that they are obsessed with "religion", as though religion were something completely different to what they themselves practice. Practically every thread is a hate-thread about how the religious should be exterminated. Every thread is the source of some outlet of atheist's anger about some imagined wrong evil "religious" people committed. In fact, it's very similar to going onto a white supremacist site and finding them obsessed with black people, even though they claim to only be concerned with the "well-being of the white race".
And to top it all up, they do it all in the name of "science" to justify their actions while not knowing anything about science at all. It's disgusting.

No, Atheism in itself makes no comment on the origin of the Universe. However, most Atheists are rational people, who accept the scientific explanation for the current state of the Universe (not the origin of it!), the Big Bang Theory. But this is not a fundamental belief to neither science nor Atheism. Should we discover evidence that contradicts the Big Bang Theory, we would change our minds and develop new theories. That's how science works. Furthermore, neither science nor Atheism makes any comments on the "purpose" of the Universe.

WHERE did universes come into this??

It is commonly regarded as consisting of a person’s relation to God or to gods or spirits.

Like I said, (bla bla bla bla bla lot's of atheist nonsense)
Atheism has none of these things (some Atheists use a capital 'A' as their symbol, but this is not an official symbol all Atheists in the world can relate to).

So does Atheism have 'all the characteristics of a religion'? Bollocks!

So you're saying that because your religion isn't like most other religions it's not a religion?
That's like saying that Buddhism isn't a religion because there are many different ways to practice it and it doesn't use symbols!

I will therefore declare victory here unless you actually have some intelligent response to it.

So all you can do is ignore responses and declare victory? If so, there's not really much point arguing with you. You're being completely irrational.

I'm very interested to know why you find this funny. Darwin's theory of evolution (etc etc etc more crap) If you have some shocking information which can disprove evolution, I suggest you stop lolling around on Rayman forums and take it to the academic arena and win a Nobel Prize.

I've often heard atheists say that you can't disprove a negative, but it's on the shoulders of the one who "believes" to prove their point. So, prove to me evolution if you're so scientific. Or did you just expect everyone to believe you without questioning it?

So go ahead, show me what you got!

Considering your bold claims regarding evolution, I think it's on your shoulders to prove your own point first. If you can do that, I'll answer your demands. Just don't get angry when you're defeated in logical argument.

Wtf does this even mean? You believe in fact, not myth? What has that got to do with anything I said? Please elaborate.

Elaborate? I mean exactly what I said. I am only persuaded by fact, so if you want to prove anything to me, that's what you'd better demonstrate. You've done pretty badly so far.

That said, the two of them aren't fundamentally connected.

This is the one smart thing you've said all day.

Now you're just repeating youself. Like I said, Atheism is not a religion, and it is not historically closely linked to Naziism. This is something a lot of religious people believe, when there's actually no credible historical evidence to support it.

Let's rephrase this: now you're just repeating yourself. Like I said, atheism *is* a religion, and few religions other than atheism are directly linked historically to Nazism. However, that all religions, including christianity and the occult, were somehow linked to Nazism (but not atheism *gasp*) is something most atheists believe, despite their being no evidence in favour of their beliefs- in fact the evidence is downright against it. Read: http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.asp

Once again you simply make claims without giving any evidence for their validity.

Lol. In that case, what's THIS?

organised religion throughout history has been an excellent retardant for science

[/quote]

[El Dango]

I would say atheism is a hate-group.

I'm not sure whether or not that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life, but it's definitely on the top 10.

[Xenon]

It's all very well to argue for and against atheism/religious belief, but how can you label atheism as being more dangerous than religion? Religion is accountable for some of the world's most catastrophic events. Some might argue that religion is the world's deadliest weapon.

Now you're just talking nonsense.

