There's something going on in culture and the media both that's really bugging me. It seems a lot of people just like to say that the idea of a god creating the earth is utterly rediculous and people who believe it are retarded nutjobs. I've seen statements like this constantly in a lot of media and even some posts here. The simple fact is, like it or not, the belief of a god is just as valid as the belief in big bang/evolution, and to say such a thing is extremely offensive to people who believe in a god. Now, I'm not one of those people who hears something even slightly offensive and starts going nuts, I've always considered myself to be rather tough-skinned, but my point is that it seems to be constant attacks against this one group. I mean, you never see a show saying, "Oh, people who believe they evolved from monkeys are total nutjobs!"

Now, don't get me wrong, I know that there is quite a bit of mockery for many other religions, but generally this is more poking fun at stereotypes as opposed to stating that their beliefs are stupid or insane.

People are equal (rights wise, anyhow). Thoughts are not. Some are good and should be praised. Some are bad and should be looked down upon. Beliefs are not free from criticism.

That idea is utterly ridiculous because it is uninvestigative. It is not as valid as the "big bang" (bit of a misnomer) and evolution, both of which have plenty of evidence going for them. Christianity brings no new knowledege to the table as opposed to science. There is also a lot of moral bullshit and contradictions in your book. (I'm assuming it's your book. Feel free to correct me.) I would be happy to point things out. (No, not just the OT. The NT is just as full of bullshit.)

Actually, there's a lot of propaganda against non-christian beliefs. Just look at American media (older works are more open about it.)

Mr Lostman
People are equal (rights wise, anyhow). Thoughts are not. Some are good and should be praised. Some are bad and should be looked down upon. Beliefs are not free from criticism.

That idea is utterly ridiculous because it is uninvestigative. It is not as valid as the "big bang" (bit of a misnomer) and evolution, both of which have plenty of evidence going for them. Christianity brings no new knowledege to the table as opposed to science. There is also a lot of moral bullshit and contradictions in your book. (I'm assuming it's your book. Feel free to correct me.) I would be happy to point things out. (No, not just the OT. The NT is just as full of bullshit.)

Actually, there's a lot of propaganda against non-christian beliefs. Just look at American media (older works are more open about it.)

I'm not saying it isn't open to criticizm. As I said, I actually consider myself to be rather tough-skinned. I have no problems with someone saying, "I don't think a god creating the earth makes much sense, because..." my problem is with people saying "Anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot!"
And I say it's valid because there is actually quite a bit of evidence supporting, just not the scientific backing of evolution.

And yes, I know there has been a lot of propaganda against non-christian beliefs, but one thing about this is a lot of people are quick to point it out as propaganda, while someone who makes anti-christian propaganda is often applauded.

Fact is, organized religion had done allot over the centuries to crush down scientific advancement because the stuff that was being proposed contradicted the good book.

The loudest anti-religion groups are quick to point out how science has helped improve quality of life by providing us with electricity, pluming, infrastructure, medicine and so on.

Fact is. There are loud voiced bigots among church goers who will bash at scientist and teachers who dare to preach "blasphemy" like the evolution, siting that it has no basis of being correct since it's labeled a theory, even though it has stood test of time against numerous of scrutinizes and examination, been compared with DNA research and more.

You shouldn't be surprised that there are people who claim to be better then religious folks, siting that they know science and that they're right and you're wrong. People like that exist in every circles. Every click has oppressive bigots that are certain in their belief that they can't be wrong.

If you think that the media is being overly supportive about anti-religious talks then that's probably because you live in an area where the majority has developed that opinion. Media loves ratings so they'll tell people what they want to hear. Go to the bible belt if you want to hear how sick and immoral scientist really are.

Someone
And I say it's valid because there is actually quite a bit of evidence supporting, just not the scientific backing of evolution.

Then you are wrong. Christianity is not investigative. It brings no new knowledge to the table. Creationism as decribed in the OT has been disproved. (You can argue for guided evolution and guided big bang all you want with deism, but that's not Christian, and is therefore useless to you.) What has it done for us? NOTHING of any scientific value. Science, on the other hand, brings all kinds of new theories to the field. Some make it big and become accepted, others become outdated and we move on. That's how progress works. It's how you're typing on that computer right now.

Case in point, there was no mass Exodus. The Jews were probably never in Egypt. How do I know this? There is archeological evidence against the notion they were. To say they were would be wrong, regardless of whether you believe it or not. Here is where that belief is not valid.

