Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 03-02-2008, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Since Headache did not explain what he meant by "the vast majority," which means that your reply was not a reply to a specific claim, I posted what I posted because it contained specific statistics that I thought would help you and Headache have more meaningful discussions about how much religion influences what people believe about abortion. What exactly do you believe would not be possible? Since you frequently express yourself in complex ways, not in simply stated ways, I often find your posts to be difficult to understand. Perhaps you should consider trying to state your positions more simply so as to gain a wider audience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

I don't think it is possible that the motivations (in the case of the abortion issue) are purely based on religious background.

There is a good deal of evidence that many fundamentalist Christians base their opposition to abortion solely upon what the Bible says. Surely you have heard the fundamentalist Christian saying that basically says "God said it, I believe it, and that is all that there is to it." Isn't that what Biblical inerrancy basically says? Stanton Jones, Ph.D., psychology, and Paul Yarhouse, Ph.D., psychology, both whom are Biblical inerrantists, wrote a book that is titled 'Homosexuality, the Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate.' Incredibly, at the end of chapter 4, which is titled 'Is homosexuality a psychopathology?,' after discussing lots of scientific evidence that Jones and Yarhouse used to try to convince readers that homosexuality is a psychopathology, the authors say the following:

"Finally, we have seen that there has never been any definitive judgment by the fields of psychiatry of psychology that homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle. But what if it were? Such a judgment would have little bearing on the judgments of the Christian church? In the days of Nero it was healthy and adaptive to worship the Roman emperor. By contemporary American standards a life consumed with greed, materialism, sensualism, selfishness, divorce and pride is judge healthy, but God weighs sucha life and finds it lacking."

I am surprised that you do not know more about fundamentalist Christians than you do. I was a fundamentalist Christian for over 30 years, and I can tell you from personal experience that I believed that "God said it, I believe it, and that is all that there is to it."

Regarding the issue of physician assisted suicide, consider the following:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Roman Catholic Church: The Catechism of the [Roman] Catholic Church states:

Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God Who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for His honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod: In 1979, their Commission on Theology and Church Relations issued a report on euthanasia. It condemned euthanasia because it involves suicide and/or murder and is thus contrary to God's law. Suffering "provides the opportunity for Christian witness and service.

http://www.parkridgecenter.org/Page150.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by parkridgecenter.org

The Gallup study listed 24 different matters that might worry respondents as they think about their own deaths. Although medical concerns— such as suffering great pain or living in a vegetative state—are prominent among all age groups, specifically spiritual concerns were most pronounced among younger adults. For example, 72% of the 18 to 24 year-olds worried about not being forgiven by God, and 63% of them feared dying cut off from God or a higher power. One might surmise that younger people are still struggling with the shape of their personal spirituality and thus feel less confident about facing ultimate questions.

The question of physician-assisted suicide continues to elicit divided opinions. For example, 33% support making it legal under a wide variety of conditions, while 32% support making it legal in a few cases and 31% oppose making it legal for any reason. Minorities and those over 55 are more likely to oppose physician-assisted suicide. Those who identify closely with a particular faith are most likely to oppose it.

http://www.religionfacts.com/euthanasia/index.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by religionfacts.com

Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia are both illegal in most of the world, but both are legal in the Netherlands and in Colombia. In the United States, physician-assisted suicide is legal only in the state of Oregon. According to a May 2004 Gallup Poll, 53% of all Americans feel euthanasia is morally acceptable, while 41 percent believe it is wrong.

But among those who attend religious services weekly, only 33% regarded euthanasia as morally acceptable. Among those who attend services "nearly weekly," 48% said euthanasia is morally acceptable.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Christian Reformed Church in North America: In 1971 a Synod adopted a resolution which stated: "that synod, mindful of the sixth commandment, condemn the wanton or arbitrary destruction of any human being at any state of its development from the point of conception to the point of death."

Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod: In 1979, their Commission on Theology and Church Relations issued a report on euthanasia. It condemned euthanasia because it involves suicide and/or murder and is thus contrary to God's law. Suffering "provides the opportunity for Christian witness and service."

Orthodox Christianity: The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, commenting on the case before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1996 commented: "The Orthodox Church opposes murder, whether it be suicide, euthanasia or whatever, and regardless if it is cloaked in terms like 'death with dignity.' A person contemplating ending it all because of despondency instead should turn to God for strength and support. The Book of Job serves as a prime example of how someone overcomes extreme suffering by staying focused on God."

