Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
"Oklahoma Republican wants to forbid suicidal LGBT kids from meeting gay-friendly therapists"
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/oklahoma-lawmaker-wants-to-outlaw-depres...
"Longtime priest in the Bronx accused of sexually abusing minors"
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx/bronx-priest-accused-sexually-...
"Egyptian writer Faitma Naoot sentenced to three years in prison for talking about animal rights"
"after being found guilty of insulting Islam"
http://www.albawaba.com/loop/egyptian-writer-faitma-naoot-sentenced-thre...
"UK: Cult leader sentenced to 23 years for abuse, rape"
"Prosecutors said 75-year-old Aravindan Balakrishnan, known as “Comrade Bala,” abused and brainwashed his followers into believing he had God-like powers, ensuring they were too scared to leave the tiny radical communist group he ran in south London."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/uk-cult-leader-sentenced-to-...
Hi Pragmatic
It’s been quite some time since we last chatted. Hope you are doing well. I was going through your posts and thought I will share my 2 cents on it. For the sake of brevity, let me summarize my views in a few points.
1
I am sure you would agree that equally horrible crimes have been committed by people with no faith as well. So, that sort of neutralizes the claim that religion is the reason for violence in the world.
2
What that shows is that violence is part of human nature, and no matter what the persuasion is, we have a tendency to take out our feral nature. It’s just that we justify it using our worldview (atheism or religion).
3
Why religionists seem to be more violent is due to the following reasons: religions have more adherents in the world and a longer history than atheism. Therefore, you find more examples of violence there. Atheism took on an organized, institutional form only in the last century through communism. And some of the ugliest crimes were committed during those regimes. Secondly, labels of religion are more manifest than atheism. There is no way you can tell a person’s atheism until he spells it out. Whereas religious labels get tagged on to you with your names. So, when Abdullah does a crime, it is a Muslim doing a crime – but for all you know he may be an atheist at heart.
4
You are not particularly distinguishing crimes done by people of religion and crimes done under the instigation of religion. For example, abuse of children by the church clearly happened through a violation of religious tenets, and hence those who perpetrated them did so because they were not being loyal to their faith. Such crimes cannot be blamed on religion.
5
But there are crimes done out of inspiration from religious teachings. I agree. Here comes the moot question of interpretation. All of the atrocities you showed in your examples of religious violence are done and condoned only by a very small (negligent) percentage of faithful in the world – which shows that this is not the dominant interpretation of any faith. It’s the same as how you would distant yourself from the ideology of Maoist rebels – although they share your atheism.
@ valiya s sajjad
Hi, Valiya.
Welcome back.
I understand your wish to defend religion, but (no ill will intended) you do so from a position of wishful thinking and naivety.
1
"I am sure you would agree that equally horrible crimes have been committed by people with no faith as well."
You are way too quick to presume that I would agree with you. :)
Of course you don't need faith to commit horrible acts. Selfish greed, sociopaths and psychopaths have committed many atrocities. However...
(As it is outside of the argumentation, I'm excluding "regular" criminality driven by desperation, stupidity, drugs, etc.)
Such problems are in my view mostly caused by lack of empathy for others. It's a self preserving behavior, where they are prepared to do just about anything to get what they want. Some driven by just as illogical and irrational doctrines as those of religion. These people are greatly outnumbered by the faith fuelled perpetrators that are constantly causing torment and death around the world.
You would hardly see a sociopath hijacking a passenger plane and then crash it into a skyscraper filled with people. You wont see angry anti-theist atheists running into a crowd of believers and blow themselves up. You won't see an atheist boy mistakenly raising his hand to a question, run home and chop his hand off to prove he didn't mean to raise his hand.
Pure selfish greed and political doctrines that goes against basic human rights are my enemies as well, but religion is in the lead.
2
"violence is part of human nature, and no matter what the persuasion is, we have a tendency to take out our feral nature..."
I certainly agree with that part.
We are animals, largely driven by the same instincts as other animals are. Our intellects allows us to take a certain amount of control, but we need see reality to fully understand consequences of our actions. Delusion of "being righteous" or "getting eternal life" is not the way to achieve that.
"...It’s just that we justify it using our worldview (atheism or religion)."
Wow! That's a bit over the top, don't you think? Claiming that atheism is used to justify violent acts?
Please, provide us with some examples of how "lack of belief in a god/gods" is used to justify violence.
3
"religions have more adherents in the world...", of course.
"...and a longer history than atheism.", eh... I'll give you, a more coherent and documented history.
"Atheism took on an organized, institutional form only in the last century through communism."
Again, atheism and communism are not the same. Communism is a political ideology that in some degree has been used to replace religion. Atheism is a personal lack of belief in a god.
"when Abdullah does a crime, it is a Muslim doing a crime – but for all you know he may be an atheist at heart."
Sure. If the crime is related to personal grudges, criminality or desperation.
But when the crime is actively justified with a doctrine that is disconnected from reality, it's probably religious or a political doctrine infused with religious properties. An alarming amount of vile actions are committed every day by people who openly justifies their actions with religion.
(It sounds as if you are saying that "Muslim" is a race, not just a religion. Can a Muslim be an atheist? I thought such a person would be referred to as an ex-Muslim?)
4
"abuse of children by the church clearly happened through a violation of religious tenets, and hence those who perpetrated them did so because they were not being loyal to their faith. Such crimes cannot be blamed on religion."
Such an argument can only be born out of ignorance about religions!
Religions teach very twisted and unhealthy guidelines for sexual relations. It stigmatizes sex and induces unnecessary guilt. It actively tries to counteract non-religious education about sex and instead teaches abstinence, in some cases while simultaneously forbidding contraceptives. But the animal we are, does not respond well to abstinence. Furthermore, within Catholicism there is a loophole that allows anyone to be saved and get welcomed into heaven, even if it's done on the deathbed after a lifetime of crimes against humanity or even against Catholicism.
Even without that loophole, religion is not much of a deterrent against criminality (of any kind). Because religious people who are also criminals, seem to have no problem to rationalize their guilt away.
