| Home | RSS Feeds |
| Funny Pictures | Funny Videos |
| Funny GIFs | YouTube Videos |
| Text/Links | Comic Editor |
| User Rankings | Channels |
| Copyright Removal Request | |
| |
-
World History in On- - Pokemon Logic
- Just bought this fo-
- brief history of ca-
- Consider that
- Black pussy stroked-
- Apologies
- Sometimes, 4chan ju-
- Lucky Bastard
- That is all.
- tfw I come from 2017
- superman
- Effect of feminism
- Windows 95
- Every man in a rela-
- Good Guy Dave! Agai-
- I will slap a bitch
- If celebrities were-
- Ohhh Snapp
- dickhead
Bible
Pink = Hurder
Yellow = Slavery
Yellow = Slavery
...
| |
Links are not allowed.
You are allowed to post every 1 minute on the same page.
You are allowed to post every 1 minute on the same page.
Remaining character count: 1000
#1
-
maidenmk (03/18/2012) [+]
(14 replies)
I'm surprised by the amount of rape. Maybe thats why they get children to read it at Sunday school, so that they're normalised by the idea of it when the priest's come after them.
#7
-
N. Korean citizen (03/18/2012) [+]
(2 replies)
The amount of stupid comments shows the internet knows nothing about the Bible.
#402 to #380
-
pathofchaos (03/19/2012) [-]
If you were all powerful what would you do? I bet all of these end of the world schemes and crazy people is god giving them visions to fuck with us. Yes yes science states that this this and this. happens because of this... Well what if 10 seconds ago it wasnt and god was like meh i want it this way.. People tend to forget the scope of all power... over everything even time... God can engineer things to work a certain way because he can... I just wish he let magic be the one and not science.. it would be twenty times cooler If I could make a fireball by saying some words over making fire with a fuel of some sort and a way to project it like a flamethrower...
#507 to #408
-
pathofchaos (03/19/2012) [-]
Creating a race and planet isn't noteworthy? which mind you said planet has had many noteworthy accomplishments which by being their creator all of that goes to you? Only thing we need to determine is.. what if their are different gods with different creations scattered about, and this is all just one giant game of civilization or something...? Note: my captcha is 60+9 Win....
#694 to #402
-
marinepenguin (03/19/2012) [-] All your doing is filling the unknown with God. And as soon as that is contradicted, you say "God wanted it that way".
When you do that you are creating an unfalsifiable hypothesis. Its the same when you say, "God can do it, because he is God and he can."
When you do that you are creating an unfalsifiable hypothesis. Its the same when you say, "God can do it, because he is God and he can."
#1198 to #694
-
N. Korean citizen (03/20/2012) [-]
Your dealing with a god. that's how it works. Another person who doubts all power.... yes anything and everything happens because it was made that way to happen. Science can explain something. Just because hes god doesn't make it like everything cant be explained. But science is so limited. We live because are hearts beat. if it wasn't made that way then we would simply live another way and that way would be the 100% true way. we used to blame the wind, and seasons on god. but simply because we learned a few things why is it instantly not god doing those things. Finding out how something works doesn't mean that a god is behind it. It just means we are learning and advancing. which I think is our purpose simply to advance. See how far we go. Yes its unfalsifiable. its a god ultimate power. over time and space. life and death. and peoples expression for proving he doesn't exist is because we invented a thought process? we invented a set of rules to judge the physical, and near physical. Which mind you cant stand to the glory of an invincible being with all the power in the universe to control every aspect of everything? Nah. prove what you want. I'm not about to piss off the strongest being ever...
#520
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [+]
(88 replies)
Christianity is faith based. Therefore I have come to understand that
1. Christians, why waste your time trying to prove it.
2. Atheists, why waste your time trying to disprove it.
Even the great Sheldon Cooper doesn't claim God doesn't exist, he's one of the few smart enough to know that we can't know, at least not now.
I will however say that organized religion has been the cause of much hatred and senseless death, more so than any other sociological factor combined. But that's a different matter in itself.
