Keyboard warrior atheists in AH

RichieC

to : partyatmygaff (worst party ever)


if you do not understand the concept of childhood indoctrination you have no business being in this conversation.

Pace2008

partyatmygaff wrote: »

The scientific method however applies only to the natural world. Theists believe in God as being a creator and as such God is supernatural and unprovable or indeed impossible to disprove by means of the scientific method.

I was actually going to use supernatural entities like ghosts in my analogy, but theists tend to (somewhat understandably) get insulted when people employ that gambit.

I don't deal with claims that are unprovable, creator deities included. If you like, you can class my disbelief in a creator deity as a "decision" along with my disbelief in ghosts.

sandmanporto

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

If there was no religion then:

1) the holocaust would never have happenend,

2) ethnic cleansing of millions across all continents would not have happened and continue to happen

3) thousands of women and children in the DRC would not be raped every week

4) priests in the catholic church would not have been able to be in the position to sodomise young, innocent Irish children for decades

5) our the Magdalene sisters for that matter!

That's only a few reasons off the top of my head why organised religion is the cause of such evil across the world, no doubt there's loads more..

So, those supporting and funding such movements, should have a certain amount of blood on their hands.

Right, I'm outta here, time to make pancakes...

That happens regardless!

partyatmygaff

MrStuffins wrote: »

What's with all the attempts to put words in people's mouths?

It's amazing how people can try to back up their own beliefs by playing word games!

I do not put words in to people's mouths. Merely saying that I do does not make it so.

RichieC wrote: »

to : partyatmygaff (worst party ever)

I thought you had me on ignore? I was enjoying not having to have you quote every single one of my posts to make snide comments or insult me. Oh well.

if you do not understand the concept of childhood indoctrination you have no business being in this conversation.

The subject of this conversation is keyboard warriorism in religious topics.

As for childhood indoctrination I understand it quite well but fail to see how it has had any effect on the people of AH. Generally speaking people indoctrinated in to Religion don't criticise and attack it at every avenue.

RichieC

:pac:

ETA: members of jim jones's cult survived because they ran away.

Craebear

Old man in sky with a 10 point checklist watching you all day and night. When you remove all the layers of fluff that's essentially what you believe in, and you wonder why people think you are bat**** crazy?

RichieC

Craebear wrote: »

Old man in sky with a 10 point checklist watching you all day and night. When you remove all the layers of fluff that's essentially what you believe in, and you wonder why people think you are bat**** crazy?

Sky Santy.

Stercus Accidit

RichieC wrote: »

Homophobic homicidal Sky Santy.

FYP

I find the atheists on boards really annoying and I am not religious at all.

Typical conversation on Atheism forum

Atheist 1: I heard a christian song in a public place. OMG, the irish state is forcefeeding me religion. Waah waah waah. Look at me, I am really cool because I think it makes me more sophisticated to not believe in God.

Atheist 2: I was at the Ireland game and I seen BOD make the sign of the cross before starting the game. Doesn't he realise that all priests rape anything that moves. Oh great Dades, what do you think?

Normal user: Ah come on lads, not over-reacting a bit?

Mod: "Normal user" banned. We ban everybody who disagrees with us as we are a step above everybody else and so intelligent. Did you know Einstein was an Atheist?

11 million atheists thumb up this.


I cannot wait to put down Catholicism as my religion on the next census.

pragmatic1

Deleted User wrote: »

I find the atheists on boards really annoying and I am not religious at all.

Typical conversation on Atheism forum

Atheist 1: I heard a christian song in a public place. OMG, the irish state is forcefeeding me religion. Waah waah waah. Look at me, I am really cool because I think it makes me more sophisticated to not believe in God.

Atheist 2: I was at the Ireland game and I seen BOD make the sign of the cross before starting the game. Doesn't he realise that all priests rape anything that moves. Oh great Dades, what do you think?

Normal user: Ah come on lads, not over-reacting a bit?

Mod: "Normal user" banned. We ban everybody who disagrees with us as we are a step above everybody else and so intelligent. Did you know Einstein was an Atheist?

11 million atheists thumb up this.


I cannot wait to put down Catholicism as my religion on the next census.