Examples, interviews with inmates in the U.S:
"Detroit (male, 47, carjacker, robber): Well, you know, what I think about a lot is, I shoulda’ been dead a long time ago. God has kept me around for a certain reason you know..."
"Smitty (Male, 45, Drug Addict, robber): Yeah, I was going to church. Baptist Church. But then I converted to Islam. I’m a believer man. I believe in all that, in God. Someday I will go to Mecca for the Hajj...", "...See, I know Allah knows that this is not the life I wanted. I think that it is the graciousness of Allah that I have been protected."
Young Stunna, a 23-year-old male robber: "Well, you do get punished for doing wrong, but not if you don’t have no choice. It’s like this here. See, if I go and rob a motherfucker then I’m still going to Heaven because...uhm...it’s like, Jesus knows I ain’t have no choice, you know? He know I got a decent heart."
Cool, a 25 year-old male drug dealer: "The way it work is this. You go out and do some bad and then you ask for forgiveness and Jesus have to give it to you, and you know wipe the slate clean. So, I always do a quick little prayer right before and then I’m cool with Jesus. Also another thing is this; if you doing some wrong to another bad person, like if I go rob a dope dealer or a molester or something, then it don’t count against me because it’s like I’m giving punishment to them for Jesus. That’s God’s will."
Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258192100_With_God_on_my_side_T...
Is see it like this:
Religious faith is personal interpretation inside peoples minds. As such, they tend to have an egocentric world view (god hears me, god loves me, etc), which makes it easy to give oneself a special relationship with god. If necessary, they do this and uses that special relationship to justify being exempt from guilt, for whatever reason the person can come up with, as in the examples above.
5
"All of the atrocities you showed in your examples of religious violence are done and condoned only by a very small (negligent) percentage of faithful in the world"
Sure. There are many moderate-to-liberal religious people who are good descent people.
Nevertheless, they keep indoctrinating the next generation with the same unprovable beliefs, and to varying degrees continuing the "traditions" of the less aggressive but still negative and uninformed parts of religious faith: Misogyny, homophobia, sexual repression, sexual guilt and so on.
Also, my examples are only a small percentage of the horrors that unjustified faith is causing. And there is very likely a huge unknown amount of atrocities going on every single day.
"It’s the same as how you would distant yourself from the ideology of Maoist rebels – although they share your atheism."
Your misconceptions about atheism are so profound that it seems suspiciously like intentional misrepresentation...
Atheism is STILL just a rejection of a specific belief.
It is not a political doctrine, it is not connected to Marxism / Leninism / Maoism / Nationalism.
I don't read the same literature as the Maoist rebels.
I don't hold the same convictions as the Maoist rebels.
I don't have the same ideals the Maoist rebels.
What is there to distance myself from?
But a moderate Muslim, still...
...reads the same "holy" literature as Jihadists and Islamists.
...holds many of the same convictions as Jihadists and Islamists.
...have many of the same ideals as Jihadists and Islamists.
The same principle applies to all other religions as well, but Islam is the absolute worst example in today's world.
@ pragmatic
Hi. Nice to hear your argumentation again. Here are my responses:
“You would hardly see a sociopath hijacking a passenger plane and then crash it into a skyscraper filled with people… Pure selfish greed and political doctrines that goes against basic human rights are my enemies as well, but religion is in the lead.”
Let’s get some basic facts right, before we proceed. The two groups of extreme people you mentioned – the religious zealot and the sociopath – are a very, very tiny minority in the world. However, a majority of crimes in the world are perpetrated by the third group of people you mentioned – those driven by selfish greed and such basic instincts. And these are normal people.
This is I think is the most important point to note.
We know what drives a religious zealot and a psychopath to commit their crimes. But they are a fringe minority. The moot question is, what drives these normal people (who form the majority) to commit crimes? Yes, we know it’s greed. But what is the source of greed? It is MATERIALISM.
Materialism is the notion that there is no higher truth than the material world and that we’ve got to make the most of this life.
Of course, when a person commits a greed-driven crime, he or she may not be doing so based on a text-book knowledge of materialistic philosophy. He or she may not even be aware that they are being materialistic at that point of time. But that’s what the truth is.
Now materialism to me is a creation of atheism. This point is explained in greater detail below.
“Claiming that atheism is used to justify violent acts?
Please, provide us with some examples of how "lack of belief in a god/gods" is used to justify violence.”
I think I need to clarify certain things here. An ideology cannot exist on its own in a sort of a limbo. It is always accompanied by a worldview. A religion is actually a worldview that stems from God belief. Similarly, materialism is a worldview that stems from atheism.
You cannot simply say, “I am an atheist… and that’s it” There is a worldview that arises with that conviction of No God. Just as belief in God leads to various religions – each of which is a worldview, atheism also leads to various worldviews – materialism, epicureanism, naturalism are some of them, and if you want some political worldviews arising from atheism then you have communism, Maoism, naxalism and so on. Eugenics is a worldview which arguably took off from Darwinism.
“Again, atheism and communism are not the same. Communism is a political ideology that in some degree has been used to replace religion. Atheism is a personal lack of belief in a god.”
As explained above communism is a worldview that stems from atheism. You cannot divorce one from the other so easily. Probably, you may not like to subscribe to communism – that’s like how I being a believer in God do not subscribe to Christianity. The premise can be the same, yet the worldviews can differ.
"(It sounds as if you are saying that "Muslim" is a race, not just a religion. Can a Muslim be an atheist? I thought such a person would be referred to as an ex-Muslim?)”
No, I took that example of “Abdullah” to say that it is hard to get an exact estimate of atheism-driven crimes, because there is no label that can identify an atheist easily. Whereas, say a person by name Abdullah (who doesn’t believe in any religion) commits a crime, he will still be considered a muslim by virtue of his name – unless he openly confesses his persuasion.
“Is see it like this:
Religious faith is personal interpretation inside peoples minds. As such, they tend to have an egocentric world view (god hears me, god loves me, etc), which makes it easy to give oneself a special relationship with god. If necessary, they do this and uses that special relationship to justify being exempt from guilt, for whatever reason the person can come up with, as in the examples above.”