Orthodox Judaism: The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America filed a brief in 1997-NOV to the Supreme Court. They supported laws which banned physician assisted suicide. Nathan Diament, director of their Institute for Public Affairs stated: "This is an issue of critical constitutional and moral significance which Jewish tradition clearly speaks to. We believe that the recognition of a constitutionally recognized right to die for the terminally ill is a clear statement against the recognition and sanctity of human life..."

Roman Catholic Church: The Catechism of the [Roman] Catholic Church states:

"2280: Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God Who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for His honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of."

Salvation Army: "The Salvation Army believes that people do not have the right to death by their own decision...Only God is sovereign over life and death...the grace of God can sustain through any ordeal or adversity."

In contrast, please note statements about some very liberal Christian churches from the same web site:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Mainline and Liberal Christian denominations: Pro-choice statements have been made by the United Church of Christ, and the Methodist Church on the US West coast. The "Episcopalian (Anglican) Unitarian, Methodist, Presbyterian and Quaker movements are amongst the most liberal, allowing at least individual decision making in cases of active euthanasia."

Unitarian Universalist: The Unitarian-Universalist Association, a liberal religious group, issued a statement in 1988 in support of euthanasia and choice in assisted suicide, but only if there are proper precautions in place to avoid abuse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

I am given to dense writing; it is one of the peccadilloes that I cultivate, for better or worse. Given my desire to succeed in academia, I would say better.

That is fine if you wish for your writings to only appeal to the very small percentage of people who are academics. You can succeed in academia in some of your writings and still appeal to laymen in other of your writings. That vast majority of voters are not academics. If you want to influence them, you will need to express yourself more simply. As far as I know, Dr. Robert Price is frequently able to effectively comminicate his arguments to laymen.

Johnny Skeptic · 03-02-2008, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Headache

Abortion is another area, albeit still legal, Christians wants it to become illegal based on their religion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

You flit from one elephant to another with all the ease of a gnat at the zoo. I am a Christian and even a Catholic and, with my religious beliefs, I do not want abortion to be criminalized.

At the same time, I recognize that every voter must "vote their conscience" and that a conscience is not formed ex nihilo from first principles and reasoning in the case of any human being. If you have a solution to this "flaw in democracy," please let us know.

If Muslims one day comprised the majority of voters in the U.S. and voted to legislate lots of laws based solely upon their interpretations of the Koran, would you object to them voting their consciences?

Until about ten years ago, homosexuality was illegal in thirteen states, eleven of which are Southern Bible belt states, and two of which (Utah and Idaho) have large percentages of Mormons. The court case 'Lawrence versus Texas' was the result of two gay men who lived in Texas being arrested for having sex in the privacy of a home. The gay men sued the state of Texas. Eventually, U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the gay men 6-3. The dissently justices were predictably Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas. Scalia and Thomas are conservative Christians. Rehnquist was a conservative Christian. Regarding 'Oregon versus Ashcroft,' which later became known as 'Oregon versus Gonzalez' when Gonzalez replaced Ashcroft as Attorney General, President Bush tried to overturned Oregon's physician assisted suicide law. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Oregon. The dissenting justices were predictably Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas.

When the U.S. Supreme Court ordered busing, the state of Virginia closed down the public school system so that white children would not have to go to school with black children. Such an atrocity could only have happened in a state that has a high percentage of conservative Christians.

Creationism use to enjoy exclusivity in public schools. At that time, most Christians would have opposed a balanced approach where creationism and evolution would have both been taught in public schools. Today, however, since conservative Christians know that they cannot get away with being bullies anymore, they would be quite pleased to accept the very same balanced approach that most of them would have disapproved of back then.

Some religious people who oppose abortion also have some secular arguments against it, but many religious people who oppose abortion oppose it solely on religious grounds. I refer you to my thread at the MF&P Forum that is titled 'Is it moral to support laws based solely upon religion?' The link is http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=237228.

I am well aware that it is not possible to reasonably establish cause and correlation in every case, but there are not any doubts whatsoever that many religious people based their opinions about social issues solely upon religion.

sugarhitman · 03-02-2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Headache

What has religion done to find a solution to HIV?
What has religion done to find a solution to poverty?
What has religion done to increase peoples lifespans?
What has religion done to the environment?
What has religion done to find new energy sources?
What has religion done to end racism?
What has religion done to make people safe and secure?
What has religion done to create new jobs?

What has religion done but create more poverty and more violence and more hatred?