I would have gone with the Noah's flood if we're playing the "let's point out unlikely bible stories" game.

But otherwise, I agree with Lostman on one point. The fundamental bases on scientific thinking is to ask questions about everything. Once you figure out the answer to your question, you dwell deeper into the subject, discover more things and ask questions about that. Slowly and gradually, you're understanding of that subject becomes better and better.

The fundamental bases on religious thinking is to have faith in things. To have faith is to trust that this is the way things are. Thus, there's no need to examine it further.

Naturally these two conflicting philosophies can cause a strenuous relationship.

Oh Jebus... more religious stuff? D:

You know, these discussions are tiring and repetitive. I've been a voice for the anti religion side in my time, usually I try and speak up for balance and understanding here, but now I think I'll have some fun going actively PRO-religion.

To that end:
You have no right to bash or negatively criticise anyone for their religious beliefs. People can believe what they want, as long as they don't harm anyone it's all good. In fact it's better than good because it connects them deeper and more personally with their own cultural history.

Well, at least I'm trying to make different themed debates. I'd like to see other people come up with something other then religion based debates myself.

ozoneocean
You know, these discussions are tiring and repetitive.

and they are probably about 30% of global internet traffic.

sittin' this one out. wake me for the next one.

Religion tends to get a bit of criticism from scientific communities since religious theory seemingly comes from nowhere. There is no real evidence which supports religious theory, it is meant to be taken on faith alone. What makes it worse is that much of it is based on hearsay passed down for several generations before it was finally written down and mixes parables and history, but doesn't do a particularly good job of distinguishing either. Because of this, religious scriptures, even those within a single cult, often contradict one another leaving the opportunity for the believer to pick and choose which elements of their faith to prioritize over others.

It's kind of like the problem you get when you line up a hundred people, tell the one at the front of the line to pass on a particular phrase to the next person and for them to follow suit until the phrase reaches the end of the line. At the end of the line, you end up with something completely different. Religion works in a similar way. You start with a clear message that gets embellished and confused over years of reinterpretation. It only makes matters worse that often that beginning message was just an excuse for a particular man to take power over a particular group of people and a whole mythos expands out of that one power play.

That's not to say that the religious people can't be just as critical, though. After living in the South for a while, I am quite familiar with the kind of religious fanatics who try to disbelieve any sort of scientific facts which contradict their personal beliefs no matter how much evidence you provide them with. The biggest difference I see between these two extremes, though, is that the scientists just write off these people as idiots while the religious extremists want to actively convert everyone else to their beliefs. And many, for whatever reason, think they have solid arguments and can't understand why someone would have difficulty just buying into a faith they haven't been brought up to believe.

I got so sick of preaching down there. While in grad school, I worked at Sears to pay my living expenses (and I really don't recommend anyone else try the same). At first I was in the auto center. One night I had the (mis)fortune of having a particularly chatty Jehovas Witness come in. He stayed in the showroom the whole hour his car was being serviced trying to convert me and get me to go to some meeting a local preacher ran. It was a pretty miserable hour for me because as a sales associate, I'm required to humor the man. Shortly after the guy came in a second time and asked me if I went to the meeting, I transferred over to home electronics (if anybody is shopping for a TV, I'm practically an expert on the subject). I thought I might be safe, but over there we had two creationists working in the store. One was in the same department and often had a "holier than thou attitude" about everyone. What made it worse was the guy was a total hypocrit. Despite being some sort of devout Christian, the guy was the shadiest salesman on the floor. He was great at getting people to buy thins, but also had more returns than anyone when people found out he lied to them about product features and warranties (not that the store cared, they only look at the sales, not the returns, even though the store takes a hit on every returned product). I also had this obnoxious guiy hit me up at lunch frequently. I think he was a cashier, but he'd always try to convince me that everything in life was God's plan and bad things only happen if you aren't following the Bible. I kind of wish he could see me now. I'm still not a Christian and my life's never been better.

I think the scientific community can also get a little critica of people who seem overly closed minded, and there are Christian extremists who fit that description. Before heading off to grad school I worked in accounting in the DC area. At the office where I worked there was a girl who was a Jehovas Witness. I recall getting into a long and ultimately pointless argument with her because she started exclaiming to another employee that evolution "was the stupidet thing she had ever heard" and that there was no evidence that it ever happened. She also exclaimed, "if it's real, how ome we've never itnessed it?" She also tried to push some intelligent design book on me which I had already read in high school (went to a Catholic school and amazingly the book was required reading in a RELIGION class, while we still learned about evolution in biology) and doesn't support her claims. I also pointed out several cases where evolution has been observed and tried to explain how evolution works. After a couple of hours, though, the argument was still at the "stupidest thing I've ever heard" stage, so I gave up. Of course, this was also coming from someone who believed the story of the Tower of Babel taught us that white people are superior to everyone else, so I'm not sure if I really should have expected any more from her.

