Total Posts:43|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Nine Satanic Statements

U.n
Posts: 214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
1. Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!

2. Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!

3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!

5. Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!

6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual development," has become the most vicious animal of all!

8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!

9. Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years!

- from the Satanic Bible by Anton Szandor LaVey
U.n
Posts: 214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 2:11:09 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
It may already be buried in the religious forums somewhere but I wasn't about to look through every page to double check.
DavidHenson
Posts: 446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 3:54:00 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
Those things aren't actually directly attributed to Satan in any real way, its the Gospel of LeVey, not Satan.
"Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
Posts: 146
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 3:59:09 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 3:54:00 AM, DavidHenson wrote:
Those things aren't actually directly attributed to Satan in any real way, its the Gospel of LeVey, not Satan.

Well, duh. It's not like Satan signs his name or books a guest spot on The View.
DavidHenson
Posts: 446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 4:38:54 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 3:59:09 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/7/2016 3:54:00 AM, DavidHenson wrote:
Those things aren't actually directly attributed to Satan in any real way, its the Gospel of LeVey, not Satan.

Well, duh. It's not like Satan signs his name or books a guest spot on The View.

[laughs] Well, what's the point, then?
"Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
Posts: 146
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 5:05:14 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 4:38:54 PM, DavidHenson wrote:
At 3/7/2016 3:59:09 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/7/2016 3:54:00 AM, DavidHenson wrote:
Those things aren't actually directly attributed to Satan in any real way, its the Gospel of LeVey, not Satan.

Well, duh. It's not like Satan signs his name or books a guest spot on The View.

[laughs] Well, what's the point, then?

Good question. Exactly what Satan wants us to think.

Once the spirit has moved away from abstinence of vices, then isn't "moderation" a form of "excess"? Abstinence is Boolean, not a degree. One cannot eat a little bit of holy Apple. They're like vaginas and potato chips. No one can eat just one.
DavidHenson
Posts: 446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 5:20:18 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 5:05:14 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
Good question. Exactly what Satan wants us to think.

Once the spirit has moved away from abstinence of vices, then isn't "moderation" a form of "excess"? Abstinence is Boolean, not a degree. One cannot eat a little bit of holy Apple. They're like vaginas and potato chips. No one can eat just one.

Well, I uh . . . WHAT?! LaVey (misspelled it last time) didn't believe in Satan. Probably knew nothing about him. Maybe had a goth looking leather bound copy of Paradise Lost and The Divine Comedy. Maybe painted Keith Richards' and Anita Pallenberg's door gold at their wedding, allegedly bopped around the astral plane and the wedding reception simultaneously.

Thinks Lucifer is a name for Satan, instead of Nebuchadnezzar.
"Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 7:51:49 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
[Hedonism, materialism, self-honesty, transactionalism, punitivism, pragmatism, selfishness and tyranny]

If you are unashamed about being ignorant, unjust and cruel, why do you need religion?

Likewise, if you oppose ignorance, injustice and cruelty, why do you need religion?

Religion is only for those who want to be told that their ignorance, injustice and cruelty make them pious.
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 8:10:42 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
1. Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!

2. Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!

3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!

5. Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!

6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual development," has become the most vicious animal of all!

8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!

9. Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years!


- from the Satanic Bible by Anton Szandor LaVey

Sounds like indulgence and selfishness is the encompassing belief. Sounds like adults that want to live like 5 year olds.

When I think of over-indulgence, I think of people I see in the grocery store that have to shop in scooters because they are too fat to walk.

When I think of selfishness, I think of people that nobody else likes. You get further in life if you are a likable person so selfishness is actually a hindrance to getting what you want in the long run.

When I think of Satanists, I think of people that nobody likes and are a mess physically more often than not. Sign me up!
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 8:16:46 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 7:51:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
[Hedonism, materialism, self-honesty, transactionalism, punitivism, pragmatism, selfishness and tyranny]

If you are unashamed about being ignorant, unjust and cruel, why do you need religion?

Likewise, if you oppose ignorance, injustice and cruelty, why do you need religion?

Religion is only for those who want to be told that their ignorance, injustice and cruelty make them pious.

The religious are by pretty much by definition those who think that ignorance, injustice and cruelty are real things. We believe the words do actually mean what people have always thought they meant.
This space for rent.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 9:45:11 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 8:16:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 7:51:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
[Hedonism, materialism, self-honesty, transactionalism, punitivism, pragmatism, selfishness and tyranny]

If you are unashamed about being ignorant, unjust and cruel, why do you need religion?

Likewise, if you oppose ignorance, injustice and cruelty, why do you need religion?

Religion is only for those who want to be told that their ignorance, injustice and cruelty make them pious.

The religious are by pretty much by definition those who think that ignorance, injustice and cruelty are real things.
...that for some, apply to everything and everyone except their own faith and the blind, narrow, presuppositional beliefs of its dogmatic, unaccountable, self-satisfied adherents.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 9:53:35 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 9:45:11 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 8:16:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 7:51:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
[Hedonism, materialism, self-honesty, transactionalism, punitivism, pragmatism, selfishness and tyranny]

If you are unashamed about being ignorant, unjust and cruel, why do you need religion?