What you are actually referring to here are the worldviews emerging from God Belief. Just as you are not associated with Maoism, although you do share their atheism, I don’t think I have any need to defend these cults you have referred to, although I share their theism.
“Your misconceptions about atheism are so profound that it seems suspiciously like intentional misrepresentation...
Atheism is STILL just a rejection of a specific belief.
It is not a political doctrine, it is not connected to Marxism / Leninism / Maoism / Nationalism.
I don't read the same literature as the Maoist rebels.
I don't hold the same convictions as the Maoist rebels.
I don't have the same ideals the Maoist rebels.”
I have addressed this issue in depth on top. And what you have in common with them in addition to atheism… Well, I can’t answer that unless you tell me what your views are on sexual libertinism, on marriage, on world economic order, on imperialism and is solutions, on dialectical materialism, on religions etc… But I am sure there will be a lot of crossing of paths between you.
@ Valiya
"The moot question is, what drives these normal people (who form the majority) to commit crimes? Yes, we know it’s greed. But what is the source of greed? It is MATERIALISM."
Stating your opinion as fact again... I'm sure I do that too, but I try to avoid it.
I think that money, real estate and status always translates into power. And that greed in the psychological sense comes from a thirst for power, that fills a need for feeling successful, that ultimately feeds our self-worth.
Anyway, greed and clergy has always gone hand in hand, religious leaders have always had power and often wealth. I see no signs at all that religiosity diminishes either greed or criminality. But take note that I'm not trying to claim that religious people are automatically greedy, nor that atheists are automatically selfless.
However, statistically non-religious are less criminal, have less divorces, have less abortions, have less domestic violence, are less nationalistic and racist. Yes, even when you compare relative to the size of the population of non-religious.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/07/16/what-percentage-...
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/2015/04/countries-free-of-religio...
"...But that’s what the truth is."
I'm not at all impressed, nor inclined to believe them, when people who believe in unprovable supernatural assumptions, shamelessly claim to know the truth.
"I think I need to clarify certain things here. An ideology cannot exist on its own...",
"You cannot simply say, “I am an atheist…",
"communism is a worldview that stems from atheism. You cannot divorce one from the other so easily."
Just more misconception / misrepresentation of what atheism is...
"what you have in common with them [Maoist rebels] in addition to atheism… Well, I can’t answer that unless...", "...But I am sure there will be a lot of crossing of paths between you."
I don't even get what such aimless argumentation is supposed to achieve... Anger? Shame?
I can probably compare you with Josef Mengele and find similarities, but what would be the purpose of such a irrelevant and passive-aggressive exercise?
---
To me it seems clear that you are trying to misrepresent atheism and make it out to be some sort of nasty villain. But who is it you are trying to convince?
You clearly have a skewed view of what the word "atheism" means, and unfortunately it seems you're don't have much interest to learn about it. I will nevertheless make yet another attempt at trying to decipher it.
Atheism is not a belief system. (It just doesn't qualify as such)
Atheism is not an ideology. (It just doesn't qualify as such)
In it's broadest sense, atheism is only "the lack of belief in a god or gods".
That's not a belief, it is a *lack* of belief.
Example: You tell me there is a god, but have nothing substantial to back it up with. So I don't believe your assertion that there is a god. If that god actually were to show up, I would believe.
Within atheism there is a subset of "strong atheism" or "gnostic atheism". They have a belief that a specific god, or all gods, does not exists (see the image I added). Some even claim to know for sure. But that *still* does not qualify as a belief system.
There is no ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere, but it is common that they adhere to secular philosophies like humanism and skepticism.
I get that atheism also infers some kind of world view, but repeating "Materialism" and "Communism" as if you are trying to bring atheism to shame, is just misrepresentation. Atheism is not shackled down like you seem to suggest, it is on the contrary free of the shackles. It doesn't automatically create political world views and it doesn't automatically make people greedy materialists. That is just narrow minded propaganda spread by religious bigots who see reason as an enemy. Is this actually what you have been taught?
For you to continue to use words like "ideology" and "belief system" to refer to atheism, and to claim that atheism is used to justify violence, and to continue to drag communism in to atheism, is only a testament to your unwillingness to acknowledge what the word actually means.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
@ Pragmatic
“Stating your opinion as fact again... I'm sure I do that too, but I try to avoid it.
I think that money, real estate and status always translates into power. And that greed in the psychological sense comes from a thirst for power, that fills a need for feeling successful, that ultimately feeds our self-worth.”
I am not trying to compete for a definition of greed. I don’t have a problem with your definition of it either. But what I am saying is that what drives this “thirst for power” or however you would like to define it is the worldview that ‘power is all that matters in this world, and to attain that you can follow any means”. This worldview is what I call materialism, because if you believe in God and accountability to Him, then that will take precedence over your personal greed.
“However, statistically non-religious are less criminal, have less divorces, have less abortions, have less domestic violence, are less nationalistic and racist. Yes, even when you compare relative to the size of the population of non-religious.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/07/16/what-percentage-...
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/2015/04/countries-free-of-religio...”
Pragmatic, I think you have pasted the first link without having read through it. It is in fact mocking at these statistics that favor atheists. Which also partially answers the points in your second link. However, what I would like to draw your attention to is that statistics of this kind, while they do give us some perspective, they don’t paint the whole picture. Let me explain:
Firstly, you have to understand that civilizations are in a constant flux of rise and fall. These cycles occur due to a complex set of factors – which would be naïve to simplify under a single overarching premise of belief vs non-belief. Yes, the Middle East, most of which are religiously-oriented countries is in a state of backwardness. But is it because of religion, or is it because of the western imperialistic agenda? All the puppet dictators of the Middle East are propped by the US, leading to massive political instability, creating a highly unfavorable environment for the advancement of science or art? Even a cursory understanding of history would show you that Islamic civilization was at one point the torch bearers of science and advancement. How come back then religion was driving advancement, and all of a sudden it’s drawing humanity backwards now? Your theory against religion would be inconsistent in that case.