Anyway, those are a few of the reasons why I think religion gets so much scrutiny these days. True, these extremists don't represent everyone, and certainly don't represent the majority of religious people, but they tend to be the most vocal when it comes to expressing their views and the most demanding of our government. They tend to be the ones who want to force their views on everyone else if they can't get them to accept them willingly, while I find often the scientific community just takes the attitude, "let them be idiots if they want to be just so long as they aren't standing in everybody else's way".

therealtj
the belief of a god is just as valid as the belief in evolution

Oh... must have slipped my mind that there's not shitpiles of real legitimate proof for evolution, and it's still just an inane theory in Darwin's dusty old book, much like the bible.

But yeah that first paragraph of Isukun's post.

This is also why i like my new bio book, there's no 'maybe' following the word evolution, it's treated as the true basis it is while never beating around a creationist bush. (granted the bio textbooks from middle school were old and horrid but come on)

The trouble with the "scientific community" is that they're just as representative as the rest of the general population when it comes to beliefs: Scientists aren't any more immune to religion than anyone else and never have been.
Like I tried to talk about in that thread where I discussed the fatuity of "science VS religion" debates.

A scientist that is also religious is probably more likely to be a bit more conservative in their religious beliefs though. And by "conservative" I mean: conventional, mainstream, traditional. They wouldn't tend to go for the extremest, crazier manifestations that take the bible literally (or the Torah, Koran or whatever else).

It's not religion that's the problem, it's people who for whatever reason subscribe to ideas that are at extreme variance with the established an accepted norms of mainstream society.
Evolution isn't a scientific fact, it's a scientific theory. But it IS a cultural fact: it is an accepted, established norm world wide. It has become one of the rock solid facts of our culture. People who disagree with the idea vocally aren't a problem for science, they've got nothing to do with science and science could care less. No, they're at variance with reality as we know it.
And it's the same story with the other examples.

Mr Lostman

Someone
And I say it's valid because there is actually quite a bit of evidence supporting, just not the scientific backing of evolution.

Then you are wrong. Christianity is not investigative. It brings no new knowledge to the table. Creationism as decribed in the OT has been disproved. (You can argue for guided evolution and guided big bang all you want with deism, but that's not Christian, and is therefore useless to you.) What has it done for us? NOTHING of any scientific value. Science, on the other hand, brings all kinds of new theories to the field. Some make it big and become accepted, others become outdated and we move on. That's how progress works. It's how you're typing on that computer right now.

Case in point, there was no mass Exodus. The Jews were probably never in Egypt. How do I know this? There is archeological evidence against the notion they were. To say they were would be wrong, regardless of whether you believe it or not. Here is where that belief is not valid.

Actually Jews were in Egypt. But not as slaves. It is believed they were warriors/mercinaries hired/allies by Egypt to help fight its enemies. Once the fighting was done they were out of the job and took jobs as workers. Eventually((few generations, I thnk)) they got tired of it and left. This little tibit is brought to you thanks to History channel and College History classes ;D

The first Universities were set up by the church. Thats about it that I know of for them helping science. There is alot of bad stuff they did though. But something they did that wasn't of any scientific value was to help calm people's fears of death and they have help feed and educate the less fortunate. I'm not saying everything they say is right. Nor has everything they have done/do. But just because a person does some crazy stuff isn't a reason to forget the help they did for you in the past ;D

I tend to not trust anything on a channel that fills most of it's airtime with cryptozoology shows. Bigfoot, aliens, and the Loch Ness monsters aren't really history. Many of their documentaries based on Biblical historical studies can be just as questionable.

The first Universities were set up by the church.

They were the first to use that name, but Universities were designed as a religious alternative to the remaining and largely non-religious academies. Places of higher learning existed before universities. Also, the scientific research side of things was present in the madrasahs of the Middle East before it was introduced to the European universities. There were also similar institutions which sprung up in China, Korea, and India before the founding of the University of Constantinople. So it isn't like these things wouldn't have happened without the church, the church just modified an existing institution so that it represented their particular interests. Without the influence of the church, the academies likely would have expanded and filled the same roles and we might have seen faster scientific progress.

isukun
Without the influence of the church, the academies likely would have expanded and filled the same roles and we might have seen faster scientific progress.