OK then Mr. One Liner, how is what I said nonsense? What part of that post is to your mind nonsensical? Let's take the events of 9/11 for instance: one of the most catastrophic incidents in recent history. The roots of such terrorism were obviously founded on a severe political and religious clash. Atheism, in this instance and in most other similar mass-tragedies, is entirely guiltless, so for every instance you can name that directly involves atheism, I could name a thousand that directly involve religion.

Also, I'd strongly suggest elaborating on some of your points if you want to retain your credibility.

[Rayfist]

I think god is real!

[Holy Crap]

If the two World Wars and Nazi Germany cannot justify this enough

lolwhut?

So you're saying that because your religion isn't like most other religions it's not a religion?
That's like saying that Buddhism isn't a religion because there are many different ways to practice it and it doesn't use symbols!

That's not even close to what he's saying. Athiesm is not a religion. Atheism is the lack of belief in divine entites or supernatural explanations for events in the universe. A cow is athiest by default, would you say cows are religious? Of course not don't be ridiculous.

So all you can do is ignore responses and declare victory? If so, there's not really much point arguing with you. You're being completely irrational.

There was no response to ignore.

Considering your bold claims regarding evolution, I think it's on your shoulders to prove your own point first.

Did you go to school?

That said, the two of them aren't fundamentally connected.

This is the one smart thing you've said all day.
...
However, that all religions, including christianity and the occult, were somehow linked to Nazism (but not atheism *gasp*) is something most atheists believe, despite their being no evidence in favour of their beliefs- in fact the evidence is downright against it. Read: http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.asp

So you agree that science and atheism are not connected then go onto claim that atheism is linked to Nazism because they used evolution in their principles, evolution being a scientific theory in itself? You're just contradicting yourself.

Once again you simply make claims without giving any evidence for their validity.

Lol. In that case, what's THIS?

organised religion throughout history has been an excellent retardant for science

[/quote]
Maybe you should have read the entire post instead of selecting what was convenient for you to arguie against.

This statement is also ironic considering that organised religion throughout history has been an excellent retardant for science, and it still is in the Islamic world. The Catholic church wasn't exactly open to new ideas during the Dark Ages, was it? For instance, both Galileo and Copernicus were labeled heretics for advocating Heliocentrism.

[Johnny]

Look out! It’s an evil clown!

Nice to see you contributing to discussion.

I'm not sure whether or not that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life, but it's definitely on the top 10.

Then perhaps you should actually try debunking it, especially since I posted links to Nazi/social darwinism, and backed it up with the examples of atheist sites. Or are you just going to sit down and shout "that's DUMB! you're DUMB for saying that because i SAID so!"?

Some might argue that religion is the world's deadliest weapon.

Now you're just talking nonsense.

OK then Mr. One Liner, how is what I said nonsense?

"Some might argue that religion is the world's deadliest weapon?" Really? You're actually asking me how this isn't nonsense?

Also, I'd strongly suggest elaborating on some of your points if you want to retain your credibility.

What a hypocritical post. Why don't *you* elaborate on how religion can possibly be more dangerous than atheism before you barge in here trying shouting about religion- especially since you practice one.

lolwhut?

Read the damn link.

That's not even close to what he's saying. Athiesm is not a religion. Atheism is the lack of belief in divine entites or supernatural explanations for events in the universe. A cow is athiest by default, would you say cows are religious? Of course not don't be ridiculous.

So now you're saying all animals are atheist too? This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard.

There was no response to ignore.

Sorry, I take that back. This is stupider. You're actually shamelessly denying I ever made a response. Good luck with that.

Did you go to school?

Way to change the topic. Why don't you prove to me evolution since you seem to have so much faith in it.
By the way... did you ever go to school? Are you still studying today? Do you have a job? What as?

So you agree that science and atheism are not connected then go onto claim that atheism is linked to Nazism because they used evolution in their principles, You're just contradicting yourself.

No that's exactly my point- science and atheism *aren't* connected, but when you try and mix them, Nazi Germany is what happens. I can't believe you actually don't see the dangers of mixing science with atheism. And by the way:

evolution being a scientific theory in itself?

