Religion – your views

[Tobbe]

Johnny, you are a troll. Trolls are not wanted here. I suggest you GTFO. ASAP.

[Xenon]

Look, Johnny, this discussion has plummeted to a level where it's lacking the qualities of a good debate, so I'll just address a few key points to you. I request you ponder them carefully before formulating a response.

Firstly, atheism is not a hate group. Personally, I'm an atheist because I doubt the existence of a supernatural being, but I'm fully willing to listen and respect the views of religious people. Some members of my family are Christians, but I'm not willing to hate them on the grounds of their religious stances or indeed them as human beings. I don't hate religion; I hate the acts of groups/individuals who compose demoninations of evil and sadistic religious parties. Most atheists are rational people who share the same mentality.

Secondly, nobody here is "shouting" at religion or resenting you for your views (perhaps some are resenting your character, but that's another matter), and nobody here is harassing you with ad hominem attacks. In actual fact, it is you who barged into this topic as a new member and judged atheists for being judgemental, hateful narcissists who detest religion and anyone who practices religion, and who ignore "more logical" philosophies because they apparently are more "intelligent" or "rational". This reception is exactly why people you've argued with have been more downbeat with you when expressing their philosophical differences.

And finally a message I've addressed to you before: if you want to maintain your credibility as a level-headed debater, please stop dismissing relevant points with one-line comments like "this is ridiculous" or "now you're talking nonsense". This is a classic example of ad hominem, which is something you've been ranting about. Now I know your response to this will be "PEOPLE ARE DOING IT TO ME", so I suppose I'll deliver this warning to anyone who prepares such simpleton remarks. Stop.

Xenon out.

[Adsolution]

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

The only thing you ever connect your evidence to Atheists being evil is the Nazis. They were a hate group, but it's not like they were the leaders of their beliefs. [read below]

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.

You never said specific hate groups within a religion, you blatantly said Atheism is a hate-group. There's no other meaning that could have had.

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.

hateful religions such as atheism

Again, you have just stated that anyone that doesn't believe in God is hateful.

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.

What the hell are you talking about?

FYI: You're doing exactly what you're saying Atheists do that you despise. Being downright angry, raving, and bigoted towards Atheists.

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?

Herp-y-derp-alert. They don't work together. I can't possibly see how you didn't notice that. Lets see:

Religion: There is some unexplainable thing that makes us each who we are and there is a holy entity that controls the basis of how everything works.

Science: Everything has an explanation, and events caused by something else is how everything works.

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?

I like cake.

Johnny, you listen about as good as an overweight child hearing his mother tell him to stop gouging.

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.

We're not quoting you selectively, we're quoting everything you say.

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.

No, that's the global dictionary definition.

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?

Nope.

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.

That can be said the same for any belief. But is it true for everyone? Not at all. You're just generalizing over and over again, and then you say "no I didn't".

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

We've all gotten past that, but the ONLY thing you've focused on is the Nazis. Lets see, the Christian Dark Ages screwed us over for thousands of years, while the Nazis only screwed us over for forty. Therefore Christians are pure eviler than them Atheists.

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.

Every heard of the Crusades?

I will concede that this particular definition is debatable.

Cows are not atheists.

Of they don't believe in God, then yes they are.

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.

He does the exact opposite of what you just said he does.

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.

Judging by the fact that he didn't say anything about himself, and that 9 and 10 are TWO numbers while you say it's ONE course, you have no concept of 1 + 1. Have you been through them? At the moment, I've done bio 9 and I'm going through bio 10, so I have reasonable input here, but it's not like that's the only thing that governs smartness here. We also have maturity. Generalizations have never been a sign of maturity, and you constantly generalize. So either you're a really immature above-highschool person, or you haven't actually been through these courses.

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?

You seems to be biased against the word "Atheist". And a lot of your posts certainly are extraneous, so I'd say at the moment, you fit the category.


And finally, this:

Look, Johnny, this discussion has plummeted to a level where it's lacking the qualities of a good debate, so I'll just address a few key points to you. I request you ponder them carefully before formulating a response.

