For AtheistAlex

[Socrates]

This is pretty much just for the heck of it, but here's a list of questions.

1. What is your position on atheism?

2. What is your position on Catholicism?

3. What is your position on any politician that supports the right to life of all human persons, born and unborn?

4. What is your position on Protestantism?

5. What is your position on non-liberal politics?

6. How do you open yourself to new minds and experiences without changing your atheistic position?

7. Choose: a Catholic friend, or an atheist enemy?

8. Choose: pro-life liberal willing to give reparations, tax breaks to blacks, free immigration to all, etc., or a staunch conservative who supports killing of unborn babies?

9. Choose: Chairman Mao, or Pat Robertson?

10. Choose: Flag burning or a boycott of The Passion of the Christ?

11. Choose: Nazis or Communists?

12. What would you plan to do with four years of Kerry's reign?

[AtheistAlex]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 10 2005, 07:09 PM'] This is pretty much just for the heck of it, but here's a list of questions.

1. What is your position on atheism?

2. What is your position on Catholicism?

3. What is your position on any politician that supports the right to life of all human persons, born and unborn?

4. What is your position on Protestantism?

5. What is your position on non-liberal politics?

6. How do you open yourself to new minds and experiences without changing your atheistic position?

7. Choose: a Catholic friend, or an atheist enemy?

8. Choose: pro-life liberal willing to give reparations, tax breaks to blacks, free immigration to all, etc., or a staunch conservative who supports killing of unborn babies?

9. Choose: Chairman Mao, or Pat Robertson?

10. Choose: Flag burning or a boycott of The Passion of the Christ?

11. Choose: Nazis or Communists?

12. What would you plan to do with four years of Kerry's reign? [/quote]
This is for the "heck" of it? Not an attempt to mock me?
Either way...

1. It is a great position to take for religious matters. You take your life into your own hands.
2. I take the same position as all religions, though not as free as atheism, it has shown to give people generally a greater sense of self and it makes people happy. So that's cool.
3. As long as they are for the freedoms ensured to us all, including women, I just may support them. Depends though.
4. I take the same position as all religions, though not as free as atheism, it has shown to give people generally a greater sense of self and it makes people happy. So that's cool.
5. Depends on the politics. Hard Conservatism is, in my mind a political stance as devoid of nuance as hard liberalism. Radical moderation is another position I have heard of, but it seems to be merely an oxymoron.
6. Can't you see?
7. The friend.
8. The liberal.
9. Neither.
10. Boycott that movie, come on, I love the flag!
11. Neither.
12. Relax....oh well for that...

[Brother Adam]

Alex,

Is there a such thing as right and wrong? Why?

[Socrates]

[quote name='AtheistAlex' date='Feb 10 2005, 09:59 PM'] This is for the "heck" of it? Not an attempt to mock me?
Either way...

1. It is a great position to take for religious matters. You take your life into your own hands.
2. I take the same position as all religions, though not as free as atheism, it has shown to give people generally a greater sense of self and it makes people happy. So that's cool.
3. As long as they are for the freedoms ensured to us all, including women, I just may support them. Depends though.
4. I take the same position as all religions, though not as free as atheism, it has shown to give people generally a greater sense of self and it makes people happy. So that's cool.
5. Depends on the politics. Hard Conservatism is, in my mind a political stance as devoid of nuance as hard liberalism. Radical moderation is another position I have heard of, but it seems to be merely an oxymoron.
6. Can't you see?
7. The friend.
8. The liberal.
9. Neither.
10. Boycott that movie, come on, I love the flag!
11. Neither.
12. Relax....oh well for that... [/quote]
It's cool. This is not attempt to mock you - merely throw back some of the same types of questions you gave us, and maybe make you think a bit (since some of your questions seemed to be worded with a certain bias, or present false dichotomies).

Thanks for answering, though - this actually helps me get a better idea of where you're coming from. You've actually been one of the few atheistic/non-religious types on here who's been cool. I'm actually going to be bedding down soon, but I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have later.

[Socrates]

Oh, by the way, Alex, do you actually support boycotting the Passion, or is it just preferable to flag burning?

(just curious)

[AtheistAlex]

Heh. I'm cool.
I knew what I was doing, I just didn't expect that people would see the Panthers as a racist group, is all.

I don't like using fire much, and I really do like the flag. But, that is the last time I will try to prove my patriotism. It's the Passion that I am not in favor of. No sir.