Lol. Evolution. Scientific. I thought jokes were less funny the second time someone said them.

Maybe you should have read the entire post instead of selecting what was convenient for you to arguie against.

Ohhh... because neither you nor Tobbe nor even Spiraldoor have EVER done that *gasp*.http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BBjBD8eujrg/S ... +happy.jpg

[El Dango]

I'm not sure whether or not that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life, but it's definitely on the top 10.

Then perhaps you should actually try debunking it, especially since I posted links to Nazi/social darwinism, and backed it up with the examples of atheist sites. Or are you just going to sit down and shout "that's DUMB! you're DUMB for saying that because i SAID so!"?

1. You switched around our names there.

2. Atheism is not a hate group. In fact, it's not even a 'group' in the first place. As Tobbe has already pointed out, atheism basically means that you don't believe in any god, not that you have anything against people who do. I don't know why you have such a narrow-minded view on atheism, but going as far as to call it a 'hate group' is just ridiculous.

Also, atheism is not a religion. This is not debatable. It's a fact.

[Johnny]

1. You switched around our names there.

Sorry about that. This was actually a genuine mistake.

going as far as to call it a 'hate group' is just ridiculous.

Then why do atheists hate religion and the religious (besides themselves)? Why is it you can go onto any atheist site and find a narrow-minded bunch of morons blaming all the world's problems on religious people (as though atheists aren't) and their cultures?

Also, atheism is not a religion. This is not debatable. It's a fact.

Ah, so it's not debatable. Has atheism taught you not to question things and to accept as fact what you're told to? Oh, I apologize- I'm actually questioning belief here. How silly of me.

And, on top of all this, WHY has no-one (not even the one to whom the link was posted) addressed the evidence of social darwinist beliefs evident in Nazism?

1. Atheism is a religion.
2. Atheism is a hate-group.
3. Atheism is closely linked to Nazsim. http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.asp
4.Atheism is not connected to science in any way; it is, however, connected with evolution, which no one has ever proven or ever will.
5. Mixing science with atheism is dangerous. (Again, the example of Nazism).

I've given evidence for all these things except for two. One is atheism being a religion since, admittedly, that revolves more around personal definition than fact, but at the very least, if we're going to be technical, I've demonstrated my definition is more likely the real one. The second thing I gave no evidence for is that atheism is not connected to science, or that evolution has never been proven, as this is a negative, therefore it is on the shoulders of any atheists here to prove otherwise if they want to. Until then, the statement remains unaltered.

This concludes my stance on religion, the topic of discussion for this thread. If no-one can answer these things, I maintain my position and claim victory for the debate. Thanks.

[timoo]

After all, as I said, that is what the Nazis, or social darwinists, did to try and justify their killing of Jews.

What's wrong with the National Socialists (I don't like the pejorative connotation of the term 'Nazis') in the first place? They were very nice people

[El Dango]

Then why do atheists hate religion and the religious (besides themselves)? Why is it you can go onto any atheist site and find a narrow-minded bunch of morons blaming all the world's problems on religious people (as though atheists aren't) and their cultures?

I don't know what sites you're talking about, but I do know that atheists in general do not hate religion.

Ah, so it's not debatable. Has atheism taught you not to question things and to accept as fact what you're told to?

The definition of the word 'atheist' is a person who does not have any religion.

And, on top of all this, WHY has no-one (not even the one to whom the link was posted) addressed the evidence of social darwinist beliefs evident in Nazism?

I believe Tobbe did at one point and another.

1. Atheism is a religion.
2. Atheism is a hate-group.
3. Atheism is closely linked to Nazsim. http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.asp
4.Atheism is not connected to science in any way; it is, however, connected with evolution, which no one has ever proven or ever will.
5. Mixing science with atheism is dangerous. (Again, the example of Nazism).