Just dont read their posts then. Simples.

pragmatic1

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Just dont read their posts then. Simples.

Can there be a filter where I can block atheists when they are talking about religion?

pragmatic1

Deleted User wrote: »

Can there be a filter where I can block atheists when they are talking about religion?

Yep. Its called looking away.

jill_valentine

Deleted User wrote: »

Can there be a filter where I can block atheists when they are talking about religion?

If I could get one to block out the Youth Defence billboards and Legion of Mary canvassers in my neighbourhood too, we could all be happier.

Helix

Deleted User wrote: »

Can there be a filter where I can block atheists when they are talking about religion?

you could try not looking in the atheism forum

RichieC

Deleted User wrote: »

I find the atheists on boards really annoying and I am not religious at all.

Typical conversation on Atheism forum

Atheist 1: I heard a christian song in a public place. OMG, the irish state is forcefeeding me religion. Waah waah waah. Look at me, I am really cool because I think it makes me more sophisticated to not believe in God.

Atheist 2: I was at the Ireland game and I seen BOD make the sign of the cross before starting the game. Doesn't he realise that all priests rape anything that moves. Oh great Dades, what do you think?

Normal user: Ah come on lads, not over-reacting a bit?

Mod: "Normal user" banned. We ban everybody who disagrees with us as we are a step above everybody else and so intelligent. Did you know Einstein was an Atheist?

11 million atheists thumb up this.


I cannot wait to put down Catholicism as my religion on the next census.

Poor

Ptard

Can I just say here and now that mocking someone for their perception on reality is no way to explain your own perception of reality. We don't need to answer the question "Does a god exist", what we need is a way for everyone to get along and respect one another for our differences.

sbsquarepants

prinz wrote: »

1 word answer lol. The Pope has no personal claim on the wealth of the Vatican or of the Catholic Church at large. AFAIK he used to own an apartment in Rome that was sold when he became Pope. Apart from that perhaps he has some savings from his previous salaries. Again AFAIK he gets a stipend for personal clothing/living expenses but most is covered by the Church (travel costs, lives in the papal apartments, official clothing, stationary etc), income from his books goes to the Church as part of this.
The Pope is not in receipt of any salary or wage.

Sure he must be rich, rich, rich obviously.

Maybe i'm not an atheist at all, cos the overwhelming feeling i get from this is "oh my god!" If you're having a whip around for poor old benny give me a shout and i'll throw him a few bob. You truly are deluded if this is what you believe.

Deleted User wrote: »

---

Aside: I'll place my own religious cards on the table before I get down to the nitty-gritty of what started this.

I call myself Catholic.

I shrug my shoulders at Transubstanciation, and most of the other niggling points of my Faith that have little or no bearing on my moral compass.

I believe the Bible is open to interpretation, and that there is room for many interpretations of it.

I believe the Universe and all religion is open to interpretation, and that my own interpretation is that "If you live a life of Creation and not Destruction, then whatever's the other side of the Death Wall will probably look after you"

I believe I could be right, I believe I could be wrong.

I believe I have the right to associate myself with whatever religious affiliation I wish as an inalienable human right, just as I have the right to decide my political, sexual, and associative affiliations. I have chosen to associate myself with Catholics. The only way another can stop me from calling myself a Catholic is by denying my human right to life. To do that, they must take my life.

I believe I have the right to stand apart from the Roman Catholic Church on issues which I hold their stance as contrary to my own morals.

.

If you called yourself an octopus, would that make you one?
You're not a catholic. You "shrug your shoulders" at the very thing that makes catholics catholic. You are right, no one can stop you from calling yourself a catholic, just like they can't stop you calling yourself an octopus, however the TRUTH is you are neither.

Humans eh! wrote: »

I learn and read about the church not to belittle it but to try to understand the complex reasons why and how clever men use its considerable power over the minds of their flocks and how they benefited politically financially and egotistically.
.

Apparently Pope Benny is an exception. Poor blokes on the skids.

Deleted User wrote: »

I find the atheists on boards really annoying and I am not religious at all.