What has sexual immorality done to contribute to aids?
What has greed done to create poverty?
What has irresponsibility done to decrease lifespans?
What has science and tecnological progress done to the enviroment?
What has science done that enabled the use of fossil fuels?
What has Darwinism done to fuel racism?
What has science and technology (Nuclear Weapons) done to make people feel less safe and secure?
What has Darwinist economics done to destroy jobs (ask John D. Rockefeller)?

How can you call for religion to clean up the mess that is caused by rampant ungodlessness? Especially if you will not adhere to sound Christian Morality.

Johnny Skeptic · 03-02-2008, 01:26 PM

Message to arnoldo and sugarhitman: Please post your evidence that reasonably proves that a God exists, that he is the God of the Bible, that he has good character, and that he is not able to provide additional evidence that would convince more people to love and accept him without unfairly interefering with their free will.

In addition, why does God predict the future, and why hasn't he ever made an indisputable prophecy such as a prediction regarding when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year?

Sheshbazzar · 03-02-2008, 01:41 PM

Doom and gloom, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling! and everything is just totally going to hell! and your all gonna burn just forever and ever, just you wait, I told you so, I told you so;
And I'm a'gonna be up there just jumping up and down for joy while I get to watch all of you suffer and burn, and I'll get to sing "I told you so, I told you so",
Hey! Look at meeeee I'm UP here! I'm just so Gooood! I'm just so much better than any of you!
hah hah hah! and nyah! nyah! nyah!" and on, and on, and on, for all of eternity. (dosen't sound like much of an improvement, or any real advantage)

Sick dude!, I mean really, really, REALLY,SICK!
Sounds like you have one really serious personality disorder.
What? "sound Christian Morality"? Oh -THAT- "Christian Morality";

That "Christian Morality" that -SLAUGHTERED- its way to way to the domination of its fellow man?

That -ROBBED- the rest of the ancient world blind to increase its own wealth and power?

That willfully -BURNED- and -DESTROYED- thousands of years of accumulated knowledge, to enforce ignorance?

That has always sought to employ tyrannical governments to -FORCE- its lies, and evil will on everyone it could reach?

That advocated and continued -SLAVERY- and -HUMAN BONDAGE- for near two millenia?

That has preferred keeping men bound in chains of -STONE-AGE IGNORANCE AND SUPERSTITION-, rather than encouraging real knowledge and scientific advancement?

That has shown itself to -BE- the -FOREMOST PRACTITIONERS- of some of the most despicable conduct and morals that this old world has ever seen?

Oh, -THAT- "Christian Morality"?

Pardon me whilst I flush the toilet.

Johnny Skeptic · 03-02-2008, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Headache

Abortion is another area, albeit still legal, Christians wants it to become illegal based on their religion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

You flit from one elephant to another with all the ease of a gnat at the zoo. I am a Christian and even a Catholic and, with my religious beliefs, I do not want abortion to be criminalized.

At the same time, I recognize that every voter must "vote their conscience" and that a conscience is not formed ex nihilo from first principles and reasoning in the case of any human being. If you have a solution to this "flaw in democracy," please let us know.

If Muslims one day comprised the majority of voters in the U.S. and voted to legislate lots of laws based solely upon their interpretations of the Koran, would you object to them voting their consciences?

Until about ten years ago, homosexuality was illegal in thirteen states, eleven of which are Southern Bible belt states, and two of which (Utah and Idaho) have large percentages of Mormons. The court case 'Lawrence versus Texas' was the result of two gay men who lived in Texas being arrested for having sex in the privacy of a home. The gay men sued the state of Texas. Eventually, U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the gay men 6-3. The dissently justices were predictably Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas. Scalia and Thomas are conservative Christians. Rehnquist was a conservative Christian. Regarding 'Oregon versus Ashcroft,' which later became known as 'Oregon versus Gonzalez' when Gonzalez replaced Ashcroft as Attorney General, President Bush tried to overturned Oregon's physician assisted suicide law. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Oregon. The dissenting justices were predictably Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas.

When the U.S. Supreme Court ordered busing, the state of Virginia closed down the public school system so that white children would not have to go to school with black children. Such an atrocity could only have happened in a state that has a high percentage of conservative Christians.

Creationism use to enjoy exclusivity in public schools. At that time, most Christians would have opposed a balanced approach where creationism and evolution would have both been taught in public schools. Today, however, since conservative Christians know that they cannot get away with being bullies anymore, they would be quite pleased to accept the very same balanced approach that most of them would have disapproved of back then.

