Atheism... destroying your family since since you became self reliant.

The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not.
- Eric Hoffer

That thumbnail gives me the creeps. I don't know much about Joel Osteen, but his pictures always give me the gibblies. That lady behind him ain't helping either.

Christianity doesn't require that you be perfect. It requires that you strive towards perfection and allow Christ to make up the difference. And that's evil, how?

>> ^furrycloud:
Christianity doesn't require that you be perfect. It requires that you strive towards perfection and allow Christ to make up the difference. And that's evil, how?


Hitchens is criticizing and calling evil the kind of "perfection" toward which Christians strive.

^Because it's an ideology of ignorance.

Please tell me what Bronze-Age texts have to say about someone who's a genetic male but who's cells are immune to the effects of testosterone and thus by many but not all measures, he appearances to be a female. Should he/she be allowed to fall in love with someone else, or does he/she automatically go to hell?

^ It's not evil at all, because that part of christianity doesnt exist with the Christianists and fundamentalists who walk the earth today.

^I don't understand. Are you saying Theists 1) don't have a tendency to condemn "deviant" sexual behavior, and 2) don't incorrectly believe gender is binary, rather than a biological spectrum that merely statistically clusters in a binary formation, as it's understood in biology to be?

>> ^HadouKen24:
>> ^furrycloud:
Christianity doesn't require that you be perfect. It requires that you strive towards perfection and allow Christ to make up the difference. And that's evil, how?

Hitchens is criticizing and calling evil the kind of "perfection" toward which Christians strive.


Regardless, Hitchens should stop bothering with a religion (in it's truest form) promotes loving others, and focus on something that more resembles evil. Like Islam.

They're the same, furrycloud! Either you believe, or you die and go to hell! That is the central tenet, not love thy neighbor! If I don't open the door and let Jesus into my life, I supposedly suffer in the pit for eternity! And you call that a religion that promotes love? What parent would allow his children to suffer for eternity, even if they turned away from him?

It's just sick. Open up your eyes and look at what you preach.

I wasn't necessarily stating that either religion is true (although I have my own opinions about what I think is truth), I'm simply saying that if you're going to be bashing on religions, you might as well be bashing on the ones that are outright killing people.

You mean like during the Crusades? Or the Inquisition? Or the Witch trials?

Yup, all in the name of christianity.

Let's not point fingers. All religions are guilty of atrocities. End of story.

Mmmhmm, the Crusades, and The Inquisitions(depending on which one you're talking about, presumably the Spanish) were both done by the Catholic church, and or the pope. Witch hunts have rarely been specifically attributed to a certain religion, but are more effected by the culture.

Not to say that bad things haven't happened "in the name of christianity", but bad things can happen in the name of anything. I could do bad things "in the name of MaxWilder" and that doesn't make you bad.

You are free to believe whatever you choose.

So you admit that people can do "bad things" in the name of Islam, and that doesn't make Islam bad.

I'm glad you've learned this valuable lesson about over-generalizing.

That seems fair and quantifiable to say that by any measure, in the modern world, Islam is much more violent and less modernized than Christianity. My best hopes for both of them striving to better reach perfection.

But as long as Christians are legislating ignorance in our countries, we are not free to believe whatever we choose.

Sorry, chilaxe, but it was an army comprised of mainly christians that invaded Iraq and caused the deaths of untold thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens. Of course the situation was much more complicated than just one religion against another, but if christians are all about love and muslims are all about violence, then tell me how that happened.

I'm not trying to say that one group is worse than another, I'm saying that you can't point your finger at one group and say "there's your problem". They are ALL a problem, they all cause (or significantly contribute) to murder and other atrocities.

I'd be much happier if everyone on the planet admitted that religion is totally bogus, but until that happens I will not stay silent when a person from one group points at another group and says "well, they're worse".

I guess I just don't get it. Where does Hitchens get off giving Christianity such a hard time (whether it's sarcastic or if he's serious is another issue completely), but he never mentions anything about Islam, or any other religion for that matter?

Granted, Christianity probably has more hypocrites than most religions, and maybe that's why people hate it so much.


But you're right Chilaxe, ignorance shouldn't be tolerated. Whether you believe religion is ignorance is your choice. Just be glad you didn't make that choice in Iran, or you might be executed.

"Of course the situation was much more complicated than just one religion against another, but if christians are all about love and muslims are all about violence, then tell me how that happened."

MaxWilder, probably ~95% of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed as a result of the US invasion were killed by fellow Muslims.

In that respect, Christians don't have a problem with violence, they have a problem with lack of competence (e.g. Bush, Palin, Limbaugh), and that's why their war, along with their plans for the 2000s and 2010s, turned to ash in their hands.

Muslims have a problem with incompetence in addition to their problem with violence. I think at some levels, your point about a symmetry is very useful, and at other levels it's a false symmetry. Furrycloud is right that we would be executed if we were born in Iran.