1. We've already pointed out several times that it isn't.
2. Claiming this is very discriminating towards atheists (aside from being a load of bullshit)
3. Not at all. Also, I don't see any reason to trust that website's credibility.
4. Well, you got the first part right.
5. That does not make any sense at all.

I'm sorry Johnny, but your crazy propaganda just doesn't work.

[Adsolution]

Johnny, Atheism is not a hate group. You wanna see a hate group? Look up the West-bro Baptist Church.

What gave you the idea that Atheists are evil? Then what do you call people that don't believe in God?

It is true, that in the recent past Atheists have been some of the most critical, but come on, it's not like Atheism is a hate group.

I'm not going to call myself Atheist, because even though I believe in science and all, I like to believe in the deities too even though it's conflicting. I don't care if one half of that may be bs, because, imo, it makes me happy.

Also what is the debate/argument about exactly? Which "view on life" is better? Johnny's ignorance and inability to explain his points in a way that makes sense? I also don't know why Nazis are the highest common denominator here.

[Hunchman801]

Tobbe has already addressed most of RayFan's logical fallacies (no offence though, I think she's a very nice person ), but some still remain:

Notice how when people solve math problems, there's only an answer, right or wrong. But when someone does something such as write music, there's no right or wrong answer, there's no technical answer.

First of all, this only applies to boolean questions (unless you can reply to “1 + 1 = ?” by “true” or “false” — please note I used an example of basic arithmetic to make things as clear as possible, but the same would apply to analysis, geometry, algebra, etc.), and the reason why there's no absolute answer in some other domains is because there is no objective question.

Now thing of that as the Universe. Where the HELL did everything come from. Is there a scientific answer for that? There was the big bang theory, but what created the big bang? And what created the thing that created the big bang and so on?

Because you lack the theoretical knowledge to comprehend the mechanics of the Big Bang doesn't mean the theory doesn't make sense. You said you were interested in quantum physics, therefore you must have heard of spontaneous models. There was no need for someone or something to create the Big Bang, and there was absolutely nothing before it, because time did not exist!

Which was first, the chicken or the egg?

None of them: it was theropod dinosaurs.

Atheism is the lack of belief in divine entites or supernatural explanations for events in the universe. A cow is athiest by default, would you say cows are religious?

No, atheism is the belief that such entities do not exist. Therefore, cows are non-aligned

[Tobbe]

Oh, Johnny. Everything we tell you just go in one ear and out the other, doesn't it?

First of all: If we're gonna attempt to have an intelligent discussion, you have to stop quoting us selectively, ignoring our responses, dismissing valid arguments with one-line comments calling them 'stupid' or 'ridicolous'. And you must stop making the same claims over and over when we have in fact provided you with plenty of reasons why they're wrong. At least try to respond to our arguments and try to justify your claims with evidence. If you can't do this I don't see any point in having this discussion.

Okay, I'll comment briefly on all this craziness. I won't bother creating another quote-fest, so forgive me if I leave something out. Firstly, there is this claim that Atheism is a religion, which you don't seem to wanna give up despite being given solid evidence that it isn't. I'll try and explain this again: The word atheist consists of two parts; 'a' and 'theist'. A theist is a person who believes that one or more deities exist, as a quick Google or Wikipedia search will tell you. So an a-theist must therefore be a person who doesn't believe that deities exist. The only thing you can say for sure about any given Atheist is that they do not believe in any deities. Similarly, the only thing you can say about any given Theist is that he believes in at least one deity. All Christians, Muslims and Hindus are Theists, while most non-religious people and some Buddhists are Atheists. The terms 'Theist' and 'Atheist' are simply used to describe whether a person believes in one or more deities or not. Atheism may be a part of some religions (like certain forms of Buddhism. Atheism in religion is very rare, though.) or life stances, but it is not a religion or life stance in itself. At some point you mentioned that we Atheists 'practice' our "religion". Now I'm curious to know: How exactly does one practice Atheism? Being an Atheist myself I feel qualified to answer that question myself: we don't. In principle, you don't do anything special simply because you're an Atheist. You go about your daily business not believing in god, and that's pretty much it. We don't have any sacred places (like churches or mosques), we have no Atheist gatherings at specific times of the week or year, and we have no rituals that we perform simply because we are Atheists. So there's no way you can practice Atheism because it is not a religion in any way, and that's a fact.