Firstly, atheism is not a hate group. Personally, I'm an atheist because I doubt the existence of a supernatural being, but I'm fully willing to listen and respect the views of religious people. Some members of my family are Christians, but I'm not willing to hate them on the grounds of their religious stances or indeed them as human beings. I don't hate religion; I hate the acts of groups/individuals who compose demoninations of evil and sadistic religious parties. Most atheists are rational people who share the same mentality.

Secondly, nobody here is "shouting" at religion or resenting you for your views (perhaps some are resenting your character, but that's another matter), and nobody here is harassing you with ad hominem attacks. In actual fact, it is you who barged into this topic as a new member and judged atheists for being judgemental, hateful narcissists who detest religion and anyone who practices religion, and who ignore "more logical" philosophies because they apparently are more "intelligent" or "rational". This reception is exactly why people you've argued with have been more downbeat with you when expressing their philosophical differences.

And finally a message I've addressed to you before: if you want to maintain your credibility as a level-headed debater, please stop dismissing relevant points with one-line comments like "this is ridiculous" or "now you're talking nonsense". This is a classic example of ad hominem, which is something you've been ranting about. Now I know your response to this will be "PEOPLE ARE DOING IT TO ME", so I suppose I'll deliver this warning to anyone who prepares such simpleton remarks. Stop.

Xenon out.

[Johnny]

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

"Just because the figurehead of our philosophy talks that way doesn't mean we actually believe him!!!" that what you're trying to say?

...which makes your previous statement wrong.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sarcasm

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

Then maybe you should actually try answering my points.

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

No because atheism *is* a hate group; especially when you try to combine it with science. There are some very good atheists I know who don't try and mix in science with their own personal beliefs.

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've spoken on a logical, consistent basis throughout this debate; others have used ad hominem attacks, red herrings, and every dirty trick in the book to justify themselves while providing no evidence to support their claims, being contradictory, and downright stupid in the way they "argue".

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

What am I even supposed to say when confronted with such ignorance?

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.

Ahh, so now you've just descended to accusing me of being illogical in an attempt to invalidate my points. If that's the way you're going to debate I don't see much point in continuing.

Johnny, you are a troll. Trolls are not wanted here. I suggest you GTFO. ASAP.

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?

Now you're just spouting out insults to try and escape my demand that you prove to me evolution, as well as all the evidence I've posted. It's a very immature thing to do, but if you're just going to act like a coward, cry "troll!" and run off, then run away by all means. So much the better, as I'm not interested in arguing with contradictory and irrational posters. Goodbye.

Look, Johnny, this discussion has plummeted to a level where it's lacking the qualities of a good debate,

Lol tell me about it.

so I'll just address a few key points to you. I request you ponder them carefully before formulating a response.

May I ask you something? Did you carefully ponder the points I gave to you? Did you even address them? I certainly don't remember you doing so, so why are you now asking me to listen to what *you* have to say? But I'll actually do the mature thing here, let this slide and answer anyway.

Firstly, atheism is not a hate group. Personally, I'm an atheist because I doubt the existence of a supernatural being, but I'm fully willing to listen and respect the views of religious people.

By "religious people" I assume you mean non-atheist. Somehow I doubt you're telling the truth here, from what I've seen, but if you're truly willing to respect others' views then that's good to know. I myself pride myself in being knowledgeable on the views of others, willing to be tolerant, to listen, and to accept others for who they are as people.

Some members of my family are Christians, but I'm not willing to hate them on the grounds of their religious stances or indeed them as human beings. I don't hate religion; I hate the acts of groups/individuals who compose demoninations of evil and sadistic religious parties.

In that case your attitude is similar to mine towards the religion of atheism. I don't "hate" atheism either; it's only the bad atheists I hate. That's what I've been trying to say all along- people have a right to be atheist if they choose to be, but that certainly doesn't give them the right to go around hating others for their own religious beliefs.

Secondly, nobody here is "shouting" at religion or resenting you for your views (perhaps some are resenting your character, but that's another matter), and nobody here is harassing you with ad hominem attacks.