And Brother Adam, let me say that yes there is right and wrong, but they are subjective. This does not mean one can make up the rules on the fly, there are preset moral sets for different groups, and it is one's responsibility to learn those morals. Understand.

Morals are necessary to preserve tribal order and sustain the tribe's general welfare.

Alright, let me say now, sorry for offending people if I did.

[Socrates]

A couple questions before I hit the sack.

1. No one's questioning your patriotism - I just made a silly "false dichotomy" choice (using "left-wing" examples, rather than "right-wing")
That said, you are against the showing of that movie? Why? Wouldn't that be censorship? (I don't know your personal positions, yet, but I've noticed most secularist liberals have an odd double-standard when it comes to free speech and censorship - basically "Obscenity/blasphemy=free speech-good. Religious speech=bad."

2. If a tribe's "morals" consisted of, say, killing anybody not a member of the tribe, or treating women as property/mutilation of females, etc., would these morals be acceptable for that tribe? Would it be the tribal members' responsiblity to learn and follow these "morals"? Would you say these morals are just as good as anybody else's?

Edited February 11, 2005 by Socrates

[AtheistAlex]

1. You seem to still misunderstand what I am saying. I do not, in any way, like the movie. I am in favor of a boycott, one of the greatest celebrations of our First Amendment rights. (Freedom of speech, petition and assembly) Let them show the movie. Go ahead. I would just, if I could get a large group of people together to just not watch it, that's all. How you got censorship out of that, I'll never understand.

2. For that tribe, unfortunately they would be acceptable. I am not saying we are always moral, or always immoral. I say that morality is always going to be subjective, although that doesn't mean we should just allow others to commit wonton acts of evil. What I think we should do is find a way, any way to come together and conclude on which ideals are okay, and which aren't. Then morals and laws will be the same for all, like most of us really want them to be. That's what I think, we should be in a dialogue with the wicked, continually giving AND taking knowledge so we can come to a consensus.

[Socrates]

1. I get you here. Yeah, Boycotts are great! They were really effective in destroying the financial success of that movie and getting people not to watch it! Seriously, though, why do you find that movie so objectionable? Is it because it is a public profession of Christian faith? Did you actually watch it? (I know I'm a bit odd-topic here. But I'm genuinely curious! The only reason I can figure that secularists hate that movie so much is a hatred of Christianity.)

2. So the holocaust of the Jews and other attrocities were acceptable for the Nazis? I mean they were just following good Nazi "morality"! Get real!

This is a MAJOR flaw of an atheist system of ethics. Communist attrocities were perfectly in tune with their atheistic morality. If there is no God, then people are pretty much free to do what they want, no matter how evil or depraved. Are good and evil , then, according to you, merely the consensus of the people? Compromise always the the way to arive at a moral choice? What if most people decide that killing and rape (or fill in the heinous crime of your choice) is good? Does that make it good and moral?

It seems by your logic, good equals what's popular, and evil what is unpopular.

Edited February 13, 2005 by Socrates

[AtheistAlex]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 13 2005, 12:00 AM'] 1. I get you here. Yeah, Boycotts are great! They were really effective in destroying the financial success of that movie and getting people not to watch it! Seriously, though, why do you find that movie so objectionable? Is it because it is a public profession of Christian faith? Did you actually watch it? (I know I'm a bit odd-topic here. But I'm genuinely curious! The only reason I can figure that secularists hate that movie so much is a hatred of Christianity.)

2. So the holocaust of the Jews and other attrocities were acceptable for the Nazis? I mean they were just following
This is a MAJOR flaw of an atheist system of ethics. Communist attrocities were perfectly in tune with their atheistic morality. If there is no God, then people are pretty much free to do what they want, no matter how evil or good Nazi "morality"! Get real!
depraved. Are good and evil , then, according to you, merely the consensus of the people? Compromise always the the way to arive at a moral choice? What if most people decide that killing and rape (or fill in the heinous crime of your choice) is good? Does that make it good and moral?

It seems by your logic, good equals what's popular, and evil what is unpopular. [/quote]
1. You seem angry..."why do you find that movie to be [u]so[/u] objectionable?" and "only reason I can figure that secularists hate that movie so much is a hatred of Christianity." are statements that illustrate this.