Some religious people who oppose abortion also have some secular arguments against it, but many religious people who oppose abortion oppose it solely on religious grounds. I refer you to my thread at the MF&P Forum that is titled 'Is it moral to support laws based solely upon religion?' The link is http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=237228.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Since Headache did not explain what he meant by "the vast majority," which means that your reply was not a reply to a specific claim, I posted what I posted because it contained specific statistics that I thought would help you and Headache have more meaningful discussions about how much religion influences what people believe about abortion. What exactly do you believe would not be possible? Since you frequently express yourself in complex ways, not in simply stated ways, I often find your posts to be difficult to understand. Perhaps you should consider trying to state your positions more simply so as to gain a wider audience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

I don't think it is possible that the motivations (in the case of the abortion issue) are purely based on religious background.

There is a good deal of evidence that many fundamentalist Christians base their opposition to abortion solely upon what the Bible says. Surely you have heard the fundamentalist Christian saying that basically says "God said it, I believe it, and that is all that there is to it." Isn't that what Biblical inerrancy basically says? Stanton Jones, Ph.D., psychology, and Paul Yarhouse, Ph.D., psychology, both whom are Biblical inerrantists, wrote a book that is titled 'Homosexuality, the Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate.' Incredibly, at the end of chapter 4, which is titled 'Is homosexuality a psychopathology?,' after discussing lots of scientific evidence that Jones and Yarhouse used to try to convince readers that homosexuality is a psychopathology, the authors say the following:

"Finally, we have seen that there has never been any definitive judgment by the fields of psychiatry of psychology that homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle. But what if it were? Such a judgment would have little bearing on the judgments of the Christian church? In the days of Nero it was healthy and adaptive to worship the Roman emperor. By contemporary American standards a life consumed with greed, materialism, sensualism, selfishness, divorce and pride is judge healthy, but God weighs sucha life and finds it lacking."

I am surprised that you do not know more about fundamentalist Christians than you do. I was a fundamentalist Christian for over 30 years, and I can tell you from personal experience that I believed that "God said it, I believe it, and that is all that there is to it."

Regarding the issue of physician assisted suicide, consider the following:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Roman Catholic Church: The Catechism of the [Roman] Catholic Church states:

Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God Who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for His honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod: In 1979, their Commission on Theology and Church Relations issued a report on euthanasia. It condemned euthanasia because it involves suicide and/or murder and is thus contrary to God's law. Suffering "provides the opportunity for Christian witness and service.

http://www.parkridgecenter.org/Page150.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by parkridgecenter.org

The Gallup study listed 24 different matters that might worry respondents as they think about their own deaths. Although medical concerns— such as suffering great pain or living in a vegetative state—are prominent among all age groups, specifically spiritual concerns were most pronounced among younger adults. For example, 72% of the 18 to 24 year-olds worried about not being forgiven by God, and 63% of them feared dying cut off from God or a higher power. One might surmise that younger people are still struggling with the shape of their personal spirituality and thus feel less confident about facing ultimate questions.

The question of physician-assisted suicide continues to elicit divided opinions. For example, 33% support making it legal under a wide variety of conditions, while 32% support making it legal in a few cases and 31% oppose making it legal for any reason. Minorities and those over 55 are more likely to oppose physician-assisted suicide. Those who identify closely with a particular faith are most likely to oppose it.

http://www.religionfacts.com/euthanasia/index.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by religionfacts.com

Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia are both illegal in most of the world, but both are legal in the Netherlands and in Colombia. In the United States, physician-assisted suicide is legal only in the state of Oregon. According to a May 2004 Gallup Poll, 53% of all Americans feel euthanasia is morally acceptable, while 41 percent believe it is wrong.

But among those who attend religious services weekly, only 33% regarded euthanasia as morally acceptable. Among those who attend services "nearly weekly," 48% said euthanasia is morally acceptable.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Christian Reformed Church in North America: In 1971 a Synod adopted a resolution which stated: "that synod, mindful of the sixth commandment, condemn the wanton or arbitrary destruction of any human being at any state of its development from the point of conception to the point of death."

Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod: In 1979, their Commission on Theology and Church Relations issued a report on euthanasia. It condemned euthanasia because it involves suicide and/or murder and is thus contrary to God's law. Suffering "provides the opportunity for Christian witness and service."

Orthodox Christianity: The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, commenting on the case before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1996 commented: "The Orthodox Church opposes murder, whether it be suicide, euthanasia or whatever, and regardless if it is cloaked in terms like 'death with dignity.' A person contemplating ending it all because of despondency instead should turn to God for strength and support. The Book of Job serves as a prime example of how someone overcomes extreme suffering by staying focused on God."