Oh that's just silly supposition Isukun. And minimising the role of religion, any religion, in the founding of tertiary teaching institutions is facile and disingenuous. The study of theological texts, philosophy, and natural sciences went hand in hand for all those early institutions.
There was no real separation.

It wasn't till much later that even medical science, mathematics, chemistry and physics were separated from philosophy.

ozoneocean
couldn't care less.

fixed.

I don't think that the Christians have it any harder than the other monotheistic religions or Atheism. I never really encountered a lot of anti-christian news or shows when I was living in America, nor have I here in Australia. On DrunkDuck, yes I've seen a lot of anti-religion posts in Debate and Discussion, but mostly on other sites I've been on there were more pro-Christian beliefs. If anyone, I think it's the Muslims everyone's picking on. They always get searched at airports, there are terrible stereotypes many people actually believe... I just don't see a mass of Christian-hate.

Someone
A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your points.
Believers will stretch reason to any extent to rationalize failures, changing small points or ever larger amounts of data to accomodate their belief. The theory is never discarded only the evidence

(emphasis added)

That's all that really need be said. It's on both sides here. Evidence of acadmeies is brought out to rob Holy Mother Church of the credit when in fact the Church reinvented those academies after destroying them at the end of the Pagan Era(read histories of early Christianity and the Later Roman empire, then Medieval scholarship and into the Renaissance)

Frankly I'm disappointed in the dismissal of the The History Channel. It is correct in putting on those programs as those things are part of the historiography of modern culture. It's so easy to dismiss that "fringe" stuff but it's a vital part of understanding the modern world. We ignore it at our peril. Bigfoot and Roswell are the mythology of the modern world.

Also those scholars on the shows on Biblical history are the most noted historians on those topics and often ones are called upon to represent the differing viewpoints. I've tracked down their articles and books and you know what? They know what they're talking about. They can cite lots of credible evidencethat prove their point that has to be left out of that one minute sound byte in a 45 minute documentary.

Seems we're all falling into the trap of the above quotation and letting our belief systems blind us to the evidence. After all never forget that you just might be wrong and research with an open mind. Take yourself out of it and let the evidence form your belief, not the other way around.

I think it's worth noting the original intent of this post. If we go on discussing whether or not Christianity and the existence of God is true or provable, we'll go down the same road we always do and get nothing out of this.

So why not discuss whether or not Christianity is unfairly under fire? Or whether or not religious beliefs themselves should be challenged or ridiculed? I think we'll get a lot more out of it.

And for my part I will say that it feels like media portrayal of Christians has shifted over the years. It used to be that Christians were the "regular people" in movies an TV. They were the status quo. Lately they've been shifted toward the Christian stereotypes... the Flanders characters who appear stiff and stale compared to everybody else, or the lady in Hair Spray who uses Christianity to justify her racism and hatred. Then there's the lady in The Mist whose Christian beliefs caused her to stir a group of survivors into becoming a murderous mob.

Part of the reason these stereotypes are being shown is that these kinds of people do exist. But like any stereotype they are the loud minority. This makes their portrayal just as unfair to the normal Christians as any racial stereotype would be. These portrayals will continue to persist as long as Christianity becomes more unpopular.

I have to admit, I sometimes enjoy those off-kilter Christians in the movies and TV... but only because I know plenty of perfectly decent Christians around me.

It wasn't till much later that even medical science, mathematics, chemistry and physics were separated from philosophy.

We aren't talking about separation from philosophy, however, we're talking about separation from religion. The two are not always one and the same. Many of the ancient Graeco-Roman scholars actually rejected the common faiths. Their goals were to explain the universe in rational terms using what knowledge they had of science, religion, politics, and anthropology.

Evidence of acadmeies is brought out to rob Holy Mother Church of the credit when in fact the Church reinvented those academies after destroying them at the end of the Pagan Era

So, in other words, I'm right. The church took a preestablished institution and changed it to fit its needs. These institutions would have existed whether the church interfered or not, but the church wanted these institutions to reflect their values and thus they "reinvented" them and destroyed the old standards.

Also those scholars on the shows on Biblical history are the most noted historians on those topics and often ones are called upon to represent the differing viewpoints.