Likewise, if you oppose ignorance, injustice and cruelty, why do you need religion?

Religion is only for those who want to be told that their ignorance, injustice and cruelty make them pious.

The religious are by pretty much by definition those who think that ignorance, injustice and cruelty are real things.
...that for some, apply to everything and everyone except their own faith and the blind, narrow, presuppositional beliefs of its dogmatic, unaccountable, self-satisfied adherents.

I don't even know what that sentence means. You know, when you say something ridiculous, you don't always have to try to cover for it by spluttering yet more angry nonsense. You could try something like "Ok, maybe that was pretty bigoted, wasn't it"
This space for rent.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 9:53:35 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 9:45:11 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 8:16:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 7:51:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
[Hedonism, materialism, self-honesty, transactionalism, punitivism, pragmatism, selfishness and tyranny]

If you are unashamed about being ignorant, unjust and cruel, why do you need religion?

Likewise, if you oppose ignorance, injustice and cruelty, why do you need religion?

Religion is only for those who want to be told that their ignorance, injustice and cruelty make them pious.

The religious are by pretty much by definition those who think that ignorance, injustice and cruelty are real things.
...that for some, apply to everything and everyone except their own faith and the blind, narrow, presuppositional beliefs of its dogmatic, unaccountable, self-satisfied adherents.
I don't even know what that sentence means.
Ignorance generally doesn't stop you posting opinion, V, and didn't in this case either.

By way of illustration, the Latin word sanctus ("holy") is the root of the word "sanctimony", which should give you a clue as to my point.

Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.

But that's only valuable if you don't accept that your ignorance, injustice and cruelty can be improved through secular care and effort in the first place. If you know about it and want to improve on it, you don't need religion for that. And if you know about it and celebrate it as La Vey's philosophy does, why would you need religion?

This is why I think there's really no value in a religion like La Vey's. It's pointless.

But your faith for example, V, offers sanctimony in abundance to those willing to whip it up through magical thought.

In your faith, a man so shamed intellectually that he cannot admit ignorance or error, so parochial that he cannot imagine a worthy life outside his own traditions, who can't shake his own fear of difference and change long enough to respect people unlike himself, gets to feel pious by praying accountability away, and sanctimoniously vilifying any group he resents.

Religion is not the only way to achieve that, V, but it's a very popular, socially-approved way to be content with being less kind, decent and honest and self-examined than you were born to be.

That's a huge attraction of religion, and to the extent that La Vey's manifesto is talking about achieving happiness through amoral self-acceptance, my key point is that you don't need religion unless you're drawn to sanctimony.

Does it make sense now?
U.n
Posts: 214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 11:40:12 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 9:53:35 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 9:45:11 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 8:16:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 7:51:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
[Hedonism, materialism, self-honesty, transactionalism, punitivism, pragmatism, selfishness and tyranny]

If you are unashamed about being ignorant, unjust and cruel, why do you need religion?

Likewise, if you oppose ignorance, injustice and cruelty, why do you need religion?

Religion is only for those who want to be told that their ignorance, injustice and cruelty make them pious.

The religious are by pretty much by definition those who think that ignorance, injustice and cruelty are real things.
...that for some, apply to everything and everyone except their own faith and the blind, narrow, presuppositional beliefs of its dogmatic, unaccountable, self-satisfied adherents.
I don't even know what that sentence means.
Ignorance generally doesn't stop you posting opinion, V, and didn't in this case either.

By way of illustration, the Latin word sanctus ("holy") is the root of the word "sanctimony", which should give you a clue as to my point.

Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.

But that's only valuable if you don't accept that your ignorance, injustice and cruelty can be improved through secular care and effort in the first place. If you know about it and want to improve on it, you don't need religion for that. And if you know about it and celebrate it as La Vey's philosophy does, why would you need religion?

This is why I think there's really no value in a religion like La Vey's. It's pointless.

But your faith for example, V, offers sanctimony in abundance to those willing to whip it up through magical thought.

In your faith, a man so shamed intellectually that he cannot admit ignorance or error, so parochial that he cannot imagine a worthy life outside his own traditions, who can't shake his own fear of difference and change long enough to respect people unlike himself, gets to feel pious by praying accountability away, and sanctimoniously vilifying any group he resents.

Religion is not the only way to achieve that, V, but it's a very popular, socially-approved way to be content with being less kind, decent and honest and self-examined than you were born to be.

That's a huge attraction of religion, and to the extent that La Vey's manifesto is talking about achieving happiness through amoral self-acceptance, my key point is that you don't need religion unless you're drawn to sanctimony.

Does it make sense now?

I would agree with much of this, at bare minimum that which pertains to LeVay's religion. LeVay himself describes his brand of Satanism as dogmatic atheism. He believed that most people, even nonbelievers, had need for religious-style rituals and structure - hence his book and the existence of the Church of Satan.

In LeVayan Satanism you are not truly worshipping Satan but rather accepting that Satan and God are not real - they are simply figments of your imagination or ideals in your mind. Therefore Satan in LeVay's religion is mostly a manifestation of hedonist pursuits.

