Church influence down, morals changed?

It'll be interesting to see mass attendance figures after the pandemic. The oldest generation are entering lotteries to attend currently but I'd say most others won't bother once it's possible for people in general to go back.

Will people's morality change, hopefully for the better.There's undoubtedly a sea change in irish society. Many villages were focused around the church. That's not coming back, and that can be lamented in the same way as whole villages coming together to bring in a harvest.

The authority of the Church being destroyed was Ireland's Berlin Wall coming down. 'All's Changed, changed utterly: a terrible beauty is born.'

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Deleted User wrote: »

It'll be interesting to see mass attendance figures after the pandemic. The oldest generation are entering lotteries to attend currently but I'd say most others won't bother once it's possible for people in general to go back.

Will people's morality change, hopefully for the better.There's undoubtedly a sea change in irish society. Many villages were focused around the church. That's not coming back, and that can be lamented in the same way as whole villages coming together to bring in a harvest.

The authority of the Church being destroyed was Ireland's Berlin Wall coming down. 'All's Changed, changed utterly: a terrible beauty is born.'

A grarantee you, very few people in Berlin miss the wall. I'm guessing very few miss the authority of the chruch, too.

eviltwin

I wouldn’t equate religion with morality. Some of the most religious people have none. And who gets to decide what’s moral anyway? Why is it better to be a virgin on your wedding day, does that makes you a better person than someone who has had sexual experience? Does being straight make you a more moral person than someone who is gay? There is nothing stopping anyone going to church and holding onto official church teaching on these things but it’s better that we have become a bit more open minded and tolerant as a society.

Mad_maxx

AutoTuning wrote: »

I actually think we’re far more moral. If you look at politics or debates on any topic in Ireland in recent years, they’re more empathetic and reasonable and have a lot more of a social conscience than that would have had in the 1980s and dramatically more so than the 1950s or earlier.

We’re less pious, buttoned up and conservative, but those things don’t equate to morality.

Horrendous stuff happened here during our most pious and religious years and there was more focus on an outward appearance of morality than actually having morals and values of decency. That’s how we ended up protecting institutions instead of people’s rights and dignity.

I’m not even convinced that we were religious. We were pious and obsessed with social respectability and our society’s mores were often absolutist, inflexible, judgmental and lacked any sense of compassion.

Politically correct piety is borderline an Olympic sport nowadays, thing's haven't changed that much with respect of your last paragraph

_Brian

Morals of society have changed but who says the morals imposed by the church were correct for society anyway.

ancapailldorcha

Snake Plisken wrote: »

At least the Crusades drove the invading Moors back out of Europe, could do with them back to protect Europe's borders these days!

If this were anything but edgy scutter, one would wonder why you're not doing anything about it.

Deleted User wrote: »

Far more wars caused by secularism in the last few years.

So... you're just going to ignore the entirely of human history then? Blair, Bush & Putin are all Christians as far as I know so even a point this cherrypicked is blatantly wrong.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If this were anything but edgy scutter, one would wonder why you're not doing anything about it.



So... you're just going to ignore the entirely of human history then? Blair, Bush & Putin are all Christians as far as I know so even a point this cherrypicked is blatantly wrong.

Didn't Bush go so far as to say God actaully told him to invade Iraq?

ancapailldorcha

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Didn't Bush go so far as to say God actaully told him to invade Iraq?

As I recall, yes. Funny how the defenders of Christianity will gleefully ignore all of it save for the handy bits they can use to justify atrocities and oppression.

B.A._Baracus

The church got too greedy and doing horrible things became the norm for a lot of priests (alter boys and the like) so the churches popularity going down was always gonna happen when it all came out and people having enough.
Sure didn't Martin Luther have enough centuries ago as the priests were going around all rich. Guess it's rinse and repeat.

I get what the op is saying tho. But the question should have been phrased - "religious influence down, morals changed?" - that is a very good question.
Let's all be honest, this world as it is right now isn't all peace and sunshine. It's a rat race and dog eat dog. Every man for himself and all that. I would not be surprised to hear more people DONT believe in god today.

So if you truly believe there is nothing what's morals? When you go down that's it. So why not do what you want? Plenty of liars, cheaters, users, abusers, back-stabbers, murderers, rapists etc out there already have that mentality.

I know, I know, what's the alternative? back to religious control? A lot of people died in the name of God so something is broke when it comes to religious beliefs and people.