Yep, like the ones who link biblcal studies with aliens, they're real noteworthy professionals in their field. The History Channel also has a tendency to be quite sensationalist in the way they present things and will frequently pull in fake professionals to support their claims in programs. And quite honestly, I have difficulty taking many proffesionals in the field of Biblical studies very seriously as many go about their investigations backwards. Many are devout Christians who don't look at history objectively and see how it may have influenced the mythology, but instead try to find ways to fit history to the myth and in my book, that's not being a true historian.

We ignore it at our peril. Bigfoot and Roswell are the mythology of the modern world.

Only in the same sense that Star Trek is.

I was going to speak up for the History Channel since they used to be reliable in the past. But then I saw "Clash of the Gods". They had Jesus throw Hades into a lake of fire. In a documentary about Greek religion. WHAT IS THIS?

i understand some people like religion and some dont. but, pardon the way i put this, who the flicky cares. organized religion has killed more people then any other thing. the catholic church was known for being the big bully. on the other hand without religion , life would be a vain struggle for survival. religion gives hope. its a double edge sword.
its pointless to argue about this subject because there is nothing to gain. i cant change the way you think and you can change the way i think. this is completely and utterly pointless.

therealtj
There's something going on in culture and the media both that's really bugging me. It seems a lot of people just like to say that the idea of a god creating the earth is utterly rediculous and people who believe it are retarded nutjobs. I've seen statements like this constantly in a lot of media and even some posts here. The simple fact is, like it or not, the belief of a god is just as valid as the belief in big bang/evolution, and to say such a thing is extremely offensive to people who believe in a god. Now, I'm not one of those people who hears something even slightly offensive and starts going nuts, I've always considered myself to be rather tough-skinned, but my point is that it seems to be constant attacks against this one group. I mean, you never see a show saying, "Oh, people who believe they evolved from monkeys are total nutjobs!"

Now, don't get me wrong, I know that there is quite a bit of mockery for many other religions, but generally this is more poking fun at stereotypes as opposed to stating that their beliefs are stupid or insane.

The reason why Christians are being picked on is because they are a threat to the New World Order.

Inasmuch as I disagree with the dogmatic part of the Christian faith, these are the things about Christianity that fly in the face of the New World Order.

1) Belief that human life is sacred.
- Christians believe that you have an immortal soul that will have eternal life in heaven if you follow God's commandments.
- Christians believe that life begins at conception, therefore abortion is tantamount to murder.
- The problem with that? Those beliefs get in the way of the DEHUMANIZATION agenda. The Christians REFUSE TO ACCEPT that the human being is just another accident of nature that resulted from evolution. The Christians refuse to accept the idea that humans are just like any other animal. To the Christian, humans are more special than animals. But we aren't special. As we are just "useless eaters" according to Mr. Henry Kissinger.

2) The strong family ties of Christians
- Christians believe that divorce is a sin that will damn them to hell. And so they are more likely to stick it out through thick and thin.
- The problem with that? The family is what the controllers want to destroy so that they can come in and fill in the role of the parents. They want broken families so that more people can be in the system. Think of all the messed up kids that broken families produce. That's your potential market for the drugs you sell (both legal and illegal) as well as the prisons you build.
- That is why I urge everyone here to LOVE THEIR FAMILY because family comes first before government.

3)This whole moral code thing
- Christians have the 10 commandments. They believe that if you follow them (plus a few other added dogmas depending on the denomination/sect) you will go to heaven. The 10 commandments basically act as a moral code.
- The problem with that? How will you convince them that there are no consequences to your actions? A degenerate society where crime is high is the dream of the controllers. Because that provides an excuse to take away liberty and bring in martial law.

4) There shall be no other Gods before me
- To a Christian, the word of God is more important than the word of the state.
- The problem with that? How can you tell them to do something that contradicts the bible (what they believe is the word of God)? That is why the Christians need to be persecuted because they are unmanageable.

And this isn't only about Christians but EVERYONE else whose thoughts aren't the right kind of thoughts.

You gotta be politically correct in this day and age...

jonthebome
organized religion has killed more people then any other thing.

Um... what about EUGENICS? You know, the ideology where our friend Adolf Hitler got his ideas from.

Isn't that supposedly SCIENTIFIC?

@jonthebome: If you don't want to talk about this, then don't. But other people do.

@Kyupol: Do you follow anything else in the OT besides the 10 Commandments? Think carefully. (Besides the fact they are only somewhat useful at best. 3 or 4 can easily be thrown out.)

1) Belief that human life is sacred.