Okay, that took more time than I expected, so I don't have time to make any detailed responses to anything else Johnny has said today before my bedtime (hooray for military life! It's like being 10 years old again ). But don't worry, sometime in the near future I will deal with the outrageous claims made by him concerning Naziism and Evolution, unless someone beats me to it, of course.

[Adsolution]

@Hunch:
Think of it as my my stupidly direct learning curve where for some reason I was basing my opinions off of something that I didn't know all too well.

[Holy Crap]

Atheism is the lack of belief in divine entites or supernatural explanations for events in the universe. A cow is athiest by default, would you say cows are religious?

No, atheism is the belief that such entities do not exist. Therefore, cows are non-aligned

I would say implicit atheism still counts as atheism but I guess this at least is debateable.

Some might argue that religion is the world's deadliest weapon.

Now you're just talking nonsense.

Ever heard of the crusades? Or are you going to try and tell me that the Roman Catholic forces were made up of Atheists?

[cows etc]

So now you're saying all animals are atheist too? This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard.

Animals do not believe in god/s and are non-religious.
Athiests do not believe in god/s and are non-religious.
If you count implicit atheism I would certainly count animals under the definition, but I will concede that this particular definition is debatable.

There was no response to ignore.

Sorry, I take that back. This is stupider. You're actually shamelessly denying I ever made a response. Good luck with that.

You didn't make any real arguement you just pathetically tried to link Tobbe to Nazism because you had no reasoable rebuttal to his statements.

Did you go to school?

Way to change the topic. Why don't you prove to me evolution since you seem to have so much faith in it.
By the way... did you ever go to school? Are you still studying today? Do you have a job? What as?

I'm still in school, and if you had done so a basic year 9 and 10 biology (Biology is a science btw) course would have explained Evolution sufficiently enough for you to understand the mountainous evidence pointing towards evolution.
But maybe you wagged that day to spew illogical nonsense all over the internet.

[Hunchman801]

By the way...

[Johnny]

After all, as I said, that is what the Nazis, or social darwinists, did to try and justify their killing of Jews.

What's wrong with the National Socialists (I don't like the pejorative connotation of the term 'Nazis') in the first place? They were very nice people

Sorry. I don't feed trolls.

I don't know what sites you're talking about, but I do know that atheists in general do not hate religion.

If it were up to atheists they'd probably torture, maim and kill every religious person in the world besides themselves (atheists excluded of course) just look at how Richard Dawkins talks about them if you don't believe me. "If someone tells you they're religious you can immediately assume they're a psychopath, ignorant and evil"; funny how this comes from the figurehead of atheism himself.

The definition of the word 'atheist' is a person who does not have any religion.

According to atheists. However, the statement rings hollow when you recognize the fact they *are* religious.

I believe Tobbe did at one point and another.

Of course he did.

1. Atheism is a religion.
2. Atheism is a hate-group.
3. Atheism is closely linked to Nazsim. http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.asp
4.Atheism is not connected to science in any way; it is, however, connected with evolution, which no one has ever proven or ever will.
5. Mixing science with atheism is dangerous. (Again, the example of Nazism).

1. We've already pointed out several times that it isn't.

No you've just kept on saying "THIS IS WRONG!!!!!" with no evidence to support that.

2. Claiming this is very discriminating towards atheists (aside from being a load of bullshit)

I don't mean every individual atheist as I've had to say many times over. But I've already given links, evidence and examples to back up the claim which no one has debunked, or will, I suspect: you'll just keep using red herrings to divert the topic, such as shouting "DISCRIMINATION AND PERSECUTION AGAINST ATHEISTS!!!!!! YOU SHOULD FEEL SORRY FOR US!" rofl!