My two cents to the question "religious influence down, morals changed?" - I would agree.

ancapailldorcha

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

The church got too greedy and doing horrible things became the norm for a lot of priests (alter boys and the like) so the churches popularity going down was always gonna happen when it all came out and people having enough.
Sure didn't Martin Luther have enough centuries ago as the priests were going around all rich. Guess it's rinse and repeat.

I get what the op is saying tho. But the question should have been phrased - "religious influence down, morals changed?" - that is a very good question.
Let's all be honest, this world as it is right now isn't all peace and sunshine. It's a rat race and dog eat dog. Every man for himself and all that. I would not be surprised to hear more people DONT believe in god today.

So if you truly believe there is nothing what's morals? When you go down that's it. So why not do what you want? Plenty of liars, cheaters, users, abusers, back-stabbers, murderers, rapists etc out there already have that mentality.

I know, I know, what's the alternative? back to religious control? A lot of people died in the name of God so something is broke when it comes to religious beliefs and people.

My two cents to the question "religious influence down, morals changed?" - I would agree.

There's far too many blatantly incorrect statements here.

Do you think it wasn't every man for himself in the dark ages or in the stone age? Seriously? It's always been there and all Christianity does is to justify this. God helps those who help themselves after all.

Morals are down to the individual to decide and certainly not for an organisation that employs and defends child molesters to have the final say on.

If you want to know why people are ditching God, look at his Church. It's putrid, squalid and venal. I see no reason to continue supporting it.

B.A._Baracus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

There's far too many blatantly incorrect statements here.

Do you think it wasn't every man for himself in the dark ages or in the stone age? Seriously? It's always been there and all Christianity does is to justify this. God helps those who help themselves after all.

Morals are down to the individual to decide and certainly not for an organisation that employs and defends child molesters to have the final say on.

If you want to know why people are ditching God, look at his Church. It's putrid, squalid and venal. I see no reason to continue supporting it.

It never justified it. It tried to control it - "dont you dare have sex out of wed lock or burn in hell sinner!!!!" - that's hardly justifying it. That's control. Which is wrong by the way!

Vic_08

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

A grarantee you, very few people in Berlin miss the wall. I'm guessing very few miss the authority of the chruch, too.

You'd be surprised. Plenty of East Germans waxing lyrical about the DDR, dig down and they are mostly ex-Stasi pricks. Of course these are the same kuntbags who would have been first in line to eradicate Jews for Hitler, rape and pillage on crusades or burn witches in the name of Christ.

No shortage of these types anywhere happy to pledge allegiance to whichever religion or political movement has the biggest power base at the time. Always the most vocal with their piousness and "morality".

There are plenty of true believers and do-gooders in religions but there isn't an organised religion or political movement going that isn't swelled by power hungry sociopaths who know that feigning belief is an excellent vehicle for personal advancement and opportunities to abuse and subjugate with impunity.

Mad_maxx

_Brian wrote: »

Morals of society have changed but who says the morals imposed by the church were correct for society anyway.

agreed but there are aspects of a religious society which bring benefits , a society where " anything goes " will bring problems of its own and who,s to say that is the better way ? , we just assume it is because our liberal betters of today tell us it is

received wisdom of today etc

RobbieTheRobber

Mad_maxx wrote: »

agreed but there are aspects of a religious society which bring benefits , a society where " anything goes " will bring problems of its own and who,s to say that is the better way ? , we just assume it is because our liberal betters of today tell us it is

received wisdom of today etc

When you say there are aspects of a religious society that brings benefits what do you mean?
Are the benefits derived from the religious belief or from society (community) . If they are not directly as a result of the religious belief then surely these same benefits can still be derived by the society without the religion

completedit

It is actually very interesting to think about what a purely individualistic world would look like. Or would such a world exist? Would our search for purpose and meaning lead to us devoting our lives to some other deity? Perhaps the nation state was a natural replacement but even that is an illusion and no more real than the Catholic Church. Do we really believe that each generation becomes morally better than the past and that all our values are essentially better because we exist in the only future we know? I don't think so. The abortion debate to me is the most obvious example. There are very clear reasons to be vehemently opposed to abortion, as well as for it, but the debates made it seem like a simple choice with a clear bias towards 'her right to choose'. It just seemed clear to me at the time that this mindset would be something we'd look back on in the future and be horrified to find out about.