There have actually been quite a few, not least the accusation of being a "troll", ignorant, uneducated, and I'm pretty sure "loony" or something similar was said somewhere in one of the previous posts as well. But I'm not going to highlight the matter and rant about it as it's beside the point. I only ask that for those who say they want to have a nice, rational discussion, will actually be nice, polite and rational. Otherwise I probably won't be debating for much longer.

In actual fact, it is you who barged into this topic as a new member and judged atheists for being judgemental, hateful narcissists who detest religion and anyone who practices religion, and who ignore "more logical" philosophies because they apparently are more "intelligent" or "rational".

I never accused anyone specifically; the very thread itself is entitled "Religion- Your Views": I posited my personal view of religion, including atheism, but if certain people here are going to interpret that to be something aggressive and insulting and get all worked up about it then that's their problem.

This reception is exactly why people you've argued with have been more downbeat with you when expressing their philosophical differences.

I'm not complaining about how others argue, I'm just saying a rational discussion calls for a rational attitude.

And finally a message I've addressed to you before: if you want to maintain your credibility as a level-headed debater, please stop dismissing relevant points with one-line comments like "this is ridiculous" or "now you're talking nonsense". This is a classic example of ad hominem, which is something you've been ranting about. Now I know your response to this will be "PEOPLE ARE DOING IT TO ME", so I suppose I'll deliver this warning to anyone who prepares such simpleton remarks. Stop.

But people *are* doing it to me. Anyway, if the warning's delivered to everyone here rather than being a biassed warning, I think it's a good one. No more ad hominems please! On that note, others here who wish to can redeem themselves by actually answering my five main points, posited in an earlier post. And Tobbe has yet to prove evolution, which is apparently "science", or prove any connection whatsoever between atheism and science, beyond what atheists try and present their philosophy as.

Xenon out.

THANK you for the first intelligent post I've seen so far. This just goes to show, everyone, it actually *is* possible to answer someone without crying "troll", questioning their education, and accusing them of being a raving lunatic. Just a heads up.

The only thing you ever connect your evidence to Atheists being evil is the Nazis. They were a hate group, but it's not like they were the leaders of their beliefs. [read below]

Read what? I can't see anything in your post to justify what you just said. Nazis *were* the leaders of their beliefs; no one else was. Are you saying here that the Nazis were manipulated? If so, you should look at my history link. You really, really should.

You never said specific hate groups within a religion, you blatantly said Atheism is a hate-group. There's no other meaning that could have had.

Yes there is. The meaning of what I actually said. Atheism is a hate group; that doesn't mean I was saying other religions don't have their own hate groups also.

Again, you have just stated that anyone that doesn't believe in God is hateful.

Now you're implying there's only *one* God. That isn't what I was saying at all. I even said that I'm not a friend of extremists within Christianity and Islam! Did you even read my post or do you just interpret things to mean whatever you want them to?

What the hell are you talking about?

This is the kind of one-line response Xenon dislikes.

FYI: You're doing exactly what you're saying Atheists do that you despise. Being downright angry, raving, and bigoted towards Atheists.

I'm not doing that at all.

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?

Herp-y-derp-alert. They don't work together. I can't possibly see how you didn't notice that. Lets see:

Religion: There is some unexplainable thing that makes us each who we are and there is a holy entity that controls the basis of how everything works.

Science: Everything has an explanation, and events caused by something else is how everything works.

I meant how is science and the belief in deities conflicting? This is what I mean when I say you interpret things to mean what you want them to.

I meant how is science conflicting with belief in deities- but no, you automatically assume "science" and "non-atheist religion", and answer this imagined question in whatever way you want to to try and make out everyone who is non-atheist and religious as not knowing anything about science... then proceed to say *I'm* the one who's bigoted.

I like cake.

Johnny, you listen about as good as an overweight child hearing his mother tell him to stop gouging.

Perhaps if you actually tried reading my responses you'd realise I'm not the ignorant moron you're trying so desperately to make me out to be.

We're not quoting you selectively, we're quoting everything you say.

Yet another example of your bigoted interpretations of things. Look at the original post. The comment was towards a single user, not everyone! Are you trying to make it seem like this point was addressed towards everyone to try and lessen my credit in this debate? Or are you just being silly?