1. Christians, why waste your time trying to prove it.
2. Atheists, why waste your time trying to disprove it.
Even the great Sheldon Cooper doesn't claim God doesn't exist, he's one of the few smart enough to know that we can't know, at least not now.
I will however say that organized religion has been the cause of much hatred and senseless death, more so than any other sociological factor combined. But that's a different matter in itself.
#550 to #520
-
BlottedScience (03/19/2012) [-]
Im fine with other people believing in a god. What i am not okay with is people trying to teach it in schools or people like Newt Gingrich saying that he would not trust an atheist president because people cant make good choices without god.
Religion isn't the problem. Just as you said, organized religion is. The only downfall is that organized religion actually has a foothold in government, and that is why we argue.
Religion isn't the problem. Just as you said, organized religion is. The only downfall is that organized religion actually has a foothold in government, and that is why we argue.
#576 to #550
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] 1. People should be able to teach it in schools. Coming from an atheist. If they can't it defeats the "freedom of religion" concept. You should be taught all possibilities with demonstrable evidence. Christopher Hitchens sent his children to Catholic schools when they were young so they'd be exposed to it and he let them decide. He's one of the most famous atheists (and intelligent) we've known.
2. I agree, God does not equal morals. Humans have a much higher cognitive ability to reflect on our actions than do animals, thus allowing morals. With or without God.
3. Yep lol
2. I agree, God does not equal morals. Humans have a much higher cognitive ability to reflect on our actions than do animals, thus allowing morals. With or without God.
3. Yep lol
#605 to #576
-
BlottedScience (03/19/2012) [-]
Religion should not be taught in schools because schools teach use of reason and logic and scientific fact, and religion denies all of these. I don't care what Christopher Hitchens did. That is an argument from authority, which is a flawed argument.
Atheism is not a religion. It is the act of not having a religion. What you are saying is that not collecting postcards can be considered a hobby.
Atheism is not a religion. It is the act of not having a religion. What you are saying is that not collecting postcards can be considered a hobby.
#609 to #605
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] 1. Never said atheism was a religion.
2. There is some scientific evidence that supports intelligent design, however scarce. It's true that there is MUCH MORE evidence in the support of the origin of life without God. Nonetheless schools teach much more than just reason, logic, and science. They teach critical thinking, creativity, and tolerance. (or they should)
2. There is some scientific evidence that supports intelligent design, however scarce. It's true that there is MUCH MORE evidence in the support of the origin of life without God. Nonetheless schools teach much more than just reason, logic, and science. They teach critical thinking, creativity, and tolerance. (or they should)
#629 to #621
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] No proof, just scarce evidence, mainly in support of the accuracy of biblical scripture and the lack of disproof. I guess I shouldn't call it scientific because it's not testable. It's more of a philosophical, sociological, and cultural subject that should be learned about.
#657 to #653
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] That's just naive. Again, who said anything about proof. My point is that you cannot prove or disprove either view. There is room for religion whether we like it or not. To ignore religion is to ignore a huge part of global culture. How can we persuade and help the masses when we don't understand our audience. Not every career is based in scientific fact alone.
#709 to #657
-
BlottedScience (03/19/2012) [-]
There is scientific proof for the theory of the big bang. There is no scientific proof for any religion to date. In fact, there has been a million dollar prize for anyone who is able to scientifically prove gods existence. It has sat there for years.
School is not about learning about global cultures' religions. School is about being able to address the world in a scientific fashion. Everything besides faith has its roots in scientific theory. Saying that a large part of the world believes in religion is an argument from authority, which is a logical fallacy. Just because many people believe it doesn't mean that it is right.
You address the world with scientific reasoning. You look up at the sky and know that because the clouds are dark, that based on past events it will most likely rain today. Science is what allows us to grow crops, shelter ourselves from the elements, and create governments based on moral and ethical standpoints. Religion does none of this, and it actually contradicts much of the fundamental ideals of science, and yet you think that it should be taught in schools, which are here to educate people about the natural world. Come on.
School is not about learning about global cultures' religions. School is about being able to address the world in a scientific fashion. Everything besides faith has its roots in scientific theory. Saying that a large part of the world believes in religion is an argument from authority, which is a logical fallacy. Just because many people believe it doesn't mean that it is right.