But since we are in the subject of stats, here are two stats… the first one says atheists are the least charitable. The second one puts Muslims as the least promiscuous people in the world. But once again, just based on these stats I wouldn’t commit your folly of jumping to conclusions on any group.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/21/muslims-give-most_n_3630830.html
http://asr.sagepub.com/content/77/5/723.full
“In it's broadest sense, atheism is only "the lack of belief in a god or gods".
That's not a belief, it is a *lack* of belief.”
I never said atheism is a belief system. What I was trying to prove in my post is that atheism, like all other isms, brings with it a baggage of worldviews. Are you saying that you don’t have any worldview? Then what are you doing in this forum trying to argue about rights and wrongs? Yes, you may say that your arguments are backed by science (which is debatable), but you do hold to a certain view of what’s good for the world and what’s not. That’s your worldview.
If you read Marxism you will understand how Marx construed communism based on materialistic philosophy, which is based on atheism. That’s why I say that communism is an atheistic worldview. That fact that you don’t buy into it, doesn’t make it different.
“I get that atheism also infers some kind of world view, but repeating "Materialism" and "Communism" as if you are trying to bring atheism to shame, is just misrepresentation. Atheism is not shackled down like you seem to suggest, it is on the contrary free of the shackles.”
I don’t know how you have understood worldviews. Let me just give an example, so you will see my point of view. Imagine that I don’t believe that there is any higher truth beyond the material world that I can sense and understand. Therefore there is no God. That automatically entails that all religions are baseless. Without a creator, we are random products of evolution with no specific purpose in life other than what we make of it. Some felt that the only reasonable purpose of life is to maximize pleasure as much as possible. How do you maximize pleasure? Marx used his reasoning and felt that real pleasure lies in the destruction of private property – where you have a world of equals, with no one working for personal gains but for the good of the society. That’s a complete worldview. All this stems from materialism, which is based on the negation of all things immaterial (or supernatural).
Ask yourself what you think is your purpose of life? And ask how to get there? And you will see your worldview unfolding. With it comes your baggage of rights and wrongs – which can also be read as your value system.
@ Valiya
"if you believe in God and accountability to Him, then that will take precedence over your personal greed."
Perhaps in a certain percentage of individuals, but it is very clear that for some individuals and for the clergy, it has no effect like you are describing. My posts are only the tip of the tip of the iceberg, there are countless examples, and a lot doesn't even reach any news.
"Pragmatic, I think you have pasted the first link without having read through it. It is in fact mocking at these statistics that favor atheists."
Don't think so... although it's a little self criticizing and honest. Perhaps you should look again.
"statistics of this kind, while they do give us some perspective, they don’t paint the whole picture. Let me explain:"
Yes, I'm quite aware of that thank you. Saying that won't make it go away though.
"How come back then religion was driving advancement, and all of a sudden it’s drawing humanity backwards now? Your theory against religion would be inconsistent in that case."
That religion was "driving advancement" is highly debatable in many ways. I'm not even going to go into that here as it's a big topic by itself. Yes, Baghdad was the scientific centre of the world once, but Islam has successfully pounded that out of the Muslim world.
"But since we are in the subject of stats, here are two stats… the first one says atheists are the least charitable."
Good to see! As I said, there is a lot of religious individuals who are decent people.
Not surprisingly: "Muslim Aid and Islamic Relief benefited most". It's certainly needed, since innocent Muslims are also the most common target of militant Muslims.
"I never said atheism is a belief system."
You're quite right, you didn't. I'm so used to the complete lack of knowledge about atheism among apologists, I at least thought it was implied. But you do call it an ideology, and you keep insinuating that atheism infers materialism and communism.
"Are you saying that you don’t have any worldview?"
No, of course not, where did you get such a silly notion?
"communism is an atheistic worldview. That fact that you don’t buy into it, doesn’t make it different."
I never said I "don't buy into it", whatever that is supposed to mean.
------
Let's back things up a bit here...
I have started a thread dedicated to showing people of religion, as well as non-religious people, about the harm that superstitious beliefs are causing all over our world. Because, most religious people seem completely unaware and a lot of non-believers as well.
You, as other religious who have read (at least parts of) this thread, get upset because you think I'm claiming that "all religious people are like this". I'm not. Just like "brian" ( http://www.atheistrepublic.com/comment/31891 ) you are missing the point:
"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg
All over our world, people are basing their decisions on completely unproven beliefs. This is causing untold suffering, undermining of education, scientific research, politics, human rights, etc... All of it is mindlessly perpetuated in a vicious cycle of indoctrination.
Now, lets get back to your post criticizing this thread.
I'm not very good at the names and particulars of Logical Fallacies, so I don't know the official names of them.
1. "...that sort of neutralizes the claim that religion is the reason for violence in the world."
Incorrectly assumed premise: I have never *ever* claimed that "religion is the reason for violence in the world". I'm saying that it is *one* of the major causes. But not only a major cause of violence: It is spreading a blanket of ignorance all over this world, that in turn causes so much needless suffering in many aspects of life.
2. "...we have a tendency to take out our feral nature. It’s just that we justify it using our worldview (atheism or religion)."
No, sorry. Your argument is invalid.
You seem to be implying: Communism is based on Materialism that is based on Atheism, therefore atheists are as bad as Stalin!
I'll just call this what it is: flawed thinking.
3. "religions have more adherents in the world and a longer history than atheism. Therefore, you find more examples of violence there."
Even though I'm quite sure that the statistics I linked to is fairly accurate, but even if it's completely wrong, that is irrelevant to your explenation!
How does religious people being a majority justify that we should let unwarranted beliefs continue it's rampage causing destruction, suffering and undermining education and human rights?
"some of the ugliest crimes were committed during those regimes."
We have covered this over and over to the absurd. So I'll just give you a couple of links.
https://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress.com/2014/10/21/the-atheist-atroc...
http://www.eoht.info/page/Atheism+atrocities+fallacy
4. "abuse of children by the church clearly happened through a violation of religious tenets...", "...Such crimes cannot be blamed on religion."