Christians are more likely to support the death penalty. They are also more likely to protect their property by means of firearms. Apparently human life isn't as sacred as their TVs. They are also more likely to support military action and acts of retribution. If anything, your average atheist values life more than your average Christian. After all, you only get one shot at things and there is nothing greater you can take from someone than their existance.

There are also plenty of reasons for non christians to be of the opinion that we are superior creatures to other animals. Complex language allows for complex thought and the development and teaching of more complex ideas. We think and communicate ideas that are totally foreign to any other animal on the planet. What you're talking about isnt dehumanizing. By continuing to think we are better because God said so, that is actually damaging and one of the reasons why there is so much conflict among humans. This idea of superiority makes us also separate ourselves from each other.

2) The strong family ties of Christians

I'm sorry. Strong family ties? What are you smoking Kyupol? Religion these days has very little to do with strong family ties. The fundamentalists may tout the sacredness of marriage, but the class of people from which the fundamentalists primarily come are also the source of the most divorces.

This controllers BS is a bit shakey, as well. What benefit is there to having people be "in the system"? Medicare, unemployment, and prisons don't pay for themselves. What benefit is there for these theoretical controllers who spend money to keep you dependent on them. They don't get anything in return, which kind of defeats the purpose of control.

3)This whole moral code thing

Christians love to twist their moral code however they like and claim the Bible says it's okay. Some sects beleive you can be as rotten of a person as you like, but as long as you beleive in Jesus, you'll get into heaven. Others think that as long as you donate to the church or go to confession every once in a while, all your sins are absolved. Then you've got the people who twist passages of the Bible to claim God wanted us to be racist or spiteful. Hell, most Christians couldn't even tell you what all the ten commandments are. How can they be expected to follow those rules if they don't even know what they are? Obviously, the word of God isn't THAT important to them.

4) There shall be no other Gods before me

That is a problem, but not in the respect that Christians willfully defy the law. They don't. After all, the Bible actually encourages you to follow your government's doctrines. Where this causes a problem is that the fundamentalist Christians want to force their belief system on others by manipulting the government. If other people defy their religious beliefs, that has no bearing on their ability to practice their religion or really their lifestyle. That doesn't stop them from lobbying to force their ideals on others, though. They also have a tendency to spread disinformation about subjects to manipulate the general public.

If there is anyone trying to establish this new world order the paranoids have been crying about for over 200 years, then there is no doubt in my mind that anyone leading such a movement would be Christian.

Science versus religion. Hmmm. ¿?

There is no debate here, they are totaly different things. Science is just a set of rules and a method to investigate, one that has proven very succesful up to now. And it seems to work quite well. But it is what it is, a tool to investigate and find out about the reality around us. As such it has nothing to do with religion or any other system of beliefs. Religions are based on revelation and faith, while science is based on evidence and doubt. As such many scientists hold religious beliefs, so there is realy no contradiction here, as long as you don't confuse both.

Let's even take evolution, that for some christians seems to be very controversial. Where is the problem? Obviously the bible doesn't mention evolution, the same way it doesn't mention cell phones. Only a fanatic would want to take the bible word for word. And actualy if you read carefuly, quite surprisingly, you will find that actualy it does talk about evolution. Six days, six days in God's life. And also if you believe, you should know that God dictated the Bible for all men to understand; and using a language that only educated men from the XX century could understand, would have been very un-god-like.

God gave mankind free will, and a brain. Not only that, he also gave us the desire to Know. By the way, anyone noticed that the Big-Bang Theory is almost the proof of God's existance?

Well, this is my point of view. Please be happy. And remember that God in his infinite wisdom and love only desires us to be better.

Christians are more likely to support the death penalty.

- And so do atheists and other religions. Being Christian has nothing to do with support of death penalty.

They are also more likely to protect their property by means of firearms.

- what's wrong with that? If someone tries to break in my house, I guarantee that he will be severely injured or killed (if he would persist after I threaten him to leave with a knife or gun pointed at him). Its called self-defense.

They are also more likely to support military action and acts of retribution.

- Those are the fake neocons who love Bush and call themselves "Christian". Yes there are people like that.

If anything, your average atheist values life more than your average Christian.

- I understand that there are atheists who are anti-abortion and anti-war and all that. However, that is a result of the deep rooted spiritual nature that exists in all humans.

I was talking to an atheist who is part of a 9-11 truth movement and he said that he feels there's some sort of moral obligation to expose the truth. He said something along the lines of "its because its the right thing to do". etc. etc. Though he refuses to admit it, that is his spiritual nature calling out to him to do the right thing.