Typical conversation on Atheism forum

Atheist 1: I heard a christian song in a public place. OMG, the irish state is forcefeeding me religion. Waah waah waah. Look at me, I am really cool because I think it makes me more sophisticated to not believe in God.

Atheist 2: I was at the Ireland game and I seen BOD make the sign of the cross before starting the game. Doesn't he realise that all priests rape anything that moves. Oh great Dades, what do you think?

Normal user: Ah come on lads, not over-reacting a bit?

Mod: "Normal user" banned. We ban everybody who disagrees with us as we are a step above everybody else and so intelligent. Did you know Einstein was an Atheist?

11 million atheists thumb up this.


I cannot wait to put down Catholicism as my religion on the next census.

This post is one of the most ridiculous things i've ever read. You hate this shít yet here you are reading and commenting on it at 4 o'clock in the fúcking morning!!
Do you know what irony is?

prinz

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Maybe i'm not an atheist at all, cos the overwhelming feeling i get from this is "oh my god!" If you're having a whip around for poor old benny give me a shout and i'll throw him a few bob. You truly are deluded if this is what you believe.

Feel free to show something to contradict it. Would you like to know Pope John Paul II's wages? About €100 that was buried with him when he died.

Now you might want to continue your conspiracy theory nonsense but there's a better forum for that. I'm not the only one that can see you're talking through your hat on this one.

farna_boy

The problem with religion,atheism, communism, marxism and most of all other concepts, theories and beliefs are people.

Like I said earlier I have no problem with Atheism (the idea) but I do have a problem with some atheists. What I didn't say earlier is that I have no problem with most religions (the ideas/beliefs) but I do have a problem with some religious people.

In the vast majority of cases, its not the idea that is the problem, it is how it is implemented and used by people.

For instance, communism is great in theory. Everybody does their share of the work, the wealth is evenly distributed among all and everyone can live comfortably.

However, once you introduce people into the idea, it all goes tits up. Everyone has a different goal in life. You can call it greed, ambition, laziness it doesn't matter, the idea will always get corrupted the second people start getting involved in it.

sbsquarepants

prinz wrote: »

Feel free to show something to contradict it. Would you like to know Pope John Paul II's wages? About €100 that was buried with him when he died.

Now you might want to continue your conspiracy theory nonsense but there's a better forum for that. I'm not the only one that can see you're talking through your hat on this one.

Deja vu!
You're nothing if not consistent, ill give you that!
I have nothing to show, other that is, than the fact that he is the head of the worlds richest organisation.
But if you want to insist he scrapes by, having "most" of his expenses paid and his staionary supplied then you do so. But if i was you i'd be prepared to be disbelieved. At best you're indoctrinated, at worst you're just plain lying. Either way you'd fit right in with his organisation.
Also why did they bury the pope with a €100, why didn't they give it to some poor kid in africa, or put it in a basket to fix the leaky roof that every church in the world seems to have?
Burying it is quite a vile thing to do don't you think?

prinz

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Deja vu!
You're nothing if not consistent, ill give you that!
I have nothing to show, other that is, than the fact that he is the head of the worlds richest organisation.

Right so still with that infantile notion I see.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

But if you want to insist he scrapes by, having "most" of his expenses paid and his staionary supplied then you do so. But if i was you i'd be prepared to be disbelieved. At best you're indoctrinated, at worst you're just plain lying. Either way you'd fit right in with his organisation..

In other words 'Fingers in ears, la la la la la.'

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Also why did they bury the pope with a €100, why didn't they give it to some poor kid in africa, or put it in a basket to fix the leaky roof that every church in the world seems to have?
Burying it is quite a vile thing to do don't you think?

It's a symbolic salary, and an architectural tool, to a man who had a massive impact on geopolitics in his life time and career. They could also have dumped his corpse into the Tiber and saved on the cost of a coffin. Really, really laughable.

Ghost Buster

partyatmygaff wrote: »

You choose to be a true believer or a true atheist.

If you do not believe in a God or you do believe in a God you make a choice to adhere to the (Lack of) belief system that you find yourself comfortable with.