Is it possible that I didn't like the needless blood shed? I watch action movies, but I can only take so much gore. I can't even play Doom 3, it can get to me that much. Even more to the point, the whole "Jews killed Jesus" thing seems anti-Semitic, to me at least. Anti-Semitism is something I don't want to get near. Your idea that "secularists" hate Christianity, shows two things, whether or not they're true.

a. You despise secularism, or at least you cannot understand it.

b. You believe that Christianity, the majority religion in this country, is somehow being waylayed upon by the "evil" atheists, haters of all Christians.

I dunno if they're true, but, that's what came to mind.

2. No, you were not reading what I wrote, I see.

If murder, rape, etc. were popular, we would not have survived, obviously. We would try to be good, and we would kill ourselves off, or we would do such horrible things to each other that we wouldn't be able to reproduce and grow as a species. So, those tribes that decided not to murder would be the ones to survive longer and have descendants, and murder is shunned because of the adverse effects it has. Still the act was decided as evil by the group alone. Comprende?

Live and Learn,

Alex

[Guest]

[quote name='AtheistAlex' date='Feb 13 2005, 10:29 PM'] 1. You seem angry..."why do you find that movie to be [u]so[/u] objectionable?" and "only reason I can figure that secularists hate that movie so much is a hatred of Christianity." are statements that illustrate this.

Is it possible that I didn't like the needless blood shed? I watch action movies, but I can only take so much gore. I can't even play Doom 3, it can get to me that much. Even more to the point, the whole "Jews killed Jesus" thing seems anti-Semitic, to me at least. Anti-Semitism is something I don't want to get near. Your idea that "secularists" hate Christianity, shows two things, whether or not they're true.

a. You despise secularism, or at least you cannot understand it.

b. You believe that Christianity, the majority religion in this country, is somehow being waylayed upon by the "evil" atheists, haters of all Christians.

I dunno if they're true, but, that's what came to mind.

2. No, you were not reading what I wrote, I see.

If murder, rape, etc. were popular, we would not have survived, obviously. We would try to be good, and we would kill ourselves off, or we would do such horrible things to each other that we wouldn't be able to reproduce and grow as a species. So, those tribes that decided not to murder would be the ones to survive longer and have descendants, and murder is shunned because of the adverse effects it has. Still the act was decided as evil by the group alone. Comprende?

Live and Learn,

Alex [/quote]
you say that you cant even play a video game because of the blood shed . Which is cool, in noway am i jokeing about that. But there lies a hidden reason why this bothers you so much. You say you dislike the passion because of the blood shed in it. You also say though, that you dont like any gory movies.

Again cool, the only thing is, "THE PASSION " was a true story. That actually happened to Jesus Christ. This isnt a science fiction movie throwing unnessary blood at you, this actually happened. Mabey the reason you have a hard time watching this is because deep down inside your soul, you fear death. Which is normal, we all fear death. But a person stareing death in the face, would fear it even more if not knowing their soul was saved for eternity from the pitts of hell.
To that you prolly say, "no no i dont fear dieing, it will be notheningness " ok even if this is true, even if God gave you the grace not to have a active memory of what your soul was suffering, it still though doesnt get your soul out of suffering this hell forever. So therefore, deep down in your soul, wether you know it or not, your soul yearns to be saved for eternity, becuz your soul knows what eternity is and knows that heaven and hell exist without a doubt.

So people who dont know God and who go to great lengths to shun him out of society, are actually people liveing in fear becuz they are stareing death right in the face without a gurantee of escapeing hell. They may not know it, but underneath the surface that is whats going on.

Look at people like Bill Mahr, has that show on hbo. He'll tell you the bible is a bunch of fabels. And he's a successful indivigual. But he KNOWS GOD doesnt exist the way the bible presents it. AND A CATHOLIC KNOWS THAT GOD EXIST THE WAY THE BIBLE PRESENTS IT

Becuz God is liveing and will give you signs to prove to you that he exist. But a person not even believing in God and His Son, cant be granted that humble gracious gift of faith. So therefore they go out to destroy anything haveing to do with truth about the ONLY LIVEING God.........and they end up working in vain for the devil...........some aware of it, some sadly blind and deceiced have know idea...

Edited February 14, 2005 by Guest

[Socrates]

[quote name='AtheistAlex' date='Feb 13 2005, 10:29 PM'] 1. You seem angry..."why do you find that movie to be [u]so[/u] objectionable?" and "only reason I can figure that secularists hate that movie so much is a hatred of Christianity." are statements that illustrate this.