You address the world with scientific reasoning. You look up at the sky and know that because the clouds are dark, that based on past events it will most likely rain today. Science is what allows us to grow crops, shelter ourselves from the elements, and create governments based on moral and ethical standpoints. Religion does none of this, and it actually contradicts much of the fundamental ideals of science, and yet you think that it should be taught in schools, which are here to educate people about the natural world. Come on.
#716 to #709
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] There is scientific evidence for the theory of the big bang, not proof.
School is not about being able to address the world in a scientific fashion. Science classes are about that. You're very narrow-minded.
PLEASE READ THIS VERY CAREFULLY: I'm not saying religion is right. I'm saying it's impossible to ignore on a global cultural scale and to ignore that big of a demographic would result in much less effective human beings in ALL fields. It's something that must be taken into account regardless of it's validity. In marketing, psychology, etc.
Again, stop simplifying the purpose of schooling. It's much broader than you continue to claim.
School is not about being able to address the world in a scientific fashion. Science classes are about that. You're very narrow-minded.
PLEASE READ THIS VERY CAREFULLY: I'm not saying religion is right. I'm saying it's impossible to ignore on a global cultural scale and to ignore that big of a demographic would result in much less effective human beings in ALL fields. It's something that must be taken into account regardless of it's validity. In marketing, psychology, etc.
Again, stop simplifying the purpose of schooling. It's much broader than you continue to claim.
#750 to #716
-
BlottedScience (03/19/2012) [-]
Fair enough, i misspoke on the evidence/proof thing.
Im narrow minded? Science is everything. Science is not just chemistry and biology. Science is the ability to gain knowledge of the world around us. You emotions? Chemistry. Art? Visual or auditory stimulus and emotion. Our understanding of everything in this world comes from the ability to repeat scenarios and learn from experimentation, which is exactly what science is.
You are portraying science in way that shows ignorance of the subject, which is very ironic. But besides that, you are claiming that some things in the world happen that are not scientifically supported and explainable, which is complete bullshit. Which is exactly why i don not accept religion. We live in a physical world. Science is what got us to the moon. Do you know how that happened? Schooling in the realm of science, ie the physical world. This is why religion should not be taught. It does nothing for the advancement of the human race except for hold us back with misinterpreted stone age morals. Religion has no place in a schooling system. You can pray all you want at home, but there is a reason for the separation of church and state.
Im narrow minded? Science is everything. Science is not just chemistry and biology. Science is the ability to gain knowledge of the world around us. You emotions? Chemistry. Art? Visual or auditory stimulus and emotion. Our understanding of everything in this world comes from the ability to repeat scenarios and learn from experimentation, which is exactly what science is.
You are portraying science in way that shows ignorance of the subject, which is very ironic. But besides that, you are claiming that some things in the world happen that are not scientifically supported and explainable, which is complete bullshit. Which is exactly why i don not accept religion. We live in a physical world. Science is what got us to the moon. Do you know how that happened? Schooling in the realm of science, ie the physical world. This is why religion should not be taught. It does nothing for the advancement of the human race except for hold us back with misinterpreted stone age morals. Religion has no place in a schooling system. You can pray all you want at home, but there is a reason for the separation of church and state.
#823 to #750
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] I think you misunderstand educating people about world religions with converting them to these religions. My point is that you would be ignorant to ignore such a huge demographic simply because you disagree with it. You can use knowledge of others beliefs for yours and their benefit. You can use it to advance.
You only pay attention to one realm of understanding and utility. Yes we research, discover, and understand with science, but many things in life can not be simplified so easily.
You only pay attention to one realm of understanding and utility. Yes we research, discover, and understand with science, but many things in life can not be simplified so easily.
#1033 to #823
-
BlottedScience (03/19/2012) [-]
I am not ignoring a demographic. I am giving my opinion on a subject. I could care less if a large percentage of the people are religious. I am saying that religion has no place in any institutionalized setting, which is one of the main reasons this country was founded. Again, just because there is a large percentage of the populace with religious beliefs does not make my opinion or point any less valid. It is an opinion, and everyone is entitled to their own, though that does not mean that some are not better than others. Please stop justifying your point using majority reasoning.
