Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

OReilly Slips Up & Exposes Religion

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:17:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
In his first interview with Richard Dawkins, he made this startling admittance, probably unintentionally.

"The founding fathers of the United States saw religion as a moderating influence, as a good thing that people embrace the tenets. ...They saw it as a moderating influence because the federal government at that point, couldn't control the country. And they said, if people followed Jesus, then the country is going to be better." -- Bill O'Reilly
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:26:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:24:58 PM, innomen wrote:
Kind of with Koopin, where's the big slip up?

O'Reilly is a supposed "Catholic," yet he admits that religion was a tool used by the government to control people.

Napolean Bonaparte thought the same:

"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping the common people quiet."
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
m93samman
Posts: 2,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:28:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:24:58 PM, innomen wrote:
Kind of with Koopin, where's the big slip up?

O'Reilly is a supposed "Catholic," yet he admits that religion was a tool used by the government to control people.

Napolean Bonaparte thought the same:

"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping the common people quiet."

"Religion" and "Catholicism" can't be equated. And that's the truth, it's not like we didn't know that. Look at Byzantium.
: At 4/15/2011 5:29:37 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
: Pascal's wager is for poosies.
:
: I mean that sincerly, because it's basically an argument from poooosie.
:
: I'm pretty sure that's like a fallacy.. Argument ad Pussium or something like that.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:31:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:28:48 PM, m93samman wrote:
"Religion" and "Catholicism" can't be equated. And that's the truth, it's not like we didn't know that. Look at Byzantium.

This has nothing to do with Catholicism. It wouldn't matter if O'Reilly happened to be a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Muslim. The point is that he is a supposed religious person, yet he makes the startling admittance that religion is a tool to control people. And it's not just Catholicism, it's any religion.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:33:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:31:51 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
This has nothing to do with Catholicism. It wouldn't matter if O'Reilly happened to be a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Muslim. The point is that he is a supposed religious person, yet he makes the startling admittance that religion is a tool to control people. And it's not just Catholicism, it's any religion.
Also Illimunati...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:35:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:33:19 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:31:51 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
This has nothing to do with Catholicism. It wouldn't matter if O'Reilly happened to be a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Muslim. The point is that he is a supposed religious person, yet he makes the startling admittance that religion is a tool to control people. And it's not just Catholicism, it's any religion.
Also Illimunati...

Actually, religion is a tool of the Illuminati, not just a force along side it.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
m93samman
Posts: 2,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:35:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:31:51 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:28:48 PM, m93samman wrote:
"Religion" and "Catholicism" can't be equated. And that's the truth, it's not like we didn't know that. Look at Byzantium.

This has nothing to do with Catholicism. It wouldn't matter if O'Reilly happened to be a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Muslim. The point is that he is a supposed religious person, yet he makes the startling admittance that religion is a tool to control people. And it's not just Catholicism, it's any religion.

Any =/= all
: At 4/15/2011 5:29:37 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
: Pascal's wager is for poosies.
:
: I mean that sincerly, because it's basically an argument from poooosie.
:
: I'm pretty sure that's like a fallacy.. Argument ad Pussium or something like that.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:37:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:35:34 PM, m93samman wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:31:51 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
This has nothing to do with Catholicism. It wouldn't matter if O'Reilly happened to be a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Muslim. The point is that he is a supposed religious person, yet he makes the startling admittance that religion is a tool to control people. And it's not just Catholicism, it's any religion.

Any =/= all

"Any" means that it equally applies to all, though it may not be the case that it's true for all.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:38:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:35:15 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Actually, religion is a tool of the Illuminati, not just a force along side it.

the pope's in their pocket:
http://caricatureman.typepad.com...
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:39:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:35:15 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Actually, religion is a tool of the Illuminati, not just a force along side it.
That is very absurd. Did you call religion "illogical?"
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:39:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net...
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
m93samman
Posts: 2,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:39:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:37:42 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:35:34 PM, m93samman wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:31:51 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
This has nothing to do with Catholicism. It wouldn't matter if O'Reilly happened to be a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Muslim. The point is that he is a supposed religious person, yet he makes the startling admittance that religion is a tool to control people. And it's not just Catholicism, it's any religion.

Any =/= all

"Any" means that it equally applies to all, though it may not be the case that it's true for all.

That's far more valid (I'm not being sarcastic)
: At 4/15/2011 5:29:37 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
: Pascal's wager is for poosies.
:
: I mean that sincerly, because it's basically an argument from poooosie.
:
: I'm pretty sure that's like a fallacy.. Argument ad Pussium or something like that.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:41:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:26:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:24:58 PM, innomen wrote:
Kind of with Koopin, where's the big slip up?

O'Reilly is a supposed "Catholic," yet he admits that religion was a tool used by the government to control people.
Wow! Way to read what's NOT there! He specifically said that if people followed religion, it was a good thing. Not that the government could control religion to use it to control the people.

Napolean Bonaparte thought the same:
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping the common people quiet."
Yeah, yeah, and it's the opium of the masses, yara, yara.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:45:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:41:56 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
Wow! Way to read what's NOT there! He specifically said that if people followed religion, it was a good thing. Not that the government could control religion to use it to control the people.

"...They saw it as a moderating influence because the federal government at that point, couldn't control the country."

Napolean Bonaparte thought the same:
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping the common people quiet."
Yeah, yeah, and it's the opium of the masses, yara, yara.