Is it possible that I didn't like the needless blood shed? I watch action movies, but I can only take so much gore. I can't even play Doom 3, it can get to me that much. Even more to the point, the whole "Jews killed Jesus" thing seems anti-Semitic, to me at least. Anti-Semitism is something I don't want to get near. Your idea that "secularists" hate Christianity, shows two things, whether or not they're true.

a. You despise secularism, or at least you cannot understand it.

b. You believe that Christianity, the majority religion in this country, is somehow being waylayed upon by the "evil" atheists, haters of all Christians.

I dunno if they're true, but, that's what came to mind.

2. No, you were not reading what I wrote, I see.

If murder, rape, etc. were popular, we would not have survived, obviously. We would try to be good, and we would kill ourselves off, or we would do such horrible things to each other that we wouldn't be able to reproduce and grow as a species. So, those tribes that decided not to murder would be the ones to survive longer and have descendants, and murder is shunned because of the adverse effects it has. Still the act was decided as evil by the group alone. Comprende?

Live and Learn,

Alex [/quote]
1. I have serious doubts that you even watched that movie. You seem to simply be parroting the ludicrous claims the anti-Christian "critics," made, often before the movie was ever shown. There is nothing anti-Semitic about it. With regards to the Jews, the movie simply protrays the events in the Gospels. Jewish leaders called for his death, and the Roman officials condemned him to die. If anything, the sadistic, anti-Semitic Romans came off worse than the Jews. Remember, Jesus and His disciples were Jews, as was His Blessed Mother (portrayed in the movie by a Jewish woman.) As Mel Gibson has said, it was the sins of all of us, not the Jews, that were responsible for the death. The anti-Christian people said the movie should not be shown because it would spark all kinds of anti-Semitic violence. So far, the body count is 0! There has been absolutely no anti-Semitic violence on account of the movie, and various criminals have even repented on account of seeing the film! Those protesters sure made geniuses of themselves! (If you want to argue more about the movie, I can start another thread. There has been plenty of discussion of this movie already on this site, but you are the first on here to give the "anti-Semitic" line.)

2. Your "evolutionary" account of morality is ludicrous to say the least. A "tribe" can quite easily survive with plenty of murder, rape, etc., as history has demonstrated time and time again. (I can give plenty of details later, if you want.)
Your "morality" doesn't even give you a rational basis to condemn the actions of the Nazis, as they used this same Darwinist logic to justify their bloody atrocities. See, they believed it was justifyable to slaughter Jews and others outside their "tribe," the "Aryan master-race"! They saw this as helping their tribe in its quest for world domination. They saw this as Darwinian survival of the fittest, in which the "master-race" could wipe out "inferior" races to ensure its own survival and dominance.
It seems that atheistic theories tend naturally towards atrocities.
(Note, I'm not implying that you're a Nazi or anything, merely pointing out that your basis of "morality" really gives you no reason to say why the Nazis' actions are wrong, other than that you just don't like them.)

Edited February 14, 2005 by Socrates

[J.R.D]

[quote name='AtheistAlex' date='Feb 10 2005, 09:59 PM'] This is for the "heck" of it? Not an attempt to mock me?
Either way...

1. It is a great position to take for religious matters. You take your life into your own hands.
2. I take the same position as all religions, though not as free as atheism, it has shown to give people generally a greater sense of self and it makes people happy. So that's cool.
3. As long as they are for the freedoms ensured to us all, including women, I just may support them. Depends though.
4. I take the same position as all religions, though not as free as atheism, it has shown to give people generally a greater sense of self and it makes people happy. So that's cool.
5. Depends on the politics. Hard Conservatism is, in my mind a political stance as devoid of nuance as hard liberalism. Radical moderation is another position I have heard of, but it seems to be merely an oxymoron.
6. Can't you see?
7. The friend.
8. The liberal.
9. Neither.
10. Boycott that movie, come on, I love the flag!
11. Neither.
12. Relax....oh well for that... [/quote]
1. You as a human being can not steer your life to joyness or happiness. Without God your nobody.
2. There is not just "one" postion os religion. Religion is your knowing of God. Religions have diffrent viewings or positions on how you should know God.
3. Depends on what?
4. Read number 3.
5. How is a oxymoron?
6. see what?
7. good choice.
8. Bad choice.
9. good choice.
10. The passion of the Christ is an awsome movie. Boycotting the One Being that made you is blasphamy.
11. haha
12. Relax????? knowing that someone is killin innocent babbies?????

[HomeTeamFamily]

alex.....what do you believe will happen when you die?