(lots more bull in which you basically tell me everything I say is wrong, everyone who argued with me is right, and I apparently don't know what "1+1" is. Very immature of you btw) And finally, this:

Just what point are you trying to make? Do you think reposting things will make anyone change their views on them? How can you possibly believe my posts to be extraneous when you're the one giving kindergarten insults like "YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW 1+1! SO THERE!"?

[El Dango]

I honestly think a ban will be necessary here.

[PowerPatrick]

If the cluebat has no effect, use the banhammer.

[Xenon]

May I ask you something? Did you carefully ponder the points I gave to you? Did you even address them? I certainly don't remember you doing so, so why are you now asking me to listen to what *you* have to say?

I did, apart from the blind declarations you made but let's not delve back into that. The bulk of my answer was continued by another member I believe, so I saw no reason to respond further to it.

By "religious people" I assume you mean non-atheist. Somehow I doubt you're telling the truth here, from what I've seen, but if you're truly willing to respect others' views then that's good to know. I myself pride myself in being knowledgeable on the views of others, willing to be tolerant, to listen, and to accept others for who they are as people.

Your assumption is correct. I'm using the universally accepted definition and not your personal one, likewise to everyone else here. And yes, I am telling the truth; I've attended church on several occasions and have respected the occasion by joining in the rituals, not to mention partaking in numerous other religious festivals despite not sharing the same spiritual mindset myself. If you're truly willing to listen and respect the views of atheists - including those in this thread - then we're on level grounds.

In that case your attitude is similar to mine towards the religion of atheism. I don't "hate" atheism either; it's only the bad atheists I hate. That's what I've been trying to say all along- people have a right to be atheist if they choose to be, but that certainly doesn't give them the right to go around hating others for their own religious beliefs.

But your attitude doesn't seem to follow this path. I've seen nothing but harsh generalisations about atheists and atheism, with all sorts of preposterous claims being spouted everywhere. Someone previously pointed out that these types of people are actually called extreme antitheists, who account for a very small percentage of general atheism. Most rational atheists as myself detest such people in the same way we do religious activists.

There have actually been quite a few, not least the accusation of being a "troll", ignorant, uneducated, and I'm pretty sure "loony" or something similar was said somewhere in one of the previous posts as well. But I'm not going to highlight the matter and rant about it as it's beside the point. I only ask that for those who say they want to have a nice, rational discussion, will actually be nice, polite and rational. Otherwise I probably won't be debating for much longer.

Yes, you have every right to complain about those allegations. The troll comments aren't bringing anything to the discussion and the fundamental message they're conveying, in my opinion only aggravates trolls. However, you have to accept that there's no obligation to be pleasant towards you if you're discharging horrendous generalisations about atheists and dismissing relevant points by claiming they're ridiculous or nonsensical - this can actually be as offensive as the crackpot insults you're grousing about.

I never accused anyone specifically; the very thread itself is entitled "Religion- Your Views": I posited my personal view of religion, including atheism, but if certain people here are going to interpret that to be something aggressive and insulting and get all worked up about it then that's their problem.

If I arbitrarily made claims now saying "anyone who believes in a god is ignoring more consistent and dependable philosophies" and "Christianity is a hate group squarely directed at atheism and constantly aims to undermine logical reasoning in a non-intelligent way", you'd probably understand the frustration everyone's going through in this discussion. Yes, this is a religion thread, but it doesn't excuse posting generalisations that are backed by insufficient evidence and a clear lack of understanding.

I honestly think a ban will be necessary here.

If the cluebat has no effect, use the banhammer.

If you guys can't contribute anything to the discussion I suggest you leave now. I'm a moderator here and yes, I know the debates in this topic have plunged into unknown depths, but I'm trying to discipline these dialogues as best I can. A ban is completely unjustifiable in these circumstances.

A message for Johnny though: a little bird whispers in my ear that you've been flooding someone's inbox with religious spam. Now this is worthy of a temporary ban at the very least

[Adsolution]

The only thing you ever connect your evidence to Atheists being evil is the Nazis. They were a hate group, but it's not like they were the leaders of their beliefs. [read below]

Read what? I can't see anything in your post to justify what you just said. Nazis *were* the leaders of their beliefs; no one else was. Are you saying here that the Nazis were manipulated? If so, you should look at my history link. You really, really should.