3. Not at all. Also, I don't see any reason to trust that website's credibility.

That's because you don't like the evidence. You must simply rely on blind faith in some imaginary morals for atheism to brush it aside.

4. Well, you got the first part right.

5. That does not make any sense at all.

I'm sorry Johnny, but your crazy propaganda just doesn't work.

If you could actually be logical perhaps you could address the point instead of saying: "this is silly"/"discrimination"/"stupid"/"doesn't make sense" etc. etc. etc. to try and nullify the points. This demonstrates that you want to prove the points wrong while avoiding getting into an actual logical discussion. Therefore, I don't really see much more point in debating with you further.

Johnny, Atheism is not a hate group. You wanna see a hate group? Look up the West-bro Baptist Church.

I never said there weren't other religious hate groups.

What gave you the idea that Atheists are evil? Then what do you call people that don't believe in God?

Depends on the god, but in most cases you'd just call them people of a different religion. I'm a friend of any peaceful religion, but not hateful religions such as atheism, or the extremist denominations of Christianity/Islam etc.

It is true, that in the recent past Atheists have been some of the most critical, but come on, it's not like Atheism is a hate group.

"Critical"? More like downright angry, raving, bigoted, hateful preachers of how their religion is the only true one- and then they try and say that science supports such a claim. Every religion does the same thing: whether their actions are justified by a god, or gods, or by them being "holier" or more worthy than others, or by them being of a higher race, or, in the case of atheism, being more "intelligent", hate-groups are all the same as each other.

I'm not going to call myself Atheist, because even though I believe in science and all, I like to believe in the deities too even though it's conflicting. I don't care if one half of that may be bs, because, imo, it makes me happy.

How is it conflicting?

Also what is the debate/argument about exactly? Which "view on life" is better?

The peaceful one.

And finally: Oh, Tobbe. Everything we tell you just go in one ear and out the other, doesn't it?

First of all: If we're gonna attempt to have an intelligent discussion, you have to stop quoting me selectively, ignoring my responses, dismissing valid arguments with one-line comments calling them 'stupid' or 'ridicolous'. And you must stop making the same claims over and over when I have in fact provided you with plenty of reasons why they're wrong. At least try to respond to my arguments and try to justify your claims with evidence. If you can't do this I don't see any point in having this discussion.

Okay, I'll comment briefly on all this craziness. I won't bother creating another quote-fest, so forgive me if I leave something out.

Don't worry, I'll point it out so you can see what you avoided

Firstly, there is this claim that Atheism is a religion, (bla bla bla lots of rubbish) but it is not a religion or life stance in itself.

That is the atheistic definition. Certainly, that would have been the thought behind creating the term, however, despite what the wishes of the inventor of the term may have been, atheism bears the characteristics of religion today. Atheists have their mythological stories for the creation of the world, they believe in their invented mythological creatures, they have their "high priests" and "wise men" (Richard Dawkins and others) and so on. Atheists are also taught who to hate: in the atheistic religion, all who believe in deities are the "sinners". The one difference between atheism and other religions is that atheism is dressed up in pseudo-scientific language, and terms such as "holier than thou", "brethren", "priest" and so on are omitted in favour of "more rational than you", "non-believer", "(pseudo-)intellectual" and so on.

At some point you mentioned that we Atheists 'practice' our "religion".

So you're saying you don't practice your religion, therefore it's not a religion. What about a "christian" who doesn't pray or go to church? I suppose this person isn't religious either? And you practice religion, including atheism, by adhering to all beliefs that "prove" or benefit your religion; by jointly verbally harassing members of alternate faiths; by worshipping your head-figure to the extent that even when he destroyed the leading atheist forum on the net none of his followers blamed him for it. http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.co ... open-soon/

And by the way, here are the points you brushed aside: the link between atheism and Nazism. You have also not addressed about the way atheists act irrational and abusive, (as seen on all their sites), and finally, the point you've avoided more than any other is: prove to me evolution. You have failed to demonstrate that atheism is scientific in any way despite your loud claims. But don't worry, I'm willing to wait

Therefore, cows are non-aligned

By that logic animals are non-aligned then. I don't know why you even brought up cows in the first place tho.