Also, why do we equate liberal values as necessarily good values? A friend of mine said to me the other day ''Did you know the Republicans used to be the good party in America''

Mad_maxx

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

When you say there are aspects of a religious society that brings benefits what do you mean?
Are the benefits derived from the religious belief or from society (community) . If they are not directly as a result of the religious belief then surely these same benefits can still be derived by the society without the religion

living by a set of codes - rules etc , much of what is taught in christianity is a good roadmap for life

the community one is also important , no reference to individual profiles unlike the scourge of identity politics which does nothing but breed grievance and make official both victims and oppressors , thus rubber stamping division

Mad_maxx

completedit wrote: »

It is actually very interesting to think about what a purely individualistic world would look like. Or would such a world exist? Would our search for purpose and meaning lead to us devoting our lives to some other deity? Perhaps the nation state was a natural replacement but even that is an illusion and no more real than the Catholic Church. Do we really believe that each generation becomes morally better than the past and that all our values are essentially better because we exist in the only future we know? I don't think so. The abortion debate to me is the most obvious example. There are very clear reasons to be vehemently opposed to abortion, as well as for it, but the debates made it seem like a simple choice with a clear bias towards 'her right to choose'. It just seemed clear to me at the time that this mindset would be something we'd look back on in the future and be horrified to find out about.

Also, why do we equate liberal values as necessarily good values? A friend of mine said to me the other day ''Did you know the Republicans used to be the good party in America''

because we are bombarded with the message that liberal values are the correct ones to hold , its not respectable to not hold those values and people hate not being respectable

ohnonotgmail

Mad_maxx wrote: »

agreed but there are aspects of a religious society which bring benefits , a society where " anything goes " will bring problems of its own and who,s to say that is the better way ? , we just assume it is because our liberal betters of today tell us it is

received wisdom of today etc

benefits to who, exactly? benefits to whoever the church decides should benefit. Everybody else can go **** themselves.

Mad_maxx

Mad_maxx wrote: »

agreed but there are aspects of a religious society which bring benefits , a society where " anything goes " will bring problems of its own and who,s to say that is the better way ? , we just assume it is because our liberal betters of today tell us it is

received wisdom of today etc

Where anything goes? What stops people doing harm to others isn't because of a sky god, but because of the threat of someone from AGS feeling their collar, who derive their authority from the people, Anything doesn't Go.

ohnonotgmail

Mad_maxx wrote: »

living by a set of codes - rules etc , much of what is taught in christianity is a good roadmap for life

the community one is also important , no reference to individual profiles unlike the scourge of identity politics which does nothing but breed grievance and make official both victims and oppressors , thus rubber stamping division

Do you need the church to tell you that you shouldn't lie, cheat, steal, murder?

Mad_maxx

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

benefits to who, exactly? benefits to whoever the church decides should benefit. Everybody else can go **** themselves.

im not sure it was ever like that while admitting there were serious examples of gross hypocrasy

ohnonotgmail

Mad_maxx wrote: »

im not sure it was ever like that while admitting there were serious examples of gross hypocrasy

it was exactly like that. If you didn't confirm to the church you were condemned from the pulpit.

Mad_maxx

Deleted User wrote: »

Where anything goes? What stops people doing harm to others isn't because of a sky god, but because of the threat of someone from AGS feeling their collar, who derive their authority from the people, Anything doesn't Go.

oh please , any amount of people have no fear of the law as it takes such a lenient approach

why has crime gone up as faith has fallen amongst the population ?

the state cant perfect people , neither can faith but it has been useful for keeping behaviour in check down the centuries , that is an upside

Mad_maxx

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Do you need the church to tell you that you shouldn't lie, cheat, steal, murder?

cheating is seen as ok by the new moral guardians if the right people are engaged in it ( the left tell them its the fault of society and down to inequality etc ) , in the past there was a lot less murder too

ohnonotgmail

Mad_maxx wrote: »

oh please , any amount of people have no fear of the law as it takes such a lenient approach

why has crime gone up as faith has fallen amongst the population ?

the state cant perfect people , neither can faith but it has been useful for keeping behaviour in check down the centuries , that is an upside

more crime or more reported crime?

ohnonotgmail

Mad_maxx wrote: »

cheating is seen as ok by the new moral guardians if the right people are engaged in it ( the left tell them its the fault of society and down to inequality etc ) , in the past there was a lot less murder too

spare me this "lefty" bollix. try to debate intelligently.