Why pray to "Satan"? If you don't believe in God or Satan then there is no harm in praying to an imaginary devil. It's simply dogma for those atheists who need it. Much of LeVay's religion is built around the rejection of Christianity and conservative teachings such as abstinence. To LeVay, if you enjoy it and you are not harming anyone else, there's no reason to hold yourself back.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2016 11:59:52 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 11:40:12 PM, U.n wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
To the extent that La Vey's manifesto is talking about achieving happiness through amoral self-acceptance, my key point is that you don't need religion unless you're drawn to sanctimony.
I would agree with much of this, at bare minimum that which pertains to LeVay's religion. LeVay himself describes his brand of Satanism as dogmatic atheism.

So is the dialectical materialism of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, U.n. [https://en.wikipedia.org...] You can underpin atheism with all kinds of dogmas (or else adopt atheism as part of some dogma), and there's no telling what values an atheistic ideology will uphold.

But atheism itself isn't dogmatic. It's a theological position, not an ideology. So LaVeyan Satanism isn't quintessentially atheistic; nor is atheism quintessentially LaVeyan.

But LaVey's own regard for amoral individualism begs the question of why an amoral individualist would need a dogma in the first place. I can see why they'd want others to uphold a dogma, but why would they?

It's simply dogma for those atheists who need it.
I suspect you mean for the amoral hedonistic individualists who need it, since not all atheists would so identify.

Yet, paradoxically, by needing it, the ones who need it are not really upholding the dogma anyway. :p So not only do I find its amorality distasteful, U.n, but I think it's philosophically cynical too. LaVey was originally a carnie by profession [https://en.wikipedia.org...]. Like L. Ron Hubbard, I think he saw the rubes coming when he wrote his manifesto. :)
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 9:53:35 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 9:45:11 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 8:16:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 7:51:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/7/2016 2:09:45 AM, U.n wrote:
[Hedonism, materialism, self-honesty, transactionalism, punitivism, pragmatism, selfishness and tyranny]

If you are unashamed about being ignorant, unjust and cruel, why do you need religion?

Likewise, if you oppose ignorance, injustice and cruelty, why do you need religion?

Religion is only for those who want to be told that their ignorance, injustice and cruelty make them pious.

The religious are by pretty much by definition those who think that ignorance, injustice and cruelty are real things.
...that for some, apply to everything and everyone except their own faith and the blind, narrow, presuppositional beliefs of its dogmatic, unaccountable, self-satisfied adherents.
I don't even know what that sentence means.
Ignorance generally doesn't stop you posting opinion, V, and didn't in this case either.

By way of illustration, the Latin word sanctus ("holy") is the root of the word "sanctimony", which should give you a clue as to my point.

Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.


And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious? Your premise is that they are ignorant, cruel, and unjust.

But that's only valuable if you don't accept that your ignorance, injustice and cruelty can be improved through secular care and effort in the first place.

What if I don't want to be improved? What if the fact is that I don't give a sh*t about anybody else?

The apostle Paul is the classic illustration - a man dead set on the wrong path with no interest in changing. Then, literally out of the blue, God turned him completely around.

Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: I long ago found out that I am not capable of running my own life. I am not naturally a good person. I wasn't an awful person or anything, but I was not a good person. Today, as 2000 years ago, it is the publicans and sinners who attend the party, not the Pharisees.

So even the desire to improve - that is from God. We wouldn't even exist if he hadn't chosen to make us, and we surely won't ever be what we were meant to be if we insist on being our own tiny god.
This space for rent.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 4:52:49 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?
Could you please explain why it should be appropriate that the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief is eternal bliss, while the punishment for a life of kindness, respect and ninety years of skepticism is eternal torture?

If you can explain that, then perhaps you have some answer for why ignorance, cruelty and injustice likes to think itself pious. But if you can't, then you might find the entitled conceit of the ignorant, cruel and unjust every bit as perplexing as I do.

But that's only valuable if you don't accept that your ignorance, injustice and cruelty can be improved through secular care and effort in the first place.
What if I don't want to be improved? What if the fact is that I don't give a sh*t about anybody else?
That's why we have man-made laws, a judiciary and a police-force, V3nesl.

And among the evidences that there is there is no god whispering in peoples' hearts and improving them is the statistical behaviour of people themselves.

No matter how much religious propaganda they inflict and how exaggerated their promises of reward and punishment, the religious still need a police-force for their own populations. Meanwhile, the strongest predictors of low crime rates are not religiosity but prosperity, education and an effective rule of law.

Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: I long ago found out that I am not capable of running my own life.
V, I'm sorry but I don't believe you. Rather, I think that from a place of sanctimonious, self-satisfied ignorance, you believe yourself capable of running everyone else's life.

So even the desire to improve - that is from God.
How would you know if it weren't? If you can't answer, yet still assert this proposition, then would not that be an example of self-satisfied ignorance seeking to run everyone else's life?
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 6:01:48 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 4:52:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?
Could you please explain why it should be appropriate that the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief is eternal bliss, while the punishment for a life of kindness, respect and ninety years of skepticism is eternal torture?