And what do you mean about using knowledge of beliefs for your benefit? Please clarify.
And no, all things in life can be explained by science. Sadly we do not at the present know the exact chemical requirements for a feeling of love ore compassion, but such things do have an answer without the need for some form of almighty being. And just because we cannot presently explain them does not mean that religion or belief in a soul suddenly has the right answer.
And what do you mean about using knowledge of beliefs for your benefit? Please clarify.
And no, all things in life can be explained by science. Sadly we do not at the present know the exact chemical requirements for a feeling of love ore compassion, but such things do have an answer without the need for some form of almighty being. And just because we cannot presently explain them does not mean that religion or belief in a soul suddenly has the right answer.
#1163 to #1033
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] Everyone is entitled to their opinion but all opinions are not of equal worth. You can say a Ford F-150 looks cooler than a Chevy Silverado and no one can argue with you but as soon as you say the Ford is a better truck you need a solid argument. You've yet to address the point that ignoring religion in school would be ignorant (by it's actual definition).
By using the knowledge of others beliefs you can begin to approach explaining to them why they may or may not be true and forging alliances rather than war. My point is that you are fully grounded in science, many fanatical religious groups/leaders are not. In order to understand them you must understand their beliefs. It's not a matter of following the religion. It's a matter of learning about it. A social study.
In Psychology (the scientific study of human behavior) one of the fundamental research methods is observation. Observation among a large group of diverse people with diverse beliefs.
I didn't say that things couldn't be explained by science, I said they couldn't all be simplified by it.
By using the knowledge of others beliefs you can begin to approach explaining to them why they may or may not be true and forging alliances rather than war. My point is that you are fully grounded in science, many fanatical religious groups/leaders are not. In order to understand them you must understand their beliefs. It's not a matter of following the religion. It's a matter of learning about it. A social study.
In Psychology (the scientific study of human behavior) one of the fundamental research methods is observation. Observation among a large group of diverse people with diverse beliefs.
I didn't say that things couldn't be explained by science, I said they couldn't all be simplified by it.
#843 to #750
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-] Actually religion is what saved what we have of the ancient world
When the Romans fell due to the barbarian hoards, and Rome's own faults, the dark age began.
The only places that kept and maintained the knowledge of the ancient western world was the Ottoman's and Christian monasteries
So yes religion has had many positive impacts on the world, including bringing it into the renessaince
Just as science has brought us penicillin and the atomic bomb
When the Romans fell due to the barbarian hoards, and Rome's own faults, the dark age began.
The only places that kept and maintained the knowledge of the ancient western world was the Ottoman's and Christian monasteries
So yes religion has had many positive impacts on the world, including bringing it into the renessaince
Just as science has brought us penicillin and the atomic bomb
#1018 to #843
-
BlottedScience (03/19/2012) [-]
I am not doubting that religion has ever had any positive influence. I am saying that in the present, there is no reason for there to be as much organized religion as there exists. Sure, back in the day i'm sure that religion was the only thing keeping many people going, but that was during the dark ages, as you said. Today we have no need for it. It is a relic of a time when such fantasies were needed.
#652 to #621
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-] proof is mostly found in lack of proof, this may sound vague so let me elaborate
Have you heard of the multiverse theory? This theory states that there is an infinite amount of universes, because of this there is every possible possibility in existence
Want to know the proof of the multiverse theory?
There isn't any, this is only around to explain the existence of everything.
For you see the chances of the big bang happening is literally impossible, it is somewhat beyond twice what is mathematically considered impossible, so the multiverse theory is a way of explaining that it was bound to happen in an infinite chance spectrum
One could argue that existence was bound to happen because time is infinite, and that regardless of chance, if given an infinite spectrum chance it would infact happen
These people fail to realize that time is relative to gravity/matter so if there is no existence than there is no time
Also mutations are almost always negative, and the chances of an organism getting all of its vital components out of a, or set of, mutations is somewhat impossible (such as the giraffe theory where as they would have all died out before the next numerous mutations occurred to save them from simply killing themselves due to faulty biological engineering)
This is the same with all animals, in which case the earth isn't even old enough (old or young earth theories) for all these animals to evolved the way they did
Most theories explaining God's (christian) existence are morally based
Have you heard of the multiverse theory? This theory states that there is an infinite amount of universes, because of this there is every possible possibility in existence
Want to know the proof of the multiverse theory?