Except when Napolean says it, it actually holds weight because he was an actual ruler who almost conquered the world, and knows what methods keep people in line. Marx doesn't have the same status.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 2:47:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
There weren't a whole lot of "papists" that were worried about stuff back then, so the Catholic thing is irrelevant. Secondly, what's the big deal? The country was struggling to stay united, and the federal government hadn't established itself. If there was a common influence that helped with keeping the country together and it was the belief in Christ, what's the problem exactly? It's not like a formal theocracy was established as an intermediary government, it was just a commonality of values based in Christian faith that helped with some continuity.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:02:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:45:40 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:41:56 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
Wow! Way to read what's NOT there! He specifically said that if people followed religion, it was a good thing. Not that the government could control religion to use it to control the people.

"...They saw it as a moderating influence because the federal government at that point, couldn't control the country."
So IN LIEU of the federal government, religion would be a moderating influence.


Napolean Bonaparte thought the same:
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping the common people quiet."
Yeah, yeah, and it's the opium of the masses, yara, yara.

Except when Napolean says it, it actually holds weight because he was an actual ruler who almost conquered the world, and knows what methods keep people in line. Marx doesn't have the same status.
I agree with what you said about Marx, however, Napoleon was NO WHERE near conquering the world.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:08:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:17:22 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
In his first interview with Richard Dawkins, he made this startling admittance, probably unintentionally.

"The founding fathers of the United States saw religion as a moderating influence, as a good thing that people embrace the tenets. ...They saw it as a moderating influence because the federal government at that point, couldn't control the country. And they said, if people followed Jesus, then the country is going to be better." -- Bill O'Reilly

Influence = control?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:13:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 3:08:40 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:17:22 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
In his first interview with Richard Dawkins, he made this startling admittance, probably unintentionally.

"The founding fathers of the United States saw religion as a moderating influence, as a good thing that people embrace the tenets. ...They saw it as a moderating influence because the federal government at that point, couldn't control the country. And they said, if people followed Jesus, then the country is going to be better." -- Bill O'Reilly

Influence = control?

Besides the point. Whether the government wanted to influence or control people with religion, the idea was to use religion to keep people in line and to get them to act how they wanted.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:16:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:41:56 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
Wow! Way to read what's NOT there!

This.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:18:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 3:16:28 PM, Korashk wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:41:56 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
Wow! Way to read what's NOT there!

This.

That.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:22:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 3:18:20 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 9/17/2010 3:16:28 PM, Korashk wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:41:56 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
Wow! Way to read what's NOT there!

This.

That.

I already refuted "This" and "That."

"...They saw it as a moderating influence because the federal government at that point, couldn't control the country." - O'Reilly

"Whether the government wanted to influence or control people with religion, the idea was to use religion to keep people in line and to get them to act how they wanted." - Me
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:35:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Seneca

For thousands of years, religion has been controlling society. It's what most laws are based off of. It's what influences millions of people in their beliefs and opinions. It becomes the ultimate decision-maker in any situation. Religion is a dominating power which is extremely dangerous to use as a "moderating" force. Why? Because it creates eccentrics way too easily. And what was a "moderating" force before, is now the only force.

Through religion, governments have crumbled. Tyrannical leaders have been produced. Wars have been waged. Lives have been lost. Why use it at all?
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 3:54:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 3:22:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I already refuted "This" and "That."

Hence it is said, "Bi", „that‟ comes from "Shi," „this‟ and follows from that." This is the doctrine of the parallel birth of "this" and "that." Even so, born together they die together.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Valtarov
Posts: 136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 6:44:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:31:51 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/17/2010 2:28:48 PM, m93samman wrote:
"Religion" and "Catholicism" can't be equated. And that's the truth, it's not like we didn't know that. Look at Byzantium.

This has nothing to do with Catholicism. It wouldn't matter if O'Reilly happened to be a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Muslim. The point is that he is a supposed religious person, yet he makes the startling admittance that religion is a tool to control people. And it's not just Catholicism, it's any religion.

Wait...so because he said that people will be better people for following Christianity, Christianity must therefore be nothing more than a government tool?

No. The idea is that Christians are supposed to live a certain way. Governments can use that way of living to their own advantage, yes, but that's not the point. The point is that Christianity is supposed to make someone a better person throughout.
"We are half-hearted creatures,
fooling about with drink and sex and
ambition when infinite joy is offered us,
like an ignorant child who wants to go on
making mud pies in a slum because he
cannot imagine what is meant by the offer
of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily
pleased."—C.S. Lewis, "The Weight of Glory"
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2010 10:30:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/17/2010 2:17:22 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:

"The founding fathers of the United States saw religion as a moderating influence, as a good thing that people embrace the tenets. ...

O'Riley's statement is accurate and not at all shocking. The "control" of a religion comes from people voluntarily subscribing to the ethics of the religion. It isn't entirely voluntary, as there is social pressure, but it is not government control. If there is no effective government to capture and punish criminals, then society is better off if "thou shall not steal" is widely believed, along with the Golden Rule an other such principles.

Deists like Jefferson and Adams are often quoted as speaking favorably of Christianity. Some mistake that as evidence that Jefferson, et al, were Christians, even though they were not. What they believed was that morality had to be taught to sustain society, and Christianity was viewed favorably in that light. the "control" is a substitute for government, not a replacement of government.