If you can explain that,

Of course I can't explain that. That would be an absurd thing to claim.

Look, why don't we cut to the chase and you share what experience(s) led you to your jaundiced view?

then perhaps you have some answer for why ignorance, cruelty and injustice likes to think itself pious.

I don't know that it does. Are you really asking why some ignorant, cruel, and unjust people act pious? That's a different question, you see.

But if you can't, then you might find the entitled conceit of the ignorant, cruel and unjust every bit as perplexing as I do.

Well, I think I need some examples, something concrete. I honestly am not sure what you're alluding to.


But that's only valuable if you don't accept that your ignorance, injustice and cruelty can be improved through secular care and effort in the first place.
What if I don't want to be improved? What if the fact is that I don't give a sh*t about anybody else?
That's why we have man-made laws, a judiciary and a police-force, V3nesl.


And who are these laws made by? Seems to me politics is done by a lot of ignorant, unjust, and cruel people. So this really is quite remarkable, don't you think?

And among the evidences that there is there is no god whispering in peoples' hearts and improving them is the statistical behaviour of people themselves.


Exactly. The rule of law in lawless nations. It's quite remarkable.

No matter how much religious propaganda they inflict and how exaggerated their promises of reward and punishment, the religious still need a police-force for their own populations.

My church has a police force? This is news to me.

Meanwhile, the strongest predictors of low crime rates are not religiosity but prosperity, education and an effective rule of law.


Well, actually, where you have zero crime you don't need the rule of law. But sure, once you've got yours, you don't need to steal any more.

Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: I long ago found out that I am not capable of running my own life.
V, I'm sorry but I don't believe you. Rather, I think that from a place of sanctimonious, self-satisfied ignorance, you believe yourself capable of running everyone else's life.


lol. No, I'm afraid that in real life I'm on the overly passive side. I should have beat my kids more, maybe they'd have better jobs now.

No, it's sort of becoming clear to me - you have someone in mind, but I'm fairly sure that person really isn't very much like me. I'm about as live and let live as you get. I have strong opinions, but I don't force them on anybody except trespassing mice.

So even the desire to improve - that is from God.
How would you know if it weren't? If you can't answer, yet still assert this proposition, then would not that be an example of self-satisfied ignorance seeking to run everyone else's life?

How could this assertion (and I grant it is an assertion) have anything in the world to do with trying to run anybody's life? This is actually more than a bit bizarre, ruv. So like I say, I think you really need to share a little personal history, we need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth.
This space for rent.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,224
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 6:15:51 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
"We need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth."

I am gonna wager that occurs right about...

here -----> "Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: "

Where such opinion is shared by countless other religious folks whom have no special advantage. They just feel they do, and such feelz are reason for condemnation, assumptions of immorality, marginalization, etc.

And I am pretty sure that has been hit on by Ruv, many many maaaaaany many many times now.

But, Ruv, if I didn't get that right, please feel free to correct me on it.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 6:40:33 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 6:01:48 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 4:52:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?
Could you please explain why it should be appropriate that the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief is eternal bliss, while the punishment for a life of kindness, respect and ninety years of skepticism is eternal torture?
Of course I can't explain that. That would be an absurd thing to claim.
I agree. Yet it has been claimed for most of Christian history, which says something unpleasant about Christian dogma, don't you think?

Look, why don't we cut to the chase and you share what experience(s) led you to your jaundiced view?
You're shifting topic from religious populism to me, V. Feel free to raise that in another thread.

Are you really asking why some ignorant, cruel, and unjust people act pious?
Perhaps you've forgotten your original contention. Here it is again to remind you:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?

But if you can't, then you might find the entitled conceit of the ignorant, cruel and unjust every bit as perplexing as I do.
Well, I think I need some examples, something concrete.
Can you think of examples where the religious have vilified people of other faiths, legislated against people not living according to their traditions, threatened them and driven them to suicide, preferred to employ people of their faith where religious persuasion is irrelevant to the work required, protected clergy from the rule of law, prosecuted religious proselytisation with public moneys?

But that's only valuable if you don't accept that your ignorance, injustice and cruelty can be improved through secular care and effort in the first place.
What if I don't want to be improved? What if the fact is that I don't give a sh*t about anybody else?
That's why we have man-made laws, a judiciary and a police-force, V3nesl.
And who are these laws made by? Seems to me politics is done by a lot of ignorant, unjust, and cruel people. So this really is quite remarkable, don't you think?
That people of diverse views nevertheless agreeing to mutual respect, holding one another to compassionate, evidentiary account produces better justice than the rule of a tyrant or a theocracy?

Have you not read much history? Else, why would that surprise you?

No matter how much religious propaganda they inflict and how exaggerated their promises of reward and punishment, the religious still need a police-force for their own populations.
My church has a police force? This is news to me.
It does, and so does every church. It's paid for by your society and occasionally jails parishioners who beat their wives, and clergy who abuse parish children. It also protects your parishioners from the assaults of people who find your faith offensive, and vice-versa.

Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: I long ago found out that I am not capable of running my own life.
V, I'm sorry but I don't believe you. Rather, I think that from a place of sanctimonious, self-satisfied ignorance, you believe yourself capable of running everyone else's life.
lol. No, I'm afraid that in real life I'm on the overly passive side
I don't think your manner is for you to judge, but feel free to do so if you'd like to demonstrate what ignorant self-satisfaction looks like.

So even the desire to improve - that is from God.
How would you know if it weren't? If you can't answer, yet still assert this proposition, then would not that be an example of self-satisfied ignorance seeking to run everyone else's life?
How could this assertion (and I grant it is an assertion) have anything in the world to do with trying to run anybody's life?
Your god isn't simply the creator of the universe. You hold that it has moral authority over every man... and that your faith alone understands it.

So you're claiming you have knowledge (though you can't demonstrate its reliability or authenticate how you got it), and that your knowledge has authority over others.

It's not that hard to work through, V, but you have to agree to be fully accountable for your claims first though.. and that's what populist piety helps avoid.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 7:42:47 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 6:15:51 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
"We need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth."

I am gonna wager that occurs right about...

here -----> "Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: "


And Ruv doesn't quite obviously think himself superior to my religion?

Buy yourselves a complete pair, willya? I confess to having no patience for people who can dish it out but not take it.


And I am pretty sure that has been hit on by Ruv, many many maaaaaany many many times now.


Yeah, males think they're superior to women, whites than blacks, blacks than whites, urban people are smarter than rural people, etc. It's the human experience. Again, grow a pair, and if you don't want to defend your opinions, don't come to a debate forum.
This space for rent.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 7:45:31 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 6:15:51 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
"We need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth."
I am gonna wager that occurs right about...
here -----> "Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: "

You nailed the problem, perfectly, FJ. Although it's not simply presuming advantage over me, but paternalistic superiority over everyone who disagrees with the populist, presuppositional sanctimony underpinning one particular interpretation of one particular canon of one particular faith of one particular subculture of one particular civilisation of one particular era in human development.

And 'bad taste' is right, because the entire ignorant, conceited, cruel, self-serving edifice is morally and intellectually distasteful. :p
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 8:10:46 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 6:40:33 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:01:48 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 4:52:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?
Could you please explain why it should be appropriate that the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief is eternal bliss, while the punishment for a life of kindness, respect and ninety years of skepticism is eternal torture?
Of course I can't explain that. That would be an absurd thing to claim.
I agree. Yet it has been claimed for most of Christian history, which says something unpleasant about Christian dogma, don't you think?


I am not aware of any religion, much less orthodox christianity, that claims anything like this, which you damn well know. Come on, this is pathetic man, you can't even honestly state the position you disagree with?

Look, why don't we cut to the chase and you share what experience(s) led you to your jaundiced view?
You're shifting topic from religious populism to me, V. Feel free to raise that in another thread.


So you'll give me an honest, non-evasive answer if I start another thread? You can tell me to mind my own business, you know. Tell me what burr you've got up your butt or don't, it's your call.

Are you really asking why some ignorant, cruel, and unjust people act pious?
Perhaps you've forgotten your original contention. Here it is again to remind you:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.

lol! That was your contention! That was what I originally disputed.

Can you think of examples where the religious have vilified people of other faiths, legislated against people not living according to their traditions, threatened them and driven them to suicide, preferred to employ people of their faith where religious persuasion is irrelevant to the work required, protected clergy from the rule of law, prosecuted religious proselytisation with public moneys?


I can think of things that redheaded people have done. I was expecting a tad more intellectual rigor here.

My church has a police force? This is news to me.
It does, and so does every church. It's paid for by your society and occasionally jails parishioners who beat their wives, and clergy who abuse parish children. It also protects your parishioners from the assaults of people who find your faith offensive, and vice-versa.


I'm starting to get the idea that you're just a little looney. Weren't you just telling me people can do law and order without religion? Honestly, I'm confused by what you may be trying to say.

I don't think your manner is for you to judge, but feel free to do so if you'd like to demonstrate what ignorant self-satisfaction looks like.


lol. no, good one, 10 points to Gryfinndor.


Your god isn't simply the creator of the universe. You hold that it has moral authority over every man... and that your faith alone understands it.


Yeah, so if God has authority, I don't, obviously. And again - I think you know you are being one of those ignorant and unjust and cruel people when you accuse me of thinking nobody outside of Christianity has any knowledge of God.

So you're claiming you have knowledge (though you can't demonstrate its reliability or authenticate how you got it), and that your knowledge has authority over others.


I think 2+2=4. What do you want me to say? "Oh, pardon me, I'm really no better than you, and this is just my opinion, and pardon me, and I'm sorry, but I really do think 2+2=4".

It's not that hard to work through, V, but you have to agree to be fully accountable for your claims first though.. and that's what populist piety helps avoid.