Tchaikovsky

Deleted User wrote: »

There is a new religion to fill the God-shaped hole. It is called political correctness. We all have to say and do the prescribed things. Travellers are an ethic group. Refugees welcome here. Believe women. Love is love.

Woe betide anyone who disagrees with the new doctrine. They need to be dragged around and publicly shamed into grovelling apologies, or risk having their careers ended.

It's the same cult of group compliance and shaming, just with different labels.

Except those things are actually about compassion and not a hypocritical approach to 'holiness'.

Mules

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it was exactly like that. If you didn't confirm to the church you were condemned from the pulpit.

Now public figures are cancelled/ ostracised if they don't conform to PC doctrine. It's two sides of the same coin. Authoritarian types will always find a way to tell people what they should and should not be doing/thinking.

ohnonotgmail

Mules wrote: »

Now people are cancelled if they don't conform to PC doctrine. It's two sides of the same coin. Authoritarian types will always find a way to tell people what they should and should not be doing.

cancelled? JFC. and you probably call people on the left snowflakes.

timmyntc

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Do you need the church to tell you that you shouldn't lie, cheat, steal, murder?

But why are lying, cheating. stealing, murdering bad things?

Nowadays I don't need a church or religion to tell me what to do and what not to do, I can identify that for myself. But you have to acknowledge the role religion has played in the past in shaping the morals of our society.


A smart person can see the effect that "bad" behaviours have on society. That if we are to have a well functioning society, we need everyone to play by a certain set of rules. This is grand for people of a certain IQ and above, but plenty of people are/were too stupid to realise the impacts that stealing/cheating/murdering would have on society they live in.

Enter, religion.
The people who would otherwise have trouble grasping the consequences of their actions are now presented with a simple explanation - these things good, those things bad. You do bad things, you burn in hell. You do good things you live forever in heaven.

Religion isn't as necessary now because our society can stand on its own, we dont need religion to enforce morals & the law, society can do that instead.

Mules

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

cancelled? JFC. and you probably call people on the left snowflakes.

I do

ohnonotgmail

timmyntc wrote: »

But why are lying, cheating. stealing, murdering bad things?

Nowadays I don't need a church or religion to tell me what to do and what not to do, I can identify that for myself. But you have to acknowledge the role religion has played in the past in shaping the morals of our society.


A smart person can see the effect that "bad" behaviours have on society. That if we are to have a well functioning society, we need everyone to play by a certain set of rules. This is grand for people of a certain IQ and above, but plenty of people are/were too stupid to realise the impacts that stealing/cheating/murdering would have on society they live in.

Enter, religion.
The people who would otherwise have trouble grasping the consequences of their actions are now presented with a simple explanation - these things good, those things bad. You do bad things, you burn in hell. You do good things you live forever in heaven.

Religion isn't as necessary now because our society can stand on its own, we dont need religion to enforce morals & the law, society can do that instead.

religion didn't shape those behaviours. it reflected what people were already doing. in societies that western religion have never touched they have the same prohibitions broadly. It is inherently human. that you need someone to tell you not to do these things is a reflection of you.

RobbieTheRobber

Mad_maxx wrote: »

living by a set of codes - rules etc , much of what is taught in christianity is a good roadmap for life

the community one is also important , no reference to individual profiles unlike the scourge of identity politics which does nothing but breed grievance and make official both victims and oppressors , thus rubber stamping division

You didnt really answer my question. You say religion gives a good set of rules or a roadmap. but I'll ask again which of the rules of your preferred belief and the associated value to society can only be derived by the involvement of religion.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

oh please , any amount of people have no fear of the law as it takes such a lenient approach

why has crime gone up as faith has fallen amongst the population ?

the state cant perfect people , neither can faith but it has been useful for keeping behaviour in check down the centuries , that is an upside

There is no fear of any Gods by many many people at senior levels of all belief systems anymore than there is fear of law of government.
For the great majority of people though fear of failing foul of the law is enough to keep them on the right side of the law.