Hitchens gives other religions a very hard time as well. I think the topic of his coversations in the US center around christianity because it makes up the bulk of theology uin the US. "Last year the First Amendment Center released a poll showing 55 per cent of Americans believe the U.S. was founded as a Christian Nation and that Christianity is embedded in the U.S. " - http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/thesearch/archive/2008/09/25/the-u-s-is-not-now-and-never-has-been-a-christian-nation.aspx

Not all religion is about loving people or "(in it's truest form) promotes loving others, and focus on something that more resembles evil." It's mostly a simple way to explain complicated ideas. The problem with the simplicity of it all is that it can be construed to suit the purposes of powerful people to control idiots and promote bigotry. (see prop 8 vote)

>> ^furrycloud:
I guess I just don't get it. Where does Hitchens get off giving Christianity such a hard time (whether it's sarcastic or if he's serious is another issue completely), but he never mentions anything about Islam, or any other religion for that matter?


I think it's pretty simple. He was born in the UK and now lives in the United States. The predominant religion in both places is Christianity. I doubt he's ever claimed that Christianity is the worst religion. He's trying to make a point about all religions, while being surrounded by Christians who don't get it.

>> ^chilaxe:
MaxWilder, probably ~95% of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed as a result of the US invasion were killed by fellow Muslims.


You're probably right on that count. My point is simply that if christians were truly a poeple who cherished peace and brotherly love as commanded by Jesus, then we would resist going to war as long as humanly possible. But instead we jump at the chance to invade foreign lands based on evidence we don't even consider checking twice.

Why is it that I, an atheist, am the one marching in peace protests, while the christian leaders back the christian president and send us into a bloody occupation? Because christians are in truth no better than the other religious extremists who use any excuse to commit murder.

>> ^MaxWilder:
>> ^chilaxe:
MaxWilder, probably ~95% of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed as a result of the US invasion were killed by fellow Muslims.

You're probably right on that count. My point is simply that if christians were truly a poeple who cherished peace and brotherly love as commanded by Jesus, then we would resist going to war as long as humanly possible. But instead we jump at the chance to invade foreign lands based on evidence we don't even consider checking twice.
Why is it that I, an atheist, am the one marching in peace protests, while the christian leaders back the christian president and send us into a bloody occupation? Because christians are in truth no better than the other religious extremists who use any excuse to commit murder.


I don't know about you, but I didn't vote for Bush. And even if I had, there isn't much I can do to change the decisions he made. Regardless of whether or not Bush is a christian, he is still human, he is still prone to error. He is however, the president of the country, and therefore garners respect based on his position. I didn't vote for Obama, and I don't agree with everything he stands for, but he is going to be my president, and I will support him.


The Iraq war may or may not have been justified, depending on your definition of justice. We did successfully capture a horrible dictator, and we did recover yellowcake. War is never perfect, or pretty, but sometimes it's necessary.

I'm of the opinion that war shouldn't continue any longer than needed, and I think it would be excellent if we could remove ourselves from Iraq as soon as possible.

It's not a question of who you voted for. It's a question of whether one religion is better than the other.

And the answer is NO.

They are both used to control the sheep, funneling resources and power to those at the top of the pyramid, i.e. politicians and priests. And if those at the top think they will gain more power and resources by going to war, then they will tell lies and quote from their holy book, and the sheep will follow and make excuses ("Bush is still human, and prone to error") even when they know what they are doing is wrong.

And the fact that you already declare that you will support Obama is further evidence that you are a sheep. I voted for him, but I will only support him when I believe he is making wise choices. He does not get carte blanche from people with rational minds, who have the ability to think critically. If he starts crapping on the Constitution, whether it's the second ammendment or habeus corpus, I will stand against him. But I voted for him because I don't believe he will do that, as opposed to the old white guy who supported Bush through the war, and torture, and internal spying, and other decidedly un-christian behavior.

I really don't give a crap about what people say they believe. It's their actions that matter, and christian actions are just as bad as anyone else.

--

"Well I don't care what you say, I still believe that God is good and He loves us and I will be rewarded for my faith and everybody else will burn in the pit. Bless you."

For all those who love to claim that Christianity is inherently hateful because it says you'll go to "hell", please do recall that you are beginning with a different set of assumptions about what humanity inherently deserves. In other words, the Christian faith claims that we are evil (and thus "hell-bound") by default and works from there to get people to not be evil (via grace received through faith then demonstrated by love). If your fundamental disagreement with Christianity is that you don't believe we are evil by default, there's little point jumping ahead to criticism of the doctrine of hell unless you first say "ok, assuming you're right about the evil thing". If you do that, i think you'll find that the idea of hell is not inherently unloving. It's only inherently unloving if you begin with the assumption that people are by default good or neutral.

This is elementary philosophy, people. Find the root assumptions and differences therein before you go spouting off ignorant things about how "Christians are unloving because they believe in hell". Be *very* slow to assume that you have thought these things through better than 2000 years of theologians who devoted their lives to the study and debate of such things. Ignorant arrogance, as you have noticed, is quite ugly. Don't be one of those people, there are enough of them out there already.

God creates the universe, which includes hell. God creates humans, hell-bound by God's design. God loves us.

Those three statements are inherently self contradictory and irrational. The christian dogma breaks rationality from the start. Like all other religions, it has no integrity (meaning it is not cohesive and structurally sound), so it can be warped to serve any purpose those at the top might choose.

*reclaimvote *brief