[AtheistAlex]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 14 2005, 05:36 PM'] 1.  I have serious doubts that you even watched that movie.  You seem to simply be parroting the ludicrous claims the anti-Christian "critics," made, often before the movie was ever shown.  There is nothing anti-Semitic about it.  With regards to the Jews, the movie simply protrays the events in the Gospels.  Jewish leaders called for his death, and the Roman officials condemned him to die.  If anything, the sadistic, anti-Semitic Romans came off worse than the Jews.  Remember, Jesus and His disciples were Jews, as was His Blessed Mother (portrayed in the movie by a Jewish woman.)  As Mel Gibson has said, it was the sins of all of us, not the Jews, that were responsible for the death.  The anti-Christian people said the movie should not be shown because it would spark all kinds of anti-Semitic violence.  So far, the body count is 0!  There has been absolutely no anti-Semitic violence on account of the movie, and various criminals have even repented on account of seeing the film!  Those protesters sure made geniuses of themselves! (If you want to argue more about the movie, I can start another thread.  There has been plenty of discussion of this movie already on this site, but you are the first on here to give the "anti-Semitic" line.)

2.  Your "evolutionary" account of morality is ludicrous to say the least.  A "tribe" can quite easily survive with plenty of murder, rape, etc., as history has demonstrated time and time again.  (I can give plenty of details later, if you want.)
Your "morality" doesn't even give you a rational basis to condemn the actions of the Nazis, as they used this same Darwinist logic to justify their bloody atrocities.  See, they believed it was justifyable to slaughter Jews and others outside their "tribe," the "Aryan master-race"!  They saw this as helping their tribe in its quest for world domination.  They saw this as Darwinian survival of the fittest, in which the "master-race" could wipe out "inferior" races to ensure its own survival and dominance.
It seems that atheistic theories tend naturally towards atrocities.
(Note, I'm not implying that you're a Nazi or anything, merely pointing out that your basis of "morality" really gives you no reason to say why the Nazis' actions are wrong, other than that you just don't like them.) [/quote]
1. Okay, I can respect your view. I didn't watch most of it, mainly because my mom was not going to let me. But, now that you said this, I will go and rent it again, and this time, I'll try to watch it all.

Oh and about these "ludicrous claims" you talk about. They, like the many outlandish claims against Michael Moore for Farenheit 9/11, will always seem to be just flat wrong. Religion and politics are very polarizing and divisive issues, and for someone to take any stance, it means others will, undoubtedly attack them. Basically, I ask you to understand that things go both ways, and so you were a prime exmaple of "the pot calling the kettle black".

2. The Germans did think it was okay to slaughter and maim people, but we used force to show them the error of their ways. I agree that the Holocaust was an awful evil we should hope not to revisit, but this call to my emotions will not change my judgement. Morality is a social concept, and that means it is subjective.

Nazis saw the Holocaust as the "Final Solution" to their problems. I disagree and so, I can of course say it is wrong. In fact, it is those who believe in an absolute morality who cannot tell what's wrong and what's right in a given situation, because:
a) they must know what the absolute morality is
b) they would need to know such a moral code for all situations at all times
c) to do such a thing, they would need to have a mind of infinite capacity

If you can prove your mind not only has infinite capacity, but also that you know every correct moral decision for all time, then you can tell [u]anyone[/u] what's always right and wrong based off an absolute value set.

But, things change...the world changes, the people change, society changes, and so we adapt, our set of morals changes as well. Sacrifices used to be commonplace and okay, but now they're not. Sure one can say that it's wrong, without a doubt. But would you have said that in that era? Enslaving a man is awfl now, but a years ago, it was good business. You see, morals are not absolutely black and white, but shades of grey.

<<It seems that atheistic theories tend naturally towards atrocities.>>
You are good at this sort of thing, I see. Taking a discussion and turning it into religion-baiting, where you make seemingly innocent statements with sharp, hateful points at the very end.

Here, your thesis implies that atheists, for some reason or another, are either the reason for atrocities, or wish to commit them. Where did you take this idea from, may I ask?

<<gives you no reason to say why the Nazis' actions are wrong, other than that you just don't like them>>

Ask yourself this, why don't I like it? It's detrimental to the German and world society as whole, it takes millions upon millions of lives away that could've been our world leaders, and it shows to us that some tribes don't understand what's important about life. Last though not least, it is an omen of future violence against us that we cannot ignore.


Here's hoping we can get back to not calling atheists monsters,

Alex

Edited February 15, 2005 by AtheistAlex