I don't think you can produce any study that would show even a correlation between decreasing religious belief and increasing criminality. In fact if one was to take a snapshot of society in Ireland 100 years ago and today you would find that we have a more lawful and less religious one.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

cheating is seen as ok by the new moral guardians if the right people are engaged in it ( the left tell them its the fault of society and down to inequality etc ) , in the past there was a lot less murder too

Ah so the big bad and undefinable Left has replaced the devil as your invisible evil I take it.

Mad_maxx

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

spare me this "lefty" bollix. try to debate intelligently.

oh the irony

timmyntc

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

religion didn't shape those behaviours. it reflected what people were already doing. in societies that western religion have never touched they have the same prohibitions broadly. It is inherently human. that you need someone to tell you not to do these things is a reflection of you.

Those behaviours didn't just appear with the advent of religion, of course not.
But religion evolved as a tool to enforce those behaviours - and it's not exclusive to western religion.

There is no such thing as "inherently human" though - human behaviour was not always rooted in cooperation. Civilization & the concept of doing no harm to others is a very recent construct in the grand scheme of things. Early man would not have survived if he didnt kill others.

that you need someone to tell you not to do these things is a reflection of you.

:pac:

seamus

It's so funny how this whole anti-PC thing has become a new cult in itself. It comes complete with its own boogeymen that don't exist, like "Woke brigade" and "cancel culture", and a verboten ideology that you can instantly pin to someone to discredit them as evil - "Leftist".

And of course, it prides itself on victimisation; believing that they are all subject to mass oppression and discrimination, despite being a part of the freest, most powerful group of people on the planet.

Where the Catholic church and Christianity filled this need in the past, the space has now been filled. All you have to do to signal that you are part of this righteous army is to say something remotely critical about "Woke", accuse "the left" of things that aren't happening, and you'll find plenty of kindred spirits.

ohnonotgmail

timmyntc wrote: »

Those behaviours didn't just appear with the advent of religion, of course not.
But religion evolved as a tool to enforce those behaviours - and it's not exclusive to western religion.

There is no such thing as "inherently human" though - human behaviour was not always rooted in cooperation. Civilization & the concept of doing no harm to others is a very recent construct in the grand scheme of things. Early man would not have survived if he didnt kill others.


:pac:

early man survived precisely because they cooperated with each other.

B.A._Baracus

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

benefits to who, exactly? benefits to whoever the church decides should benefit. Everybody else can go **** themselves.

I get what madmax is saying...
There can be benefits to having religion. I know people don't wanna hear that on here but there is

Take some firefighter who's religious. He saves people because he feels God will protect him or should the worse happen he'll go off to a better place. That helps him do his job and save people. That's a good from religion.

Most things in life aren't so black and white.

ancapailldorcha

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I get what madmax is saying...
There can be benefits to having religion. I know people don't wanna hear that on here but there is

Take some firefighter who's religious. He saves people because he feels God will protect him or should the worse happen he'll go off to a better place. That helps him do his job and save people. That's a good from religion.

Most things in life aren't so black and white.

So all firefighters are Christians? There are no firefighters who don't believe in God?

B.A._Baracus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

So all firefighters are Christians? There are no firefighters who don't believe in God?

You have a raging hard on for religion. I think the international space station can see this
I have read your posts in this thread, obviously including the nit picking one you quoted me on, which you chose not to reply to as I pointed out your incorrect use of "justified" - thank you very much.

We get it. You absolutely hate religion. So please could you add something constructive to this rather than your anti-religion bile... Because the grown ups are talking.

ohnonotgmail

timmyntc wrote: »

Those behaviours didn't just appear with the advent of religion, of course not.
But religion evolved as a tool to enforce those behaviours - and it's not exclusive to western religion.

There is no such thing as "inherently human" though - human behaviour was not always rooted in cooperation. Civilization & the concept of doing no harm to others is a very recent construct in the grand scheme of things. Early man would not have survived if he didnt kill others.


:pac:

that is about the only part of that post that is true. religion is about control. Control by those who run the religion. Any benefits to others are incidental.

seamus

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Take some firefighter who's religious. He saves people because he feels God will protect him or should the worse happen he'll go off to a better place. That helps him do his job and save people. That's a good from religion.

Well, it's not really. That's a guy who wants to be a firefighter and has his own motivations for doing so.

It's not like without religion there would be no firefighters. So it's not a "good" from religion.

We can point to plenty of good works done by religious groups, but that doesn't say that religion itself comes with inherent goods. There is no "good" in the world that is unique to religious or religious people.