No, sorry.
As I wrote: "Religions teach very twisted and unhealthy guidelines for sexual relations. It stigmatizes sex and induces unnecessary guilt. It actively tries to counteract non-religious education about sex and instead teaches abstinence, in some cases while simultaneously forbidding contraceptives. But the animal we are, does not respond well to abstinence. Furthermore, within Catholicism there is a loophole that allows anyone to be saved and get welcomed into heaven, even if it's done on the deathbed after a lifetime of crimes against humanity or even against Catholicism.
Even without that loophole, religion is not much of a deterrent against criminality (of any kind). Because religious people who are also criminals, seem to have no problem to rationalize their guilt away."
5. "All of the atrocities you showed in your examples of religious violence are done and condoned only by a very small (negligent) percentage of faithful in the world – which shows that this is not the dominant interpretation of any faith."
I never said it was "the dominant interpretation".
It doesn't have to be to cause enormous amounts of damage. As long as moderate believers keep supporting and obeying the clergies, or continue turning a blind eye to the atrocities of the radicals, or ignoring the massive amount of clergy child abuse, or shrug at the undermining of education, science, human rights, etc, the moderates are *condoning it* and even worse *perpetuating it* by indoctrinating the next generation.
@ Pragmatic
"Perhaps in a certain percentage of individuals, but it is very clear that for some individuals and for the clergy, it has no effect like you are describing. My posts are only the tip of the tip of the iceberg, there are countless examples, and a lot doesn't even reach any news.”
I think you are missing my basic point here. A person may claim to be a believer, he may be part of the clergy, but when he indulges in acts that conflict with what he believes, then it only means that he is insincere in his claims of belief. Such a person is actually a materialist donning the garbs of a religionist. For a materialist the only goal in life is to increase worldly pleasures and live life to the max… to attain that end some people indulge in financial frauds, some pursue a lucrative careers, and some people exploit religion. Your examples are those of the last category.
Secondly, in my last post I demonstrated to you how these statistics can be misleading. For example, there is a statistic in the US that says that percentage of African Americans in the prison is far disproportionate to their numbers in the society. The reasons could be social discrimination, lack of opportunities and so on. Now if you look at a majority of them, they would also be believers. That would show that a majority of prisoners in the US are believers. But it would be foolhardy to therefore tie-up criminality with belief, for the simple reason that criminality is a very complex phenomenon.
Thirdly, as you had yourself conceded, a majority of believers in the world are decent people. So, it’s only a fringe minority who indulge in crime taking inspiration from religion. They being a minority should not be used to arrive at any sweeping generalizations.
"Don't think so... although it's a little self criticizing and honest. Perhaps you should look again.”
Even if it is so, I had given a detailed answer as to how statistics can be terribly wrong. And you said: "Yes, I'm quite aware of that thank you. Saying that won't make it go away though.” If you are aware of that (statistics don’t pain the whole picture) then shouldn’t you stop arriving at strong conclusions based on it????
"That religion was "driving advancement" is highly debatable in many ways. I'm not even going to go into that here as it's a big topic by itself. Yes, Baghdad was the scientific center of the world once, but Islam has successfully pounded that out of the Muslim world.”
You are putting forth a very confused argument here. You say you are ware of Baghdad being the center of scientific advancement… Baghdad at that time was an absolutely theocratic state, and yet science developed there. And immediately, you add that “Islam successfully pounded that out of the muslim state…” That’s a contradiction. Because how can the same Islam help scientific advancement at one point and also pound it out at a later date???? So you don’t want to give credit to Islam when science develops, but are quick to point a finger when science recedes. That’s double standards.
“Good to see! As I said, there is a lot of religious individuals who are decent people.
Not surprisingly: "Muslim Aid and Islamic Relief benefited most". It's certainly needed, since innocent Muslims are also the most common target of militant Muslims.”
Thanks for the compliments. But that’s not what I expected to hear. I want you to explain this statistics to me. Do you therefore agree that atheists are the least charitable people in the world? If not, then why do you favor only particular statistics?
"But you do call it an ideology, and you keep insinuating that atheism infers materialism and communism.”
I didn’t just make a claim and stop at that. I also explained how at the basis of materialism is atheism, and how communism evolved as a worldview from materialism. I would like you to show me that atheism, materialism and communism are not related at all.
"I never said I "don't buy into it", whatever that is supposed to mean.”
When I say you don’t buy into communism, I mean that you don’t subscribe to it. You don’t agree with communism, at least as far as I can see from your arguments. If you subscribe to that worldview, then you are all the more obliged to answer the atrocities of communist regimes.
“I have started a thread dedicated to showing people of religion, as well as non-religious people, about the harm that superstitious beliefs are causing all over our world.”
You are making it sound very innocent. But you are doing much more than that. Firstly, you are trying to peddle the idea that God belief in itself is superstition. And you are conflating a whole gamut of crimes of widely varying nature and shrinking wrapping them all under the one overarching category of ‘theistic crimes’… which is very, very misleading. As I mentioned above, the statistics of believers in the jail shows nothing at all about the relationship between theism and crime. That’s entirely misleading.
However, when it comes to crimes done by secularists, especially by communists, you suddenly want to get into all the finer details of the actual causes behind their motives and the other factors that have contributed to their brutality. This is double standards.
“You, as other religious who have read (at least parts of) this thread, get upset because you think I'm claiming that "all religious people are like this". I'm not.”
No. I have never taken any post by you personally at all. I know you don’t mean it in that sense, and I respect you for you keeping it entirely ideological. And my retort is also entirely from an ideological perspective… not out of a personal outrage.