Ever heard of the crusades? Or are you going to try and tell me that the Roman Catholic forces were made up of Atheists?

Ever heard of the Nazis? Oh, I forgot- their main target was atheists. Sorry.

I will concede that this particular definition is debatable.

Cows are not atheists.

You didn't make any real arguement you just pathetically tried to link Tobbe to Nazism because you had no reasoable rebuttal to his statements.

Through the use of red herrings, ad hominem attacks, and other techniques, you have constantly derailed the topic, and failed to address the logical points at hand. This demonstrates your fallacies and flawed position.

I'm still in school, and if you had done so a basic year 9 and 10 biology (Biology is a science btw) course would have explained Evolution sufficiently enough for you to understand the mountainous evidence pointing towards evolution.
But maybe you wagged that day to spew illogical nonsense all over the internet.

Ohh I see. So you took a science course in highschool once. You're certainly fitted to for an intellectual debate then. (Yes, biology is a science, just in case you were being sarcastic.) I have been to school, graduated, and now have a science degree, but that's just me. I personally hope that knowledge of science and good education spreads more wholesomely so that the world will move away from atheism quicker. It's only natural that as such knowledge increases, atheism's power will decrease after all, until the half-baked philosophy vanishes all together. I would also say it's debatable whether present-day atheists should be labelled with schitzophrenia. Perhaps you should go for a degree in psychology and find out? I get the feeling you might need it.

And as for Hunchman; a troll? Funny, the definition of troll is: "someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous or off-topic messages in an online community." I'm simply stating my views in a thread entitled "Religion- YOUR VIEWS"; I'm stating my views in this thread alone and nowhere else But by your strange definition, Holy Crap must be a troll, since he has been avoiding my point about there being no proof of evolution, and using ad hominem attacks to justify his points. So yeah- terms like "troll" aren't things you should just throw around lightly, without thinking. Or are you simply biassed against anyone who's not an atheist to the extent that you'd sink to doing ad hominem attacks as well?

[El Dango]

If it were up to atheists they'd probably torture, maim and kill every religious person in the world besides themselves (atheists excluded of course) just look at how Richard Dawkins talks about them if you don't believe me. "If someone tells you they're religious you can immediately assume they're a psychopath, ignorant and evil"; funny how this comes from the figurehead of atheism himself.

That doesn't mean that every single atheist thinks like him. Also, your points seem to get more and more ridicolous.

According to atheists.

No, that is in fact the only correct definition of the word. It doesn't matter who you ask, religious or not.

Of course he did.

...which makes your previous statement wrong.

No you've just kept on saying "THIS IS WRONG!!!!!" with no evidence to support that.

That is a lie. We've used plenty of evidence, including Wikipedia.

I don't mean every individual atheist as I've had to say many times over.

This completely contradicts with your description of atheism as a hate group.

That's because you don't like the evidence.

You're the one who completely ignores everything we've used against you. The site you linked to doesn't seem to be made by people who know what they're talking about, and the source doesn't appear reliable.

I assume you have nothing more to say then. Good.

If you could actually be logical perhaps you could address the point instead of saying: "this is silly"/"discrimination"/"stupid"/"doesn't make sense" etc. etc. etc. to try and nullify the points. This demonstrates that you want to prove the points wrong while avoiding getting into an actual logical discussion. Therefore, I don't really see much more point in debating with you further.

You're the one being illogical. You're the one ignoring several valid points. You're the one denying evidence. Trying to blame me for all this just because you find it easier than an actual argument is incredibly immature of you.