Heres a thing and ignore the fact that I am an atheist and just take it at face value. I COME IN PEACE!!!
Anyone can call them selves an atheist. That is their right. They can associate themselves with atheists and call them selves atheists as this is their human right and to deny them this you must take their life (Im paraphrasing here:))
However. If this person calls them selves an atheist whilst believing in Gods then they are not an atheist.
Similary as far as i can assertain there are a few requirements to being catholic. One is belief in transubstantiation. If you do not believe in it then dogmatically you are not a Catholic. This is not my rule and again I repeat that you can call your self a Catholic, A teletubby or what ever you like but it doesnt make you one.
And neither would i give a toss if not for the fact that these very same (Not really) catholics will be ticking the 'Catholic box' in the next census which will give false stats which will be used to influence legistlation in favour of a non existant percentage.

AND YESS YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO CALL YOUR SELF WHAT EVER YOU LIKE.
Yours
Ghost Buster
Astronaught
First man on the sun
First woman on mars
Taoiseach
Queen of Australia

prinz

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Similary as far as i can assertain there are a few requirements to being catholic. One is belief in transubstantiation. If you do not believe in it then dogmatically you are not a Catholic. This is not my rule and again I repeat that you can call your self a Catholic, A teletubby or what ever you like but it doesnt make you one.

Not as black and white as that, you can be a Roman Catholic but not in full-communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

Ghost Buster wrote: »

And neither would i give a toss if not for the fact that these very same (Not really) catholics will be ticking the 'Catholic box' in the next census which will give false stats which will be used to influence legistlation in favour of a non existant percentage..

..and on that issue I fully agree. I don't understand why people do it.

sbsquarepants

prinz wrote: »

Right so still with that infantile notion I see. .

You call it infantile, i call it blindingly obvious.
Come on now, lets just stop and analyse what you're saying! The Pope is not poor, he wants for nothing, he lives in luxury, his every whim is satisfied, he is waited on hand and foot every second of every day, that is the exact opposite of poor, ie rich. I get the whole semantics angle you're trying to work, but it just aint working i'm afraid, you're talking total bollox!

prinz wrote: »

It's a symbolic salary, and an architectural tool, to a man who had a massive impact on geopolitics in his life time and career. They could also have dumped his corpse into the Tiber and saved on the cost of a coffin. Really, really laughable.

What's it symbolic of?
To me it symbolises waste and as such is surprisingly apt. It's not often i agree with the vatican, but this time they were spot on. Why does the vatican need all that wealth? Why not sell all those artworks and help the poor? Why bury a pope at vast expense and then, just to rub salt in the wounds of the real poor, put a fúcking oner in his arse pocket? Do they not get those 2 quid a month can save the life of a child adds in the vatican or what?
It's not laughable, it's disgusting!

gbee

Ghost Buster wrote: »

One is belief in transubstantiation. If you do not believe in it then dogmatically you are not a Catholic.

Me, a former RCC by upbringing, applying this logic would suggest that 95% of 'Catholics' are NOT by belief.

A similar study among Muslims would be even higher by the same criteria.

Ghost Buster

prinz wrote: »

Not as black and white as that, you can be a Roman Catholic but not in full-communion with the Roman Catholic Church.



..and on that issue I fully agree. I don't understand why people do it.

Ok. But where is the cut off point. How much Catholicism can you reject until you are no longer Catholic? Are you not actually closer to being Protestant perhaps?
Why not just call yourself Christian?
Again I come in peace!!

prinz

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I get the whole semantics angle you're trying to work, but it just aint working i'm afraid, you're talking total bollox!

It's not semantics at all. Let's say Bill Gates let me stay at his house for a year, all expenses paid, and after the year he kicks me out with the same amount in my pockets as I had when I entered. Does that make me as wealthy as Bill Gates? Does that make me rich? At the end of the day I'm no better or worse off as an individual. Your logic is like looking at the owners of some English country estate and deciding they must be filthy rich... they mightn't have a pot to píss in but that makes no difference to you.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

What's it symbolic of?

You get three coins for each year of your papacy. That's your salary at the end of it.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's not laughable, it's disgusting!