"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg”
This is a subject that requires a separate thread. It all starts from what you define as good and bad? You may have your own take on Stalin and his brutality – even trying to tie it up with his religious upbringing (as hitchens tries to argue according to your link) which is the most fantastical claim I have ever heard… (now religion has to bear the burden of atheistic crimes as well) – but Stalin was simply trying to do to his nation the ultimate good, which is establishing communism, and creating an equal society. Why do you think Marx concocted his communism – that calls for the eradication of private property and the family system – which led to untold miseries in the world – it was based out of an entirely good intention. He was a good man, and it was his good intentions that led him to unleash the monster of communism in the world. What do you think the proponents of Eugenics were trying to achieve – a good world ruled by the most evolved human society… their intentions were good too, but we know how sinister that was.
Many horrible things in the world have been done out of good intentions. And it has happened in the case of religion too. This is the reason I like to see every case individually, without generalizing them as theistic or atheistic. If I had shown any such differentiation in this thread, it was only to counter your argument.
The way I see it is as a conflict of various ideologies. Christianity, communism, Islam, Hinduism, humanism, atheism etc… are all merely ideologies to me. We have study each one separately and choose what is best for us and the world.
“All over our world, people are basing their decisions on completely unproven beliefs. This is causing untold suffering, undermining of education, scientific research, politics, human rights, etc... All of it is mindlessly perpetuated in a vicious cycle of indoctrination.”
This is where I would like to remind you about our earlier discussion on ‘morals and value systems.’ My position is that value systems (no matter which one) can never be rationally established. All value systems are rooted in metaphysics. Be it yours (stemming from atheism) or mine (stemming from Islam). On the question of values, yours is as much a belief as is mine. Therefore, if you are talking about moral decisions about rights and wrongs – then yours is also a belief. I know you would rearing to blaze forth at this point, but I can shed more light on it when you present your arguments against it.
"I think you are missing my basic point here. A person may claim to be a believer, he may be part of the clergy, but when he indulges in acts that conflict with what he believes, then it only means that he is insincere in his claims of belief."
So, one has to follow all the guidelines of a religion and do so perfectly or they are insincere in their claims of belief? Hmmm....so, I guess that means one who 'sins' is not a true Scotsman.
@ Valiya
Fᴏʀᴇᴡᴏʀᴅ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I always get a suspicious feeling when believers get so upset when their religions or gods get criticized. It's very suspicious indeed.
They often seem so over-sensitive about it, as if their faith is thin and fragile, not to mention their god. Is the omnipotent creator of the entire universe really so delicate and powerless that he can't take it? And that he can't stand up for himself?
Pʀᴇғᴀᴄᴇ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, having discussions with you is extremely time consuming and, at least historically, have been of very little benefit to anyone. I'm trying to keep my answers short, but that only seems to give you more room to misinterpret and misrepresent almost every point I make. It quickly gets irrelevant, excessive and uninteresting. Your continuous misrepresenting of what I have written, with the succeeding attempts to "put me up against the wall" are ridiculous and just makes this "discussion" feel like a boring pissing contest.
Nevertheless, I shall yet again try to make another attempt at answering. However, your repeated abuse of my "position", has effectively killed my desire to stay courteous.
This will probably be my biggest post to date.
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Oɴᴇ - Nᴏ Tʀᴜᴇ Sᴄᴏᴛsᴍᴀɴ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A person may claim to be a believer, he may be part of the clergy, but when he indulges in acts that conflict with what he believes, then it only means that he is insincere in his claims of belief."
This is just a variant of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. You don't count them as "true" believers, so you wish to exclude them.
I think all of them (with a few exceptions) do believe. But people believe in different ways and to various degrees. I also think it's common for people to compartmentalize, meaning that they hold simultaneous conflicting points of view, allowing for this kind of behavior. You are welcome to research about it.
Simply dismissing "the bad believers" because they don't fit your personal definition of a "true" believer, is an evasive and dishonest tactic.
"in my last post I demonstrated to you how these statistics can be misleading."
Yes, as I said I'm already aware of that.
Statistics (just like everything else) must always be viewed through a lens of skepticism. I'm not going to go into an analysis of statistics, but it is well known that is can be misleading.
This does not mean you can simply dismiss statistics in general. It's still a useful tool, or are you claiming that ALL statistics is always misleading? I don't feel obliged to explain and excuse the characteristics of statistics every time I make use of it. I assume that most people are aware of it and read it accordingly.
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Tᴡᴏ - Fʀɪɴɢᴇ Mɪɴᴏʀɪᴛʏ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...as you had yourself conceded, a majority of believers in the world are decent people."
Hold up here! Lets be crystal clear:
I have not "given in" as you seem to imply. Instead, you falsely assumed that I have claimed that "all believers" are "bad". I have not made that claim. That is you misrepresenting me.
"it’s only a fringe minority who..."
Frankly, that it is a "fringe minority" is debatable and anything close to actual numbers is unknown, especially since a lot is not reported and is therefore not known.
Exactly what "sweeping generalizations" are you referring to? Just because I'm posting news articles about crazy and horrible events caused by people who hold beliefs that cannot be proven, you and other believers automatically assume I'm saying that "all believers are like this".
Again: I'M NOT.
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Tʜʀᴇᴇ - Cʀɪᴍᴇ ᴀɴᴅ Sᴡᴇᴇᴘɪɴɢ Gᴇɴᴇʀᴀʟɪᴢᴀᴛɪᴏɴs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...indulge in crime taking inspiration from religion. They being a minority should not be used to arrive at any sweeping generalizations."
You dishonestly twist concepts to your own ends:
You use the word "crime", as if it is clear what you are talking about. Crime against... secular law? "gods law"? or what?
I have not claimed that this thread or my posts are about people breaking secular OR "gods law". It's about the insanity and atrocities that the delusion of religion cause people to do. That is not at all something that always constitutes a "crime". Many of my posts here are about things that are NOT crimes (even though in most cases I would like actual laws against it), yet you use the word "crimes" in your argumentation, disregarding that this is NOT ONLY about what actually constitutes as a crime:
Except from "crimes", it's also about:
- indoctrination of innocent children
- discrimination of non-heterosexuals
- sexual abuse (some is considered legal)
- genital mutilation
- misogyny
- undermining of education
- insane and harmful levels of delusion ("Ten year old girl can't wait to die so she can be with god")
- the corrupting of politics
- the corrupting of justice systems (making the word "crime" even more misleading)
- crime concealment (Clergy protecting their abusive members)
- enabling of sexual abuse (Clergy moving their members to new places)
Etc...