There isn't any, this is only around to explain the existence of everything.
For you see the chances of the big bang happening is literally impossible, it is somewhat beyond twice what is mathematically considered impossible, so the multiverse theory is a way of explaining that it was bound to happen in an infinite chance spectrum
One could argue that existence was bound to happen because time is infinite, and that regardless of chance, if given an infinite spectrum chance it would infact happen
These people fail to realize that time is relative to gravity/matter so if there is no existence than there is no time
Also mutations are almost always negative, and the chances of an organism getting all of its vital components out of a, or set of, mutations is somewhat impossible (such as the giraffe theory where as they would have all died out before the next numerous mutations occurred to save them from simply killing themselves due to faulty biological engineering)
This is the same with all animals, in which case the earth isn't even old enough (old or young earth theories) for all these animals to evolved the way they did
Most theories explaining God's (christian) existence are morally based
#676 to #652
-
BlottedScience (03/19/2012) [-]
But thats a logical fallacy. You cannot prove something by disproving something.
And where is this theorem on the probability of the universe starting by the big bang? You cannot find the probability of reality. That makes no sense.
Time is also not infinite. According to the theory of the big bang the matter and antimatter comprising the universe existed before the big bang. This ball of matter and antimatter was so incredibly dense that time literally did not exist. It has been proven that gravity can bend light and time. This would mean that the big bang did not need a cause for the effect to happen, because the idea of cause and effect only exist in a liner timeline.
And what is all that about mutation? Do you understand evolution?
And where is this theorem on the probability of the universe starting by the big bang? You cannot find the probability of reality. That makes no sense.
Time is also not infinite. According to the theory of the big bang the matter and antimatter comprising the universe existed before the big bang. This ball of matter and antimatter was so incredibly dense that time literally did not exist. It has been proven that gravity can bend light and time. This would mean that the big bang did not need a cause for the effect to happen, because the idea of cause and effect only exist in a liner timeline.
And what is all that about mutation? Do you understand evolution?
#580 to #568
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-]
Also if you look at a list of the most horrible atrocities committed by human kind (meaning highest death tolls) the crusades aren't even in the top ten... combined
the highest was caused by MAO ZEDONG, a, atheistic (not an atheist leader) leader
at a whopping 66 million
the highest was caused by MAO ZEDONG, a, atheistic (not an atheist leader) leader
at a whopping 66 million
#1157 to #580
-
SunilCCXXXVII (03/19/2012) [-]
Why can't you people understand the basics of war; a reason.
MAO ZEDONG's reason wasn't to start a war in the name of atheism, it was to gain power and start a revolution in his country.
If we blame every act on the religion of the person committing it rather than the reason then Christianity would win anyway as it covers about 30% of the globe.
MAO ZEDONG's reason wasn't to start a war in the name of atheism, it was to gain power and start a revolution in his country.
If we blame every act on the religion of the person committing it rather than the reason then Christianity would win anyway as it covers about 30% of the globe.