..and this just goes to show that you have no real interest in actually discussing anything, just revelling in your own C.T. world and regurgitating the same nonsense over and over.......and over...............

prinz

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Ok. But where is the cut off point. How much Catholicism can you reject until you are no longer Catholic? Are you not actually closer to being Protestant perhaps?!!

Interesting question, would be a first step towards protestantism of some sorts. You could differ on the actual RC sacraments but still share the faith and governance of the Roman Catholic Church which would put you outside full communion but wouldn't exactly put you in a protestant camp either. I'm not sure if there is any definitive cut-off point. A lot of people professing to be Roman Catholic in this country wouldn't even be in partial communion if they faced up to it. The RCC considers itself in partial communion with a lot of Protestant churches because the basics are shared more or less.

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Why not just call yourself Christian?
Again I come in peace!!

People do.

Cool Mo D

prinz wrote: »

It's not semantics at all. Let's say Bill Gates let me stay at his house for a year, all expenses paid, and after the year he kicks me out with the same amount in my pockets as I had when I entered. Does that make me as wealthy as Bill Gates? Does that make me rich? At the end of the day I'm no better or worse off as an individual. Your logic is like looking at the owners of some English country estate and deciding they must be filthy rich... they mightn't have a pot to píss in but that makes no difference to you.

Except the pope can never be kicked out. He has full and complete control of the catholic church until the day he dies.

If someone told you you would have complete personal control over a vast number of people and hundreds of billions of euro worth of property, while living in several ancient palaces full of priceless artworks, as well as being the absolute ruler of a small country with its own small army, if you are not rich, the word has become meaningless.

Saying that the Pope is poor is so disingenuous I can't believe people are trying it.

Einhard

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You call it infantile, i call it blindingly obvious.
Come on now, lets just stop and analyse what you're saying! The Pope is not poor, he wants for nothing, he lives in luxury, his every whim is satisfied, he is waited on hand and foot every second of every day, that is the exact opposite of poor, ie rich. I get the whole semantics angle you're trying to work, but it just aint working i'm afraid, you're talking total bollox!

orry spongebob, I'm completely with prinz on this one. The pope doesn;t have control or power over all the wealth that you claim for him, so how can that possibly be creditied to his personal account as you seek to do? If he wanted to in the morn, he couldn't for example, buy himself a private mansion in Bavaria, or charter a yacht. Even were he to buy himself a car, it wouldn't be his, but the chuches, and would go back to the Church on his death/abdication.

You claim that the pope is wealthy because he is the head of the world's wealthiest body. Well, Harvard is the second wealthiest private body in the world... nobody would claim that its president is therefore the second wealthiest man in the world. In Ireland, the provost of Trinity gets possibly the finest house in the most desireable location in Dublin, a car, and all expenses. Again, nobody would claim that, because of this, he is amongst Ireland's richest men.

In the past few years, there have been huge scandals involving the likes of the Vatican bank, and fraud therein. The embarassment for the Church was huge. yet, surely if the pope cntrolled all that money, then it was his t do with as he saw fit?

What's it symbolic of?
To me it symbolises waste and as such is surprisingly apt. It's not often i agree with the vatican, but this time they were spot on. Why does the vatican need all that wealth? Why not sell all those artworks and help the poor? Why bury a pope at vast expense and then, just to rub salt in the wounds of the real poor, put a fúcking oner in his arse pocket? Do they not get those 2 quid a month can save the life of a child adds in the vatican or what?
It's not laughable, it's disgusting!

I'm sorry, but this is a very lazy argument. The Vatican is a repository fof the world's art. It's for everyone, not just Catholics. It's an incredible artistic resource and treasure. Ask any art lover or art professional and they'd tell call you a madman for wanting to break it up, and see incredible art treasures disappear into private collections, or be broken up and sent around the world.

Also, the notion that selling all that art would greatly alleviate hunger in the world is laughable. The primary cause of starvation in Africa isn't lack of resources, but chronic maladministration of funds. Since the 60s trillions of dollars has been pumped into Africa through charity, and it has had very little effect. The billions that might be raised through selling Church artwork would see a similar fate. And the greatest artistic collection ever assembled would be lost to humanity. I'm no lover of the Church, but that's an incredible sucky deal!