Believing that you're pregnant with a demon is not a crime.
Claiming you're Jesus Christ is not a crime.
A propaganda video of a three-year-old decapitating a teddy bear is not a crime.
Preaching insanity as a TV preacher is not a crime.
Exaggerating and lying about the "threat" to religion is not a crime.
A hajj stampede killing 719 people is not a crime.
Suggesting that children are to blame for tempting priests into pedophile relationships is not a crime.
Suggesting people should pray for a cure is not a crime.
Denying climate change due to personal faith is not a crime.
Sentencing a human rights blogger to 1000 lashes is not a crime.
Etc...
Lets just take indoctrination as an example: How is it only conducted by a "fringe minority" of the religious community?
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Fᴏᴜʀ - Dʀᴏᴘᴘɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇ Lᴇɴs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you are aware of that (statistics don’t pain the whole picture) then shouldn’t you stop arriving at strong conclusions based on it?"
As far as I'm aware, I haven't said I have made any strong conclusions based on it. That is you misrepresenting me.
I presented statistics ONLY as statistical examples, I quote myself:
"However, statistically non-religious are less..."
"you don’t want to give credit to Islam when science develops, but are quick to point a finger when science recedes. That’s double standards."
It's amazing how you jump back and forth between having a lens of skepticism, then suddenly not.
When talking about statistics, you can immediately think of alternate scenarios and give examples, but when it comes to questions like "science vs Islam", you suddenly cant see any other factors or more complex scenarios. Where did your lens of skepticism go all of a sudden?
And you say I have double standard? The words "sanctimonious" comes to mind...
"I want you to explain this statistics to me. Do you therefore agree that atheists are the least charitable people in the world? If not, then why do you favor only particular statistics? "
Have I claimed anything like the opposite of these statistics? You are acting scorn, as if I have. Again, that is you misrepresenting me.
If there are opposing statistics that is an interesting situation, and these statistics could well be an accurate representation of Muslims in general.
But, since you're so insistent about this: I would like to point out that these statistics regarding Muslims in Britain being the most charitable givers, are largely as you yourself say "misleading statistics". Who did they give to? They gave to "Muslim Aid" and "Islamic Relief benefit". That seems a bit like self-serving from the point of view of your religion.
NOTE: Just so you don't try to strawman me (yet again), I'm NOT claiming that ordinary decent Muslims are not charitable.
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Fɪᴠᴇ - Tᴏ ᴘᴜʟʟ ᴀɴ ᴀʀɢᴜᴍᴇɴᴛ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴛʜᴇ sᴘʜɪɴᴄᴛᴇʀ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Do you therefore agree that atheists are the least charitable people"
Absolutely not.
In my own experience the most human people, those who care about others even if they DON'T share the same convictions, seems to be those who are not religious. But new statistics are interesting regardless if it doesn't support my previous conceptions or not. Viewed through a lens of skepticism of course...
"...why do you favor only particular statistics?"
I don't. I presented the statistics I knew about and felt was pertinent. That is you misrepresenting me.
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Sɪx - Iғ A ɪs Pᴀʀᴛ ᴏғ B, ᴛʜᴇɴ B ɪs ᴀʟsᴏ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴏғ A
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I would like you to show me that atheism, materialism and communism are not related at all."
Now, where did I say that? Hmm? Oh, that's right, I didn't! That is you misrepresenting me, again!
If "communism is a worldview that stems from atheism" doesn't mean that atheism also stems from communism. It doesn't mean that an atheist has to share *anything* with communism apart from a "lack of belief in a god or gods". Your ridiculous likeness with atheists and Maoist rebels (or communism in general) are just as ridiculous as if I were to bring up Daesh/ISIS every time the words Islam or Muslim was mentioned. For me to say that this is childish and irrelevant argumentation, is being a bit too kind...
"you are trying to peddle the idea that God belief in itself is superstition"
For ONCE you are actually partially right. It's not the subject of the thread at all, but that is my position.
And I dare you to prove that it isn't superstition...
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Sᴇᴠᴇɴ - Tʜᴇ Iɴᴇxᴄᴜsᴀʙʟᴇ Fᴀʙʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴏɴ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...wrapping them all under the one overarching category of ‘theistic crimes’… which is very, very misleading."
What do we have here? You couldn't possibly be misrepresenting me could you?
I have *not ever* written those two words together, you sanctimonious dishonest prick! Show me, you lying sack of weasels, where I have said that, please?
Would you like it if I started just inventing crap you "supposedly" said? T̲h̲i̲s̲ i̲s̲ yo̲u̲r̲ w̲o̲r̲s̲t̲ "̲r̲o̲c̲k̲ ̲b̲o̲t̲t̲o̲m̲"̲ a̲r̲gu̲m̲e̲n̲t̲a̲t̲i̲o̲n̲ s̲o̲ f̲a̲r̲.̲.̲.̲
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Eɪɢʜᴛ - Cʜᴀsɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇ Aᴘᴘᴀʀɪᴛɪᴏɴ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"As I mentioned above, the statistics of believers in the jail shows nothing at all about the relationship between theism and crime. That’s entirely misleading."
Those statistics were not meant to show that, where they?
I quote myself: "Because religious people who are also criminals, seem to have no problem to rationalize their guilt away. Examples, interviews with inmates in the U.S:"
It was examples of how religious people have no trouble rationalizing their guilt away. This is you, misrepresenting me.
"when it comes to crimes done by secularists, especially by communists, you suddenly want to get into all the finer details of the actual causes behind their motives and the other factors that have contributed to their brutality. This is double standards."