#624 to #594
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-] Unless you included atheism ,that point is null, and that doesn't refute how the highest amount of murders was caused by an atheist, also I googled your source
It fails to state the differences in a "head start"
number of those killed in RELIGIOUS (not religion specific) wars
809million
Number of those killed in non religious wars, but atheistic leaders
209 million (not counting non religious wars where atheism wasn't a factor)
time since religious wars started 7511 years (hi]ndusim's beginning) '
time since darwinism began 141 years
wow, only 1/4 of the deaths in 1.8% of the time, and that is impressive
![Unless you included atheism ,that point is null, and that doesn't refute how the highest amount of murders was caused by an atheist, also I googled your source
It fails to state the differences in a "head start"
number of those killed in RELIGIOUS (not religion specific) wars
809million
Number of those killed in non religious wars, but atheistic leaders
209 million (not counting non religious wars where atheism wasn't a factor)
time since religious wars started 7511 years (hi]ndusim's beginning) '
time since darwinism began 141 years
wow, only 1/4 of the deaths in 1.8% of the time, and that is impressive](http://static2.fjcdn.com/comments/Unless+you+included+atheism+that+point+is+null+and+that+_167bff23f95ea9c5a4090e7ac5b79c7c.jpg)
It fails to state the differences in a "head start"
number of those killed in RELIGIOUS (not religion specific) wars
809million
Number of those killed in non religious wars, but atheistic leaders
209 million (not counting non religious wars where atheism wasn't a factor)
time since religious wars started 7511 years (hi]ndusim's beginning) '
time since darwinism began 141 years
wow, only 1/4 of the deaths in 1.8% of the time, and that is impressive
#680 to #674
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] First you reduced it down to a percentage and then when told that you were wrong in calculating it you're saying it's wrong to place a number on human life?
The point is that proportionately (taking into account the greater number of people and the more destructive weapons) religion has MANY more deaths attributed to it than does lack of religion.
The point is that proportionately (taking into account the greater number of people and the more destructive weapons) religion has MANY more deaths attributed to it than does lack of religion.
#687 to #680
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-] actually that number wasn't lack of religion, that number was specifically atheistic, it wasn't wars that didn't have a religious start
proportionately atheism has many more deaths, the time difference is humongous seriously that is 1/4 the deaths in 1.8% of the time!
Proportionately that is MASSIVE in comparison
proportionately atheism has many more deaths, the time difference is humongous seriously that is 1/4 the deaths in 1.8% of the time!
Proportionately that is MASSIVE in comparison
#817 to #705
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-]
If you make this point than lets find out the amount of deaths due to religious wars in the past 141 years
the thing about that is, there hasn't been any major religious wars in the past century, and so there is nothing even remotely close to the numbers of Mao Zedong and Stalin
So yes we can kill more people, which there is more of now, but that still doesn't take into account the lack of major religious slaughters (on the same scale for there have been small massacres in 3rd world areas, but these are not in the hundreds much less millions that we see at the hands of atheist leaders as presented in the last century)
btw sorry I was gone i was playing LoL
the thing about that is, there hasn't been any major religious wars in the past century, and so there is nothing even remotely close to the numbers of Mao Zedong and Stalin
So yes we can kill more people, which there is more of now, but that still doesn't take into account the lack of major religious slaughters (on the same scale for there have been small massacres in 3rd world areas, but these are not in the hundreds much less millions that we see at the hands of atheist leaders as presented in the last century)
btw sorry I was gone i was playing LoL
#1160 to #837
-
SunilCCXXXVII (03/19/2012) [-]
I read all that.. it was utter bullshit, as in everything from both (and a few extra people).
The one thing that plank keeps saying is that just because someone is an atheist, they have killed in the name of their religion.. so far only 1 person has gave an example and that was the red shirts, and it wasn't many deaths at all, I doubt in the 100s.
MAO ZEDONG - he killed for power and to change his country.
Stalin - killed for power
The 30 year war - for Christianity - at the time ~2% of the world population was killed. In todays terms 140million people..
French wars of religion - for Christianity
Sudan civil war - Islam and Christianity
Crusades - Christianity
The one thing that plank keeps saying is that just because someone is an atheist, they have killed in the name of their religion.. so far only 1 person has gave an example and that was the red shirts, and it wasn't many deaths at all, I doubt in the 100s.
MAO ZEDONG - he killed for power and to change his country.
Stalin - killed for power
The 30 year war - for Christianity - at the time ~2% of the world population was killed. In todays terms 140million people..