Religion is an emergent property of how humans learn and interact with their environment and nothing else. Religion doesn't shape humans into what it wants them to be. Humans shape religion into what they want it to be.

The creation of organisations, in-groups, out-groups, ethics, cultural norms and rituals as well as co-operation and protectionism, are all things that humans naturally do with or without religion.

Mad_maxx

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is about the only part of that post that is true. religion is about control. Control by those who run the religion. Any benefits to others are incidental.

political correctness is about control but you have no problem with that

ohnonotgmail

Mad_maxx wrote: »

political correctness is about control but you have no problem with that

unfortunately what you describe as "political correctness" breaks down to simply "don't be a ****". People moaning because they can't be as publicly hateful as they could in the past.

timmyntc

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is about the only part of that post that is true. religion is about control. Control by those who run the religion. Any benefits to others are incidental.

Not all religion = organised religion.
Organised religion is about control, but religion is not. Religion is just a set of beliefs.

Some organised religions might be about control to exploit people/get rich (scientology anyone?) but others may well be benevolent (at first) - the problem is that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So inevitably an undemocratic org like a church will end up corrupt.

In most if not all organised religions, over time they end up corrupt. But the idea that they are not initially set up for any benefit is just a baseless claim from yourself.

ohnonotgmail

timmyntc wrote: »

Not all religion = organised religion.
Organised religion is about control, but religion is not. Religion is just a set of beliefs.

Some organised religions might be about control to exploit people/get rich (scientology anyone?) but others may well be benevolent (at first) - the problem is that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So inevitably an undemocratic org like a church will end up corrupt.

In most if not all organised religions, over time they end up corrupt. But the idea that they are not initially set up for any benefit is just a baseless claim from yourself.

considering this thread is about the catholic church it is safe to assume we are talking about organised religion.

ancapailldorcha

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

You have a raging hard on for religion. I think the international space station can see this
I have read your posts in this thread, obviously including the nit picking one you quoted me on, which you chose not to reply to as I pointed out your incorrect use of "justified" - thank you very much.

We get it. You absolutely hate religion. So please could you add something constructive to this rather than your anti-religion bile... Because the grown ups are talking.

It's like a f*cking cult, it really is. The fact that you have to come out with victimhood sh*te like this is just weak to be honest.

You can either make a positive case for religion in the 21st century or you can turn it into yet more anti-woke/PC, culture war scutter and you've clearly plumped for the latter option.

B.A._Baracus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's like a f*cking cult, it really is. The fact that you have to come out with victimhood sh*te like this is just weak to be honest.

You can either make a positive case for religion in the 21st century or you can turn it into yet more anti-woke/PC, culture war scutter and you've clearly plumped for the latter option.

See, you are not reading posts! :pac:

Remember that first post you quoted me? well here it is again...

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

The church got too greedy and doing horrible things became the norm for a lot of priests (alter boys and the like) so the churches popularity going down was always gonna happen when it all came out and people having enough.
Sure didn't Martin Luther have enough centuries ago as the priests were going around all rich. Guess it's rinse and repeat.

You are cherry picking posts and twisting things so you can post your bile
see, you'd love for some user to come on here spouting the bible and saying how religion is great, right?
Just so you could take down your pants in preparation of the reply you will give them
But since no one is doing that, you want to take anything you can use to post your bile :pac:

I see this.

IAMAMORON

I am a great fan of the ten commandments myself, they have stood the test of time pretty well. They are not a bad set of rules to follow whilst surviving the mayhem. They work out.

I don't fancy the concept of eternal life, it sounds really really boring. Can you imagine spending for ever and ever and ever and ever and ever etc ?

I reckon it is a fairy story made up to keep the masses in line, it may not have been a bad idea either, motivation is important. People need some sort of scope or the Devil creeps in, he is a real bitch btw.

ancapailldorcha

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

See, you are not reading posts! :pac:

Remember that first post you quoted me? well here it is again...



You are cherry picking posts and twisting things so you can post your bile
see, you'd love for some user to come on here spouting the bible and saying how religion is great, right?
Just so you could take down your pants in preparation of the reply you will give them
But since no one is doing that, you want to take anything you can use to post your bile :pac:

I see this.

You were on about some mythical firefighter and I asked about atheists in that profession and you start on with your victim spiel.