Orthodox Judaism: The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America filed a brief in 1997-NOV to the Supreme Court. They supported laws which banned physician assisted suicide. Nathan Diament, director of their Institute for Public Affairs stated: "This is an issue of critical constitutional and moral significance which Jewish tradition clearly speaks to. We believe that the recognition of a constitutionally recognized right to die for the terminally ill is a clear statement against the recognition and sanctity of human life..."

Roman Catholic Church: The Catechism of the [Roman] Catholic Church states:

"2280: Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God Who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for His honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of."

Salvation Army: "The Salvation Army believes that people do not have the right to death by their own decision...Only God is sovereign over life and death...the grace of God can sustain through any ordeal or adversity."

In contrast, please note statements about some very liberal Christian churches from the same web site:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth2.htm#chur

Quote:

Originally Posted by religioustolerance.org

Mainline and Liberal Christian denominations: Pro-choice statements have been made by the United Church of Christ, and the Methodist Church on the US West coast. The "Episcopalian (Anglican) Unitarian, Methodist, Presbyterian and Quaker movements are amongst the most liberal, allowing at least individual decision making in cases of active euthanasia."

Unitarian Universalist: The Unitarian-Universalist Association, a liberal religious group, issued a statement in 1988 in support of euthanasia and choice in assisted suicide, but only if there are proper precautions in place to avoid abuse.

I am well aware that it is not possible to reasonably establish cause and correlation in every case, but there are not any doubts whatsoever that many religious people based their opinions about social issues solely upon religion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

I am given to dense writing; it is one of the peccadilloes that I cultivate, for better or worse. Given my desire to succeed in academia, I would say better.

That is fine if you wish for your writings to only appeal to the very small percentage of people who are academics, and to the small percentage of people who are not academics who usually understand your complex writings. You can succeed in academia in some of your writings and still appeal to laymen in other of your writings. That vast majority of voters are not academics. If you want to influence them, you will need to express yourself more simply. As far as I know, Dr. Robert Price is frequently able to effectively communicate his arguments to laymen.

schilling.klaus · 03-02-2008, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

The people I don't understand are those who, believing that it is all nonsense, believing that they have only one life

one may reject the Bible and believe in multiple lives at the same times.
The Bible only has a watered notion of afterlife anyways,n e.g.
it doesn't allow for metempsychosis, thus many multiple-life believers
necessarily have to reject the Bible.

Klaus Schilling

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-02-2008, 01:26 PM	#54
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Message to arnoldo and sugarhitman: Please post your evidence that reasonably proves that a God exists, that he is the God of the Bible, that he has good character, and that he is not able to provide additional evidence that would convince more people to love and accept him without unfairly interefering with their free will. In addition, why does God predict the future, and why hasn't he ever made an indisputable prophecy such as a prediction regarding when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year?

03-02-2008, 01:41 PM	#55
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Doom and gloom, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling! and everything is just totally going to hell! and your all gonna burn just forever and ever, just you wait, I told you so, I told you so; And I'm a'gonna be up there just jumping up and down for joy while I get to watch all of you suffer and burn, and I'll get to sing "I told you so, I told you so", Hey! Look at meeeee I'm UP here! I'm just so Gooood! I'm just so much better than any of you! hah hah hah! and nyah! nyah! nyah!" and on, and on, and on, for all of eternity. (dosen't sound like much of an improvement, or any real advantage) Sick dude!, I mean really, really, REALLY,SICK! Sounds like you have one really serious personality disorder. What? "sound Christian Morality"? Oh -THAT- "Christian Morality"; That "Christian Morality" that -SLAUGHTERED- its way to way to the domination of its fellow man? That -ROBBED- the rest of the ancient world blind to increase its own wealth and power? That willfully -BURNED- and -DESTROYED- thousands of years of accumulated knowledge, to enforce ignorance? That has always sought to employ tyrannical governments to -FORCE- its lies, and evil will on everyone it could reach? That advocated and continued -SLAVERY- and -HUMAN BONDAGE- for near two millenia? That has preferred keeping men bound in chains of -STONE-AGE IGNORANCE AND SUPERSTITION-, rather than encouraging real knowledge and scientific advancement? That has shown itself to -BE- the -FOREMOST PRACTITIONERS- of some of the most despicable conduct and morals that this old world has ever seen? Oh, -THAT- "Christian Morality"? Pardon me whilst I flush the toilet.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.