But to think that humans are not above other animals? Aren't we sentient beings? We are capable of arts, sciences, philosophy, spirituality, etc. We all crave for freedom. Why is it that throughout history, humans have always fought for their freedom? But why don't chickens, pigs, cows, and other farm animals organize and fight for their freedom? Its because humans are sentient spiritual beings.

And no I'm not saying that its justifiable to be cruel to animals just because they aren't sentient beings. As a higher sentient being, it is only appropriate that we give compassion to all living things. The mark of a higher vibrational being is one who seeks to improve the lives of all living things around him/her.

By continuing to think we are better because God said so, that is actually damaging and one of the reasons why there is so much conflict among humans. This idea of superiority makes us also separate ourselves from each other.

The idea of superiority towards fellow humans is what causes conflict among humans.

All humans regardless of race are capable of reaching the stars and creating prosperous civilizations. I KNOW that out there in the universe, there are blacks, whites, browns, yellows, etc... scattered out there with higher levels of civilization than our "civilization". The human did not originate from the earth.

If you don't believe that, look at the Egyptians, Mayans, Chinese, Assyrians, etc... Those are humans that comprise various races. That's why I don't believe the idea of the superiority of one type of human race towards the other.

I'm sorry. Strong family ties? What are you smoking Kyupol? Religion these days has very little to do with strong family ties.

I understand that there are exceptions. But generally, its Christian families that tend to be intact.

For instance, why is it that 90% of Filipino families have a mom and a dad intact? Its because most of them practice some form of Christianity.

I'm not saying they are perfect either. They have problems just like any other group of human beings.

This controllers BS is a bit shakey, as well. What benefit is there to having people be "in the system"?

Imagine having absolute power. The ability to track and trace and know more about you than you know about yourself.

What benefit is there for these theoretical controllers who spend money to keep you dependent on them. They don't get anything in return, which kind of defeats the purpose of control.

They get slaves. What do you think this whole system about debt and getting people off the rural areas in to the big cities is all about?

Independence is what they don't want. Because if you are dependent, it decreases your ability to fight back.

In the book of Frederick Douglas, a former African slave, he mentions how some slaves refuse to run away because they are dependent on the slave master for food.

Christians love to twist their moral code however they like and claim the Bible says it's okay. Some sects beleive you can be as rotten of a person as you like, but as long as you beleive in Jesus, you'll get into heaven. Others think that as long as you donate to the church or go to confession every once in a while, all your sins are absolved. Then you've got the people who twist passages of the Bible to claim God wanted us to be racist or spiteful. Hell, most Christians couldn't even tell you what all the ten commandments are. How can they be expected to follow those rules if they don't even know what they are? Obviously, the word of God isn't THAT important to them.

Dogma aside, Christianity at its very core is all about loving thy neighbor. Remove all the added dogmas by the various sects and just look at its fundamentals.

Dogma is created for political purposes.

After all, the Bible actually encourages you to follow your government's doctrines.

I guess you were talking about Romans 13 and this whole idea about who cares if government is corrupt? Jesus will come and save us!!!

But if you actually read the bible, its about standing up to tyranny. Jesus himself - the man whom Christianity is based on - stood up to the Romans and the Pharisees.

If there is anyone trying to establish this new world order the paranoids have been crying about for over 200 years, then there is no doubt in my mind that anyone leading such a movement would be Christian.

I guess that the Darwins, Huxleys, etc. are Christian.

Going back to my original point, Christianity is in conflict with the New World Order.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Some_New_Testimonials.html
http://www.chick.com/default.asp
Note: I do not necessarily agree with everything the above URLs says. In fact, those 3 websites tend to contradict one another on certain points.

The point is, Christianity and the New World Order are totally incompatible as shown in those Christian websites.

Therefore, Christianity must be eliminated in order to bring forth the New World Order.

'Men must be free to do what they believe. It is not our right to punish them for thinking what they do, no matter how much we disagree.'
Video game quotes are awesome.

Anyway, regardless of beliefs, we shouldn't bash someone for it. Because no matter how hard you try to make them change their minds about what they think, they're just going to get upset and keep on believing what they want.

Now before my words get twisted and misinterpreted again (which seems to be a bad habit of mine) I will add that yes, racism, the whole Nazi thing is indeed, bad. But there isn't much we can do to change their minds. Like above quote said, we shouldn't punish someone on their beliefs but for their acts (if they're seriously harmful or break the laws I mean).