Oh my lord. So you're saying the Nazis were the leaders of their beliefs therefore all Atheists follow him. You have just said that the dead Nazis are the Atheist's idles.

You never said specific hate groups within a religion, you blatantly said Atheism is a hate-group. There's no other meaning that could have had.

Yes there is. The meaning of what I actually said. Atheism is a hate group; that doesn't mean I was saying other religions don't have their own hate groups also.

Read what you just quoted. Saying Atheism is a hate group is like saying Christianity or Judaism is a hate group. One big hate group. Why don't you say what you mean instead of not saying what you mean?

Again, you have just stated that anyone that doesn't believe in God is hateful.

Now you're implying there's only *one* God. That isn't what I was saying at all. I even said that I'm not a friend of extremists within Christianity and Islam! Did you even read my post or do you just interpret things to mean whatever you want them to?

I'm enterpreting things the same way any sane person would when reading your post. Lets see, I'll break down what you say, and detail it:

"Atheism is a hate group." <- That directly states that anyone who doesn't believe in God (...or Gods...) is part of this hate group.

"Nazis were the leaders of their beliefs." -> Their beliefs being Atheism. -> Nazis leading Atheism. -> Atheists idolizing Nazis. WHUT? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Where'd you get that from? It's also literally in every way, NOT TRUE.

Again, it seems you're saying anyone that doesn't believe in some sort of deity is devoted to Hitler.

What the hell are you talking about?

This is the kind of one-line response Xenon dislikes.

I was asking, what the hell are you talking about.

FYI: You're doing exactly what you're saying Atheists do that you despise. Being downright angry, raving, and bigoted towards Atheists.

I'm not doing that at all.

"Atheism is a hate group" and basically calling Hitler their idol. Are you saying that's not being bigoted and angry?

Also,

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?

Herp-y-derp-alert. They don't work together. I can't possibly see how you didn't notice that. Lets see:

Religion: There is some unexplainable thing that makes us each who we are and there is a holy entity that controls the basis of how everything works.

Science: Everything has an explanation, and events caused by something else is how everything works.

I meant how is science and the belief in deities conflicting? This is what I mean when I say you interpret things to mean what you want them to.

I meant how is science conflicting with belief in deities- but no, you automatically assume "science" and "non-atheist religion", and answer this imagined question in whatever way you want to to try and make out everyone who is non-atheist and religious as not knowing anything about science... then proceed to say *I'm* the one who's bigoted.

This is really starting to confuse me. "I meant how is science conflicting with belief in deities". I just gave you a comparison to show WHY it's conflicting, but you stated that I'm trying to say something else so irrelevant, it almost sounds like you're hoping people aren't reading what you're quoting, saying bad things, and hoping people will agree with you. And don't say the same for me, because I'm not the one who's by himself throwing out wide generalizations ("Atheism is a hate group") and completely false facts in which everyone knows are false ("Nazis were the leaders of Atheism").

I like cake.

What, I do. I was just throwing my opinion out there even though it was irrelevant and unrelated to the thing you're quoting, just like you were.

Johnny, you listen about as good as an overweight child hearing his mother tell him to stop gouging.

Perhaps if you actually tried reading my responses you'd realise I'm not the ignorant moron you're trying so desperately to make me out to be.

Perhaps if you tried re-reading your responses, you'd realize that the only links you've ever given us are links to sarcasm and links to the Nazis.

We're not quoting you selectively, we're quoting everything you say.

Yet another example of your bigoted interpretations of things. Look at the original post. The comment was towards a single user, not everyone! Are you trying to make it seem like this point was addressed towards everyone to try and lessen my credit in this debate? Or are you just being silly?

I've quoted other people in my posts, but only to prove points. You do realize that you're the only one arguing your... hating beliefs and generalizations ("Atheism is a hate group")... against Atheism.