Accountable to whom? See, Ruv,it's just nonsense, this position you're trying to be all sanctimonious about. If there's no God of any sort, then quit with the phony moralizing. We're all going to be non-existent in short order, so quit asking other people to participate in your coping mechanisms.
This space for rent.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 9:10:57 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 7:45:31 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:15:51 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
"We need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth."
I am gonna wager that occurs right about...
here -----> "Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: "

You nailed the problem, perfectly, FJ. Although it's not simply presuming advantage over me, but paternalistic superiority

oh come on. The entire thought was "I have a great advantage ... I am not qualified to run my own life". That's paternalistic superiority? Oy vey.

Either you two are profoundly insecure, or profoundly arrogant. I suspect it's both, actually.

over everyone who disagrees with the populist, presuppositional sanctimony underpinning one particular interpretation of one particular canon of one particular faith of one particular subculture of one particular civilisation of one particular era in human development.

And 'bad taste' is right, because the entire ignorant, conceited, cruel, self-serving edifice is morally and intellectually distasteful. :p

So I think I'll just reiterate my main point and let this go for today: It is your moral hyperventilating that I think is empty. I may be speculating in my worldview, but my word view is coherent, yours is not. And often the key to evaluating a proposition is to follow it to its logical conclusion. I don't think you've come anywhere close to doing this with your religion-hating.
This space for rent.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 9:13:07 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 8:10:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:40:33 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:01:48 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 4:52:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?
Could you please explain why it should be appropriate that the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief is eternal bliss, while the punishment for a life of kindness, respect and ninety years of skepticism is eternal torture?
Of course I can't explain that. That would be an absurd thing to claim.
I agree. Yet it has been claimed for most of Christian history, which says something unpleasant about Christian dogma, don't you think?
I am not aware of any religion, much less orthodox christianity, that claims anything like this
Setting aside the legitimacy of a modern Protestant's claims to knowledge of Christian orthodoxy, could you please identify those parts of the Bible that illustrate how expressing faith and contrition at the end of life can lead to salvation? Could you please identify those parts of the Bible indicating that there is no salvation other than through faith? Finally, please could you identify those parts of the Gospels in which Jesus endorses the existence of hell and its destination for the unsaved?

Look, why don't we cut to the chase and you share what experience(s) led you to your jaundiced view?
You're shifting topic from religious populism to me, V. Feel free to raise that in another thread.
So you'll give me an honest, non-evasive answer if I start another thread? You can tell me to mind my own business, you know. Tell me what burr you've got up your butt or don't, it's your call.
I can tell you that I have no specific personal experience leading me to dislike religion, but in another thread I'd be happy to explain how, despite growing up in a society that generally considers religion to be benign, I came to believe otherwise.

Are you really asking why some ignorant, cruel, and unjust people act pious?
Perhaps you've forgotten your original contention. Here it is again to remind you:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
lol! That was your contention! That was what I originally disputed.
You're welcome to continue to do that, so long as you stop trying to alter the position you claim to be disputing.

Can you think of examples where the religious have vilified people of other faiths, legislated against people not living according to their traditions, threatened them and driven them to suicide, preferred to employ people of their faith where religious persuasion is irrelevant to the work required, protected clergy from the rule of law, prosecuted religious proselytisation with public moneys?
I was expecting a tad more intellectual rigor here.
You asked for examples, which in the interests of rigour I indicated. So now in the interests of rigour, let's look at their scope and impact.

1) Please state the century in which Christian persecution of its own heretics commenced, and state the century in which major Christian churches stopped vilifying heretics in favour of expressing brotherly love.
2) For how long have Western and Eastern orthodoxy been estranged? Please explain how this estrangement has served Christian ideals and goals.
3) Who were the Cathars? How were they destroyed? By what means were they executed? Please name the religious leaders of the day who condemned this action as unchristian.
4) For how many centuries did Christians persecute Jews? Please nominate the century in which this ceased, and the event that led Christians to realise they'd been barbaric rather than pious. Conjecture why that hadn't been realised beforehand.
5) In 1620 a colony of religious refugees, founded a nation that would grow to build an egalitarian secular democracy specifically designed to prevent the centuries of apalling religious persecutions that birthed it. Please name the nation, and the faith whose slaughter and forced conversions led to these religious refugees.
6) For how many centuries have Christians vilified Muslims? Please nominate the century in which this ceased, in favour of brotherly love.
7) Please nominate the century in which Christians first favoured the execution, whipping or imprisonment of homosexuals, and the year in which the last antihomosexual statute was removed from the lawbooks of every Christian-majority nation.
8) Which major world church has systematically opposed the use of condoms in Africa as a means to prevent a lethal pandemic?

After you've answered these questions, please feel free to argue that populist Christian sanctimony has had little to no effect on the affairs of Christians, citizens of Christian countries, and the world at large.

My church has a police force? This is news to me.
It does, and so does every church. It's paid for by your society and occasionally jails parishioners who beat their wives, and clergy who abuse parish children. It also protects your parishioners from the assaults of people who find your faith offensive, and vice-versa.
I'm confused by what you may be trying to say.
Not for the first time. Are you just grumbling, or you have a question?