So to you crazy religi-nazis, stop condemning everyone to hell because said a bad word. You're not higher than everyone.
And crazy athiest-douches, stop insulting and bashing because you think God is imaginary, you're being just as close-minded as the religi-nazis you so hate.

I just want to know what the heck is wrong with all of us that we can't just accept that others have differing opinions to us.

- And so do atheists and other religions. Being Christian has nothing to do with support of death penalty.

Maybe you're misunderstanding the whole "more likely" part of my statement. The reasoning behind the Christian support of the death penalty, despite the fact that almost no church is in agreement with the general American Christian public, is precisely because they think the Bible promotes it. "Eye for an eye" is the most common reasoning used to support the death penalty.

If someone tries to break in my house, I guarantee that he will be severely injured or killed

Yep, that's really valuing life.

I understand that there are atheists who are anti-abortion and anti-war and all that. However, that is a result of the deep rooted spiritual nature that exists in all humans.

Sorry, but this statement and everything after it is a load of horse shit. People do not have a deep rooted spiritual nature. It is something we pick up from our environment and learn throughout childhood. Morality is the same thing. You learn it and it isn't always tied to your spirituality. Christian morals are all over the map, even within particular sects. You would think if people had a predisposition to acting a certain way, then everyone would, but that isn't the case.

I hate repeating myself but here goes. We don't need spirituality to define us as humans. We already have so many advantages over other forms of life on this planet, that it is very clear that we do stand above the rest of nature. The belief that God chose us as superior beings is not necessary and is for the most part a destructive quality of religion. It is that train of thought which has led various religions to claim superiorty over non-believers. It is that train of thought that has led to the multitude of holy wars in this world and also contributes to the issues we have in the modern world. This vain belief that we are chosen by God to stand above the rest is what leads to the greatest amount of conflict in the world.

But generally, its Christian families that tend to be intact.

Generally, it's not. Divorce rates are much higher among Christians (at 27%) than among agnostics and atheists (at 21%). Divorce rates are also much higher in areas where Christianisty is more prominant like the South. In fact, fundamentalists are even more likely to have been through a divorce with their rate at 34%. Somehow that faith ISN'T keeping them in a stable marriage, but it certainly doesn't stop them from preaching about its sanctity.

For instance, why is it that 90% of Filipino families have a mom and a dad intact? Its because most of them practice some form of Christianity.

Or perhaps divorce rates are so low in the Philipines because it's ILLEGAL there. Families stay together because the government FORCES them to. And here I thought you were all for more freedom. I'm sure if we took away things like alimony and tacked on a fine that only the rich could afford, the divorce rate would plummet here, too.

Imagine having absolute power. The ability to track and trace and know more about you than you know about yourself.

I can imagine it, but I still see no benefit unless there is something to gain. Keeping the people dependent doesn't lead to any personal gain, just a lot of hassle. Why would I want to spend all this money just to watch people? That's stupid and, quite frankly, not possible. What you're basically saying is that there is this evil conspiracy backed by big business that wants to subjugate us all "just because". There is no financial gain to be had from it since they would have to pay for everything and they would lose the potential for an effective work force and buying class. Sorry, but the world doesn't work that way. Big business has more to gain from a strong economy.

They get slaves. What do you think this whole system about debt and getting people off the rural areas in to the big cities is all about?

African slavery was class-based slavery. It would have served no purpose if there wasn't a greater economy for the slave masters to benefit from. You're talking about enslaving everybody. Who is left to profit from, then?

Dogma aside, Christianity at its very core is all about loving thy neighbor. Remove all the added dogmas by the various sects and just look at its fundamentals.

Hence the gay bashing and white supremists, not the mention the still pretty prevalent hating of the Jews and Muslims.

Jesus himself - the man whom Christianity is based on - stood up to the Romans and the Pharisees.

Actually, he didn't. He died. He discouraged his own followers from standing up against a government that everyone thought was ruthless and corrupt. He was killed because the Romans and Pharisees saw his followers as a threat and mistook him for a revolutionary, which the Bible clearly shows he had no desire for political power or to lead an uprising against the Romans.

For that last segment I'll quote a conversation I had with a friend over this particular thread. I just find it hilarious that it's actually true.

"He sounds like the kind of guy who takes Jack Chick seriously. I don't think that's possible. The guy is entertaining, but only in the same way as the Weekly World News. You don't take it seriously, it's just too ridiculous."

Because it's the new cool hype and/or because Christians believe a largely inconceivable story that conflicts about all evidence there is to the history on the planet.