(lots more bull in which you basically tell me everything I say is wrong, everyone who argued with me is right, and I apparently don't know what "1+1" is. Very immature of you btw) And finally, this:

Just what point are you trying to make? Do you think reposting things will make anyone change their views on them? How can you possibly believe my posts to be extraneous when you're the one giving kindergarten insults like "YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW 1+1! SO THERE!"?

You changed my quote. Noone will ever be on your side if you do that my bigoted sweetcakes.

[El Dango]

If you guys can't contribute anything to the discussion I suggest you leave now.

With all respect, this barely counts as a discussion anymore. It's just an annoying troll who keeps repeating his illogical theories as well as denying evidence (which also makes it a bit hard to contribute, unless we would have to repeat ourselves as well). Johnny has been identified as a troll, and he clearly isn't any good for the community, seeing as this is basically his entire reason for joining.

I know that you're trying to be fair and all, but this guy is not here to be an active part of the community.

[PowerPatrick]

And "Johnny" a.k.a. "Dr Who" are exclusively spending his time to troll atheist people: http://atheistforums.org/thread-4727-page-1.html
I searched for a portion of his first post. He created a thread on that board september 13th, and got banned september 14th. Afterwards, he came to our board september 16th. This can't be a coincidence.

I personally think any religion is fine except atheism.

I mean history has shown us just how dangerous it is to mix science and atheism. Look at the nazis for instance; social darwinists who wanted to "purge" jews in the name of "evolution", an atheistic philosophy. Yet despite it being responsible for what is perhaps the greatest disaster the world has ever seen, atheism still seems to be going strong today??

Actually, to take this further, I personally find it a little disturbing that so many can fail to have a grasp on reality, especially considering the number of times it's been disproven. However, I predict that as technology and science advances, and especially as the freedom to share information via the web increases, atheism will be gradually left behind in favour of more rational philosophies.

I think history has shown us just how dangerous it is to mix science and atheism. Yet why is it, after countless atrocities such the abominable acts commited by social darwinists and others, atheism still seems to be going strong today?

I find it absolutely incredible that the world can be so full of ignorant morons who simply cannot grasp reality and don't know the meaning of the word "fact". Hopefully, however, as technology and science advances, atheism will be gradually left behind in favour of more rational philosophies.

However, I digress because of my rant, which I hope you'll forgive. The real question is, how can an irratinoal religion such as atheism possibly hold any credit in a world where science has shown again and again its numerous and horrifying fallacies?

[Adsolution]

Oh and just another point to prove that Johnny doesn't know 1 + 1, Hitler was Catholic.

[Xenon]

Whether he's a troll or not, saying "TROLL! BAN!" is the last thing this topic needs. If you don't like the tone of dialogue in this thread you're under no obligation to post in it at all. Just ignore his postings.

[spiraldoor]

I wonder if he’s trying to troll atheists or stealthily parodying the religious. The ambiguity reminds me of Christwire.

[Adsolution]

Is that a mock site? whatever it is, it's funny either way.

TROLL- fudgit... BAAN!!

Ohshi-

[Johnny]

I honestly think a ban will be necessary here.

If the cluebat has no effect, use the banhammer.

More examples of biassed bigotry which I'm not going to bother address.

I did, apart from the blind declarations you made but let's not delve back into that. The bulk of my answer was continued by another member I believe, so I saw no reason to respond further to it.

What blind declarations? I haven't said anything without backing it up with evidence. What member apparently continued your post?

Your assumption is correct. I'm using the universally accepted definition and not your personal one, likewise to everyone else here. And yes, I am telling the truth; I've attended church on several occasions and have respected the occasion by joining in the rituals, not to mention partaking in numerous other religious festivals despite not sharing the same spiritual mindset myself. If you're truly willing to listen and respect the views of atheists - including those in this thread - then we're on level grounds.

Good then. It's refreshing to find an atheist that respects non-atheistic religions.

If you guys can't contribute anything to the discussion I suggest you leave now. I'm a moderator here and yes, I know the debates in this topic have plunged into unknown depths, but I'm trying to discipline these dialogues as best I can. A ban is completely unjustifiable in these circumstances.