Your god isn't simply the creator of the universe. You hold that it has moral authority over every man... and that your faith alone understands it.
Yeah, so if God has authority, I don't, obviously.
Except -- apparently -- the authority to say who God is and what God wants.

So you're claiming you have knowledge (though you can't demonstrate its reliability or authenticate how you got it), and that your knowledge has authority over others.
I think 2+2=4. What do you want me to say?
You could begin by acknowledging that the mathematical community has never split into 40,000 sects arguing over how to do addition, and that such an analogy is therefore conceited, dishonest and evasive.

It's not that hard to work through, V, but you have to agree to be fully accountable for your claims first though.. and that's what populist piety helps avoid.
Accountable to whom?
To everyone your sanctimonious pronouncements affect, since that's what it means to be ethical.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 10:42:07 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 9:13:07 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 8:10:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:40:33 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:01:48 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 4:52:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?
Could you please explain why it should be appropriate that the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief is eternal bliss, while the punishment for a life of kindness, respect and ninety years of skepticism is eternal torture?
Of course I can't explain that. That would be an absurd thing to claim.
I agree. Yet it has been claimed for most of Christian history, which says something unpleasant about Christian dogma, don't you think?
I am not aware of any religion, much less orthodox christianity, that claims anything like this
Setting aside the legitimacy of a modern Protestant's claims to knowledge of Christian orthodoxy,

And here I am, before the end of the day, lol. can't help myself. Anyway, yeah, you better set that aside, since you will further down want to lump me in with first century christians.

could you please identify those parts of the Bible that illustrate how expressing faith and contrition at the end of life can lead to salvation?

You said, and I cut and paste: "the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief"

So, ninety years of faith to start, no deathbed conversion, and you suggest that intolerant cruelty is rewarded. So congratulations, you get me to dignify your nonsense with a detailed response.


I can tell you that I have no specific personal experience leading me to dislike religion, but in another thread I'd be happy to explain how, despite growing up in a society that generally considers religion to be benign, I came to believe otherwise.


Ok, so it's competition for modern lefty dogma. I get it, I really do. I think it's crap, but I understand the appeal of the Bernie Sanders kind of thing.

Perhaps you've forgotten your original contention. Here it is again to remind you:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
....

After you've answered these questions, please feel free to argue that populist Christian sanctimony has had little to no effect on the affairs of Christians, citizens of Christian countries, and the world at large.


I was arguing your contention above, remember? It's a subtly different point. I still think it's a nonsensical point. You have a steaming pile of general anti-religious sentiment that you are treating as if it were logic, and it's not.

Your god isn't simply the creator of the universe. You hold that it has moral authority over every man... and that your faith alone understands it.
Yeah, so if God has authority, I don't, obviously.
Except -- apparently -- the authority to say who God is and what God wants.


No, lol, can you really not see the difference between having an opinion, or even certain knowledge, and having authority? Dude, you really are very sloppy in how you think about this stuff. Again, 2+2=4. I'm quite certain of that, it's true by definition, but I have zero authority on this matter. You're not going to baffle me into agreeing that there's something indecent about seeing that there must be a creator.

... and that such an analogy is therefore conceited, dishonest and evasive.


really?

It's not that hard to work through, V, but you have to agree to be fully accountable for your claims first though.. and that's what populist piety helps avoid.
Accountable to whom?
To everyone your sanctimonious pronouncements affect, since that's what it means to be ethical.

Ok, I can live with that. I don't say anything I know to be harmful. What I say might be painful or make you spitting mad, but I don't say anything I think would harm you. I want everyone to find eternal life. So excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me!
This space for rent.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2016 11:27:20 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 10:42:07 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 9:13:07 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 8:10:46 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:40:33 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:01:48 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 4:52:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/8/2016 1:09:04 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/7/2016 10:29:46 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
Religion sells to ignorant, cruel, unjust people the populist idea that your ignorance, cruelty and injustice can be made pious, exceptional, and ultimately worthy through the right rituals and beliefs.
And why would ignorant, cruel and unjust people want to be made pious?
Could you please explain why it should be appropriate that the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief is eternal bliss, while the punishment for a life of kindness, respect and ninety years of skepticism is eternal torture?
Of course I can't explain that. That would be an absurd thing to claim.
I agree. Yet it has been claimed for most of Christian history, which says something unpleasant about Christian dogma, don't you think?
I am not aware of any religion, much less orthodox christianity, that claims anything like this
Setting aside the legitimacy of a modern Protestant's claims to knowledge of Christian orthodoxy,
Anyway, yeah, you better set that aside, since you will further down want to lump me in with first century christians.
I never think of you as a first century Christian, V. However, please don't ask me to distinguish you from a conservative, parochial, antimodernist American Protestant of a century ago, though.. I'm not sure I could do that.

could you please identify those parts of the Bible that illustrate how expressing faith and contrition at the end of life can lead to salvation?
You said, and I cut and paste: "the reward for a life of intolerant cruelty, self-importance and ninety years of belief"
Mm-hmm... that'd include a belief in the power of deathbed repentances, wouldn't it?