This subject has been debated back and fourth for a long time. Replacing religion with another unproven ideology is just as stupid and insane. They did not kill people in the honor of "no god at all", they didn't cause all that suffering for the honor of non-belief. These were selfish sociopaths who used the mechanism of blind faith to amass an large amount of followers. These people were just as deluded as any religious leader guilty of megalomaniac mass murder, just as you yourself say: "it was based out of an entirely good intention". I.e mass murder out of "good intentions" = delusion.
Cʜᴀᴘᴛᴇʀ Nɪɴᴇ - Bᴜᴛ I'ᴍ Hᴀᴘᴘʏ Iɴ Mʏ Bᴜʙʙʟᴇ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The way I see it is as a conflict of various ideologies. Christianity, communism, Islam, Hinduism, humanism, atheism etc… are all merely ideologies to me. We have study each one separately and choose what is best for us and the world."
This, once again, proves that you have not even understood the word "Atheism".
"All value systems are rooted in metaphysics. Be it yours (stemming from atheism) or mine (stemming from Islam)."
And here atheism is a "value system"... your intentionally trying to be obstinate, aren't you?
"if you are talking about moral decisions about rights and wrongs – then yours is also a belief. I know you would rearing to blaze forth at this point, but I can shed more light on it when you present your arguments against it."
I'd like to have an endless moral debate with you, like I would like to have all my teeth pulled out without anesthesia. I have said this before, I have no interest what so ever in having an never ending debate, with gigantic post after gigantic post, with you about such a subjective and non-specific topic.
Iɴ ᴄʟᴏsɪɴɢ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To sum up, you have in one post managed to...
...incorrectly assume I'm claiming that all of theism is equally bad.
...incorrectly assume I'm making "sweeping generalizations".
...incorrectly assume I have come to strong conclusions based on statistics.
...incorrectly assume I post in this thread only about what constitutes as "crimes".
...dishonestly misrepresent me as ever having written the two words "theistic crimes" in sequence.
...incorrectly assume I favor only particular statistics.
...incorrectly assume I claimed that atheism, materialism and communism are not related at all.
...incorrectly assume I presented statistics about believers in the jail to show relationship between theism and crime.
...incorrectly accuse me of "double standards" multiple times.
These are all your own mistakes, your own misinterpretation, your own misconceptions, your own delusion deceiving you. Your level of self-deception OR intellectual dishonesty, is way beyond anything I ever suspected. This has been one huge disappointment.
valiya s sajjad - "The moot question is, what drives these normal people (who form the majority) to commit crimes? Yes, we know it’s greed. But what is the source of greed? It is MATERIALISM...Now materialism to me is a creation of atheism."
That's right people, you heard it hear first. According to Valiya "normal" people didn't commit crimes before the rise of materialism/atheism.
Ridiculous
"Michele Bachmann warns: Obama will take over the United Nations — and then reveal he’s the Antichrist"
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/michele-bachmann-warns-obama-will-take-o...
Saudi Arabia: "court overturns Ashraf Fayadh's death sentence but..."
"The court, instead, sentenced Fayadh to eight years in prison and 800 lashes"
Sounds even worse. It's just a prolonged version of a death sentence.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/03/middleeast/saudi-arabia-ashraf-fayadh-...
"The Catholic church continues to quietly pay out compensation to victims of alleged sex abuse at Catholic schools in Britain while refusing to accept liability."
"It was so frequent it was what we expected to happen. It was normal."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/03/catholic-church-pays-compen...
"Headteacher mocked on Twitter for claiming evolution is not a fact."
At least this happened in the UK where she was immediately and severly criticized for her errant view.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/03/headteacher-mocked-twitter-...
"Christian Parents File Federal Lawsuit After Daughter Learns About Islam in World History Class"
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/02/01/christian-parent...
"Islamic Terrorist Group Boko Haram Burns Children Alive, So Why Don’t More People Care?"
"Alamin Bakura said the shootings and burnings continued for four hours and he had lost several of his own family members in the attack.
The violence then continued as three female suicide bombers followed the survivors who managed to flee to the neighbouring village of Gamori before blowing themselves up"
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/02/01/islamic-terroris...
"Isis overtaken by Boko Haram as world's deadliest terror organisation"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/boko-haram-overtakes-isis...
"Chad to arrest women wearing full-face veil after deadly suicide bombing in the capital"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/chad-to-arrest-women-wear...
This one is actually kinda funny...
Somalia: "Suicide Bomber Gets Sucked Out of a Plane Hole That He Created and Falls to Earth in a Blaze"
"Aside from the bomber himself, all of the 74 passengers survived, with only two of them reported injured."
"His flaming body landed near the town of Balad, some 20 miles north of Mogadishu, where it was recovered by authorities."
Maybe Karma is real after all?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/02/04/suicide-bomber-g...
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
Justice exists after all.
"Unicef Report Finds Female Genital Cutting to Be Common in Indonesia"
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/health/indonesia-female-genital-cuttin...
"Christian Kid Says That Criticizing Him for Bullying Gay Students is Itself a Form of Bullying"
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/02/05/christian-kid-sa...
South Korea: A pastor and his wife beat his 13-year-old daughter so severely that she died from shock. Then they kept hear body for almost a year.
"They assaulted her for five hours using brooms and a clothes horse."
The girls "mummified body was found in her bed on Wednesday almost one year after her death"
"The girl's body was found by the police during an ongoing nationwide investigation into long-term missing children."
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2016/02/116_197399.html
I must say, Praggy (if I can call you that), that you have the patience of a saint (!) when dealing with the Valiya creature, who is just intent on trying to win an argument by outstaying the opposition, something I've seen many times before. I really admire your tenacity.
Thank you :)
"GOP Congressmen Oppose Abortion Rights For Women With Zika In Developing Countries"
"Each child is made in the image of God and has inherent worth"
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/zika-virus-abortion-access-gop_us_56bb857...
Please stay ignorant, so we can continue duping you...
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
"Hamas calls for suicide bombings in Israeli buses"
http://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-calls-for-suicide-bombings-in-israeli...
How can people NOT see that religion is a control method? As if blind faith wasn't the secret ingredient for having any success when calling for suicide bombings?
Pages