Exactly. Rational debate calls for rational discussion. Your use of red herrings and ad hominems has dragged this thread to "unknown depths" as the mod puts it.

A message for Johnny though: a little bird whispers in my ear that you've been flooding someone's inbox with religious spam. Now this is worthy of a temporary ban at the very least

If you mean Stacey I could actually show you every PM exchanged between us and prove her to be lying. Is that worth a temporary ban on her part?

Oh my lord. So you're saying the Nazis were the leaders of their beliefs therefore all Atheists follow him. You have just said that the dead Nazis are the Atheist's idles.

Nazis *were* the leaders of their own beliefs. If I said all atheists are Nazis I sure hope you can quote me on it because that's a strong accusation. So is saying that I believe atheistic ideals are interchangeable with Nazism. No, really: you'd better damn well come back with a quote on your next post. In the meantime, who are you saying the Nazis were apparently manipulated by? I find it interesting that you brushed this aside.

Read what you just quoted. Saying Atheism is a hate group is like saying Christianity or Judaism is a hate group. One big hate group. Why don't you say what you mean instead of not saying what you mean?

No it isn't because atheism actually *is* a hate group. I've always been saying exactly what I mean; it's your interpretation that's the problem here. I say "white" and you interpret it as "black", I say "male" and you interpret as "female"; are you going to stop twisting my words to suit your own purposes or am I going to have to teach you slowly and carefully the points I'm making here? And by the way, you should probably read this: http://www.truthtree.com/debates.shtml

I'm enterpreting things the same way any sane person would when reading your post.

Lol.

Lets see, I'll break down what you say, and detail it:

Yes I think you need to.

"Atheism is a hate group." <- That directly states that anyone who doesn't believe in God (...or Gods...) is part of this hate group.

What about agnostics? What about people who aren't old enough to make a decision to be atheist? Oh, and I like the way you put "gods" in brackets because you certainly weren't saying that before. Before you were referring specifically to the Christian/Catholic or Islamic god.

"Nazis were the leaders of their beliefs." -> Their beliefs being Atheism. -> Nazis leading Atheism. -> Atheists idolizing Nazis. WHUT? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Where'd you get that from? It's also literally in every way, NOT TRUE.

While it's true that atheism and Nazism were very closely linked, you're once again interpreting me to say something I'm not. You're saying I believe all atheists are Nazis and then demanding where I got that from? It came out of *your* own mouth. You're the one who said it, not me. So where did you get it from? I await your reply.

Again, it seems you're saying anyone that doesn't believe in some sort of deity is devoted to Hitler.

No.

I was asking, what the hell are you talking about.

Yeah and I am saying, that's the kind of one-line response Xenon dislikes. No one's so stupid they couldn't understand what someone else says when they've put their point forward so simply. Therefore, I believe you're feigning ignorance; you're crying "what are you talking about!?" to make it seem like a ridiculous or offending point, essentially playing the victim. Perhaps you should have another read of the link about good debating I gave you.

"Atheism is a hate group" and basically calling Hitler their idol. Are you saying that's not being bigoted and angry?

"Basically"? This is precisely what I've been saying when I say you like to put words into other's mouths. Also, how DARE you say you want to kill every dark-skinned child!? HOW can you possibly be so racist!? You're EVIL!!!!

See? It isn't nice when someone puts words into your mouth and then accuses you, is it? Try and be more rational from now on please. I'm getting very tired of these attacks and dirty methods you use to try and deflect the topic in an attempt to portray me as something I'm not.

This is really starting to confuse me. "I meant how is science conflicting with belief in deities". I just gave you a comparison to show WHY it's conflicting, but you stated that I'm trying to say something else so irrelevant, it almost sounds like you're hoping people aren't reading what you're quoting, saying bad things, and hoping people will agree with you. And don't say the same for me, because I'm not the one who's by himself throwing out wide generalizations ("Atheism is a hate group") and completely false facts in which everyone knows are false ("Nazis were the leaders of Atheism").

So you purposefully misinterpret what I'm saying (yet again) turn it into something you can rant about (yet again) and now tell me you've been arguing my points all along? I'd have half a mind to just call you an idiot and leave.