I can tell you that I have no specific personal experience leading me to dislike religion, but in another thread I'd be happy to explain how, despite growing up in a society that generally considers religion to be benign, I came to believe otherwise.
Ok, so it's competition for modern lefty dogma. I get it, I really do.
You're very good at understanding your own strawmen, V. It's almost as though you create them for that specific purpose.

After you've answered these questions, please feel free to argue that populist Christian sanctimony has had little to no effect on the affairs of Christians, citizens of Christian countries, and the world at large.
I was arguing your contention above, remember?
You've yet to argue anything, so far as I can tell. There've been insults, straw-men, quibbles and evasions, but if you want to argue that religion as a whole, Christianity in particular or Christian fundamentalism specifically isn't populist, or that populism doesn't routinely lead to unexamined cruelty and injustice, please go right ahead.

Your god isn't simply the creator of the universe. You hold that it has moral authority over every man... and that your faith alone understands it.
Yeah, so if God has authority, I don't, obviously.
Except -- apparently -- the authority to say who God is and what God wants.
No, lol, can you really not see the difference between having an opinion, or even certain knowledge, and having authority?
No, I'm afraid cannot see a difference between asserting the intellectual authority to interpret a supreme moral authority and asserting supreme moral authority by proxy,

It's not that hard to work through, V, but you have to agree to be fully accountable for your claims first though.. and that's what populist piety helps avoid.
Accountable to whom?
To everyone your sanctimonious pronouncements affect, since that's what it means to be ethical.
I don't say anything I know to be harmful.
And you check that how? Against your presupposed intellectual authority to interpret the commands of a presupposed supreme moral authority?

That's perhaps the funniest thing I've ever seen you write. :)
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,224
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 1:36:57 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 7:42:47 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:15:51 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
"We need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth."

I am gonna wager that occurs right about...

here -----> "Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: "


And Ruv doesn't quite obviously think himself superior to my religion?

It would be yours to demonstrate. Considering you said it nearly verbatim, I would challenge you to find such an instance when superiority was declared.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,224
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 2:08:13 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/8/2016 7:42:47 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:15:51 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
"We need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth."

I am gonna wager that occurs right about...

here -----> "Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: "


And Ruv doesn't quite obviously think himself superior to my religion?

Buy yourselves a complete pair, willya? I confess to having no patience for people who can dish it out but not take it.


And I am pretty sure that has been hit on by Ruv, many many maaaaaany many many times now.


Yeah, males think they're superior to women, whites than blacks, blacks than whites, urban people are smarter than rural people, etc. It's the human experience. Again, grow a pair, and if you don't want to defend your opinions, don't come to a debate forum.

Ironically, my position is self evident: there is no proof of a God. It now becomes yours to not only state He/She/It exists, but then to describe the qualities of such an entity in order to shoe horn them into reality, and yet outside of it where said is not directly observable, only experienced as a means through the traits you described.

If you wanna talk about growing a pair, stop getting pissy when people say thing thing you are describing doesn't make sense, or flat out assuming your perfect description is true (and its other's comprehension problem, of course!) and then getting further frustrated by the fact it HAS to be you describing the thing, because the thing doesn't, won't, or most likely can't describe itself.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
v3nesl
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 12:40:20 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/9/2016 2:08:13 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/8/2016 7:42:47 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 3/8/2016 6:15:51 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
"We need to know how you got such a bad taste for religion in your mouth."

I am gonna wager that occurs right about...

here -----> "Ruv, I have a great advantage over you: "


And Ruv doesn't quite obviously think himself superior to my religion?

Buy yourselves a complete pair, willya? I confess to having no patience for people who can dish it out but not take it.


And I am pretty sure that has been hit on by Ruv, many many maaaaaany many many times now.


Yeah, males think they're superior to women, whites than blacks, blacks than whites, urban people are smarter than rural people, etc. It's the human experience. Again, grow a pair, and if you don't want to defend your opinions, don't come to a debate forum.


Ironically, my position is self evident: there is no proof of a God.

No, and there can't be proof of a first cause, just as there can't be proof of the point or line in plane geometry. What you must do is examine the results built upon these intuitive concepts.

You and Ruv DO believe in morality (in its most generic sense), and believe is the right word. For you two morality is something that 'just is'.

The concept of God doesn't explain morality, actually, it's just that having a creator makes it reasonable that we have a moral compass that is accurate to some degree. The atheist concept of right and wrong is one of what you call Pure F'in Magic.

You guys will often attempt to explain the moral instinct as adaptation or something like that, but you fail to see that this argument assumes that survival is a good thing, so this can't explain good itself.

It now becomes yours to not only state He/She/It exists, but then to describe the qualities of such an entity in order to shoe horn them into reality,

No shoehorning necessary. Like the point and line in plane geometry, the concept of God explains the moral instinct, whereas atheism quite literally explains nothing.


If you wanna talk about growing a pair, stop getting pissy

Always love the peewee herman arguing technique - no YOU'RE pissy! But look, my flaw is in enjoying cutting through atheist pap like a hot knife through butter. I have to remember to be more sensitive to your feelings, I'm sure.
This space for rent.