French wars of religion - for Christianity
Sudan civil war - Islam and Christianity
Crusades - Christianity
#829 to #817
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-] Also I'd give a number on this but the highest anything I could find was Bosnia with a death toll of an estimated 300,000 and this was due to ethnicities (which included religions, but the conflict was not of direct cause of religion) fighting
This number includes both slaughter and military deaths, and though this is a high number, that is less than the 209 million of recent times
This number includes both slaughter and military deaths, and though this is a high number, that is less than the 209 million of recent times
#557 to #533
-
SunilCCXXXVII (03/19/2012) [-]
Well first off, Hitler was a Christian. That doesn't mean he killed in the name of Christianity. Nor does it mean anyone else you mentioned acted in light of their lack of belief.. well Darwin just proved evolution... wtf does that have to do with racism?
Relatively; there have been close to 0 deaths caused by atheism, whilst there have been millions if not billions through direct influence of organised religions.
"Relatively"
Relatively; there have been close to 0 deaths caused by atheism, whilst there have been millions if not billions through direct influence of organised religions.
"Relatively"
#572 to #557
-
N. Korean citizen (03/19/2012) [-] Hitler wasn't a christian, and if he "was" it was only by name not by action. God has a tendency to dislike raising one's self up as a god, and claiming you have divine right.
For instance would you call me an atheist if I stated I still believed there was a God, and that he was a great noodle being?
Darwin was racist in a similar fashion that Hitler was, claiming that the Aryan race was superior and that Black people were inferior
This does indeed follow survival of the fittest
Also those numbers aren't accurate, unless you consider ALL religions, in which case you would have to take into account atheism, making the point null
You also failed to mention Stalin, who killed more people, but didn't get as much hatred because he wasn't defeated in a war and didn't target a specific group
For instance would you call me an atheist if I stated I still believed there was a God, and that he was a great noodle being?
Darwin was racist in a similar fashion that Hitler was, claiming that the Aryan race was superior and that Black people were inferior
This does indeed follow survival of the fittest
Also those numbers aren't accurate, unless you consider ALL religions, in which case you would have to take into account atheism, making the point null
You also failed to mention Stalin, who killed more people, but didn't get as much hatred because he wasn't defeated in a war and didn't target a specific group
#691 to #572
-
rushnroulette **User deleted account** (03/19/2012) [-] 1.Hitler was raised by a catholic mother and catholic father, he made statements in speeches that affirmed a belief in christianity.
2. No I would call you a pastafarianist
3. Darwin wrote a book on natural selection claiming that the strong will live and the weak will die, if you look at it, black people are physically better than white people and this was proven in a boxing match against a german aryan and in the olympics at Berlin
4. Lets just consider that atheism is a religion even though it contains no worship, faith, ideology, philosophy, etc., etc.(all things in a religion) Even so the only blood we would have on our hands would be from Stalin
A few other things, if your trying to relate Darwins On Origin of Species to an atheist text your retarded, holy books are written in a way on how to tell the religious subjects to live their lives and how they should set their morals. Also stalin killed for power, he ruled russia by fear.
If your religious i have no hate against that. I have grown up with a religious father and was forced to go to a church until i was 16.
2. No I would call you a pastafarianist
3. Darwin wrote a book on natural selection claiming that the strong will live and the weak will die, if you look at it, black people are physically better than white people and this was proven in a boxing match against a german aryan and in the olympics at Berlin
4. Lets just consider that atheism is a religion even though it contains no worship, faith, ideology, philosophy, etc., etc.(all things in a religion) Even so the only blood we would have on our hands would be from Stalin
A few other things, if your trying to relate Darwins On Origin of Species to an atheist text your retarded, holy books are written in a way on how to tell the religious subjects to live their lives and how they should set their morals. Also stalin killed for power, he ruled russia by fear.
If your religious i have no hate against that. I have grown up with a religious father and was forced to go to a church until i was 16.
#600 to #572
-
SunilCCXXXVII (03/19/2012) [-]
He believed in Christianity, that was his faith, it's your gods choice to judge him not yours.
No I'd say you believed in a noodle god, because that's the faith you chose, like Hitler chose to be a Christian.
.... I don't get your comments on Darwin.. what does that matter? You Christians had slaves, the only reason people had slaves is because white people thought they were better than blacks.. racism.