What, I do. I was just throwing my opinion out there even though it was irrelevant and unrelated to the thing you're quoting, just like you were.

Perhaps if you tried re-reading your responses, you'd realize that the only links you've ever given us are links to sarcasm and links to the Nazis.

Perhaps if you tried re-reading both my responses and yours, you'd apologize and leave this debate embarrassed, never to mention it again. No. Really. Re-read them.

I've quoted other people in my posts, but only to prove points. You do realize that you're the only one arguing your... hating beliefs and generalizations ("Atheism is a hate group")... against Atheism.

Wait, really? Oh, wait a minute- surprisingly I already realise I'm the one who's arguing what I'm arguing. But thanks for the heads up. Did you realise you've acted like a total moron throughout this discussion?

You changed my quote. Noone will ever be on your side if you do that my bigoted sweetcakes.

Please don't call me sweetcakes. It implies I can be attracted to anything other than *intelligent* women- you know, the ones who can actually answer logical points put forward instead of covering their ears and screaming? Then getting angry and saying "well you don't know what 1+1 is so there".

I know that you're trying to be fair and all, but this guy is not here to be an active part of the community.

And "Johnny" a.k.a. "Dr Who" are exclusively spending his time to troll atheist people:

Did you purposefully make a fake account to frame me and therefore lessen my appearance here, like the unknown person who lied that I was spamming inboxes with religious spam? Actually, *are* you that person? Whatever. It doesn't even matter. Either way, I couldn't care less. At least I know that I'm the one who's in the right here.

Oh and just another point to prove that Johnny doesn't know 1 + 1, Hitler was Catholic.

According to RayFan9876:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_Catholicism PLUS http://sitemaker.umich.edu/rememberingn ... _is_nazism_
EQUALS... wait, what? And you say I'm the one who doesn't know 1+1

Whether he's a troll or not, saying "TROLL! BAN!" is the last thing this topic needs. If you don't like the tone of dialogue in this thread you're under no obligation to post in it at all. Just ignore his postings.

Actually this is a good post. To those who've been "arguing" my points: if you're not going to argue logically, please do not reply to my postings at all. It will save yourself time and it will save me time, as, humorous as it is to watch you desperately deflect logical argument, I've dealt with enough of your bs already.

[PowerPatrick]

Did you purposefully make a fake account to frame me and therefore lessen my appearance here, like the unknown person who lied that I was spamming inboxes with religious spam? Actually, *are* you that person? Whatever. It doesn't even matter. Either way, I couldn't care less. At least I know that I'm the one who's in the right here.

I rofl'd. Yeah sure... I just travelled back in time to create a fake account on their board... sure. lololol

[Cairnie]

It's true that none of my PMs were of any religious spam at all but it still clearly showed butthurt.

[Adsolution]

Did you purposefully make a fake account to frame me and therefore lessen my appearance here, like the unknown person who lied that I was spamming inboxes with religious spam? Actually, *are* you that person? Whatever. It doesn't even matter. Either way, I couldn't care less. At least I know that I'm the one who's in the right here.

I rofl'd. Yeah sure... I just travelled back in time to create a fake account on their board... sure. lololol

I also rofl'd.

Johnny, you're not answering our quotes anymore. You're quoting us and saying something irrelevant and doing exactly what you say I'm not doing which I actually am doing. You're backwards. It's reached the point where we can't even understand what you're trying to prove anymore because you pretty much say the same thing no matter what you're quoting. You almost look like an AAEEBIP (argue-against-everybody-else-because-I-have-problems) bot.

[MMMorshew]

My little thought on this all:

I think there is a distinction between anti-religious and atheist.
My opinion: To atheists, most religions seem implausible and they don`t believe in it themselves, but are able to accept it - while on the other hand, anti-religious people hate religion.

I am open to every religion, but I am not able to believe in most of the things that are told in religions. And I really wouldn`t care if I, trough the eyes of someone else, would be part of a hate group or similiar things.
Everyone sees things a bit different in this case - many think your thoughts are ridicoulus, while many other would agree.

[Adsolution]

About Johnny, the only place he seems to be like this is in this specific topic, but other than that he's fine.