-.- Almost nobody has killed in the name of atheism. Stalin killed for power, not atheism.
Fuck it, your god killed everything except 2 of every animal.
No I'd say you believed in a noodle god, because that's the faith you chose, like Hitler chose to be a Christian.
.... I don't get your comments on Darwin.. what does that matter? You Christians had slaves, the only reason people had slaves is because white people thought they were better than blacks.. racism.
-.- Almost nobody has killed in the name of atheism. Stalin killed for power, not atheism.
Fuck it, your god killed everything except 2 of every animal.
#643 to #639
-
asgardian (03/19/2012) [-] 1. I was saying that I wasn't going to address all his points, just the first one.
2. It's not even a claim, it's a concept.
3. Even if it were a claim you have 9 more to go.
"Atheist kill millions everyday -.- " or "Look up how many people are killed everyday and tell me NONE of them are atheist. "
Which is it? Millions die every single day because of atheism or at least one person dies every single day because of atheism. Make up your mind.
2. It's not even a claim, it's a concept.
3. Even if it were a claim you have 9 more to go.
"Atheist kill millions everyday -.- " or "Look up how many people are killed everyday and tell me NONE of them are atheist. "
Which is it? Millions die every single day because of atheism or at least one person dies every single day because of atheism. Make up your mind.
#41 to #11
-
altma **User deleted account** (03/18/2012) [-] **altma rolled a random image posted in comment #278 at cant tell if troll or fucking retarded.. **
Creepy.
Creepy.
#861
-
markthewhark (03/19/2012) [+]
(7 replies)
God creates dinosaurs, God destroys dinosaurs, God creates man, man destroys God...
Man creates dinosaurs.
Man creates dinosaurs.
#896 to #861
-
tuborial (03/19/2012) [-] i just watched this movie, there was once scene where jeff goldblum is lying hurt with his shirt half off (like right before they restart everything) and i was captioned it in my head with "my body is ready" and "paint me like one of your french girls" i need a break from fj
#191
-
goml (03/19/2012) [+]
(2 replies)
1. Person says a defining fact of their belief
2.OP spills a huge load of scientific babble (never actually happened, probably something more like "BUT DURR IS NO GOD I'M SO EDGY LOLXD")
3.Person gets angry, begins to rage and say ridiculous stereotype of their religion/belief
4.OP says something witty (never happened, probably something more like "LOL U MAD CHRISTIAN?"
Come on, we all know the story, it's been told a million times. I am a devout atheist, but stop making all religious people out to be insane, or you'll be no better then the corrupt leaders you love to rebel against. I hate asshole atheists, they make all atheist seem like douchebags...
Go on with the red thumbs.
2.OP spills a huge load of scientific babble (never actually happened, probably something more like "BUT DURR IS NO GOD I'M SO EDGY LOLXD")
3.Person gets angry, begins to rage and say ridiculous stereotype of their religion/belief
4.OP says something witty (never happened, probably something more like "LOL U MAD CHRISTIAN?"
Come on, we all know the story, it's been told a million times. I am a devout atheist, but stop making all religious people out to be insane, or you'll be no better then the corrupt leaders you love to rebel against. I hate asshole atheists, they make all atheist seem like douchebags...
Go on with the red thumbs.
#734
-
archiferd (03/19/2012) [+]
(3 replies)
I'll just hang here and wait for incoming religious debates
#755 to #734
-
xiotio (03/19/2012) [-] **xiotio rolled a random image posted in comment #2971016 at FJ Pony Thread **
Very much agree, good sir, though sometime a good shitstorm can be fun to watch.
Very much agree, good sir, though sometime a good shitstorm can be fun to watch.
#776
-
sockiiee (03/19/2012) [+]
(4 replies)
I immediately started going through the comments to see if someone argued over this post.
#746
-
bulldozah (03/19/2012) [+]
(7 replies)
"Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses."
And people say the bible isn't fun... :P
And people say the bible isn't fun... :P
#94
-
lordpsa (03/18/2012) [+]
(2 replies)
"But who prays for Satan? Who, in 18 centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most?"
~Mark Twain.
~Mark Twain.
