Home › Forums › MGTOW Central › Does Atheistic secularism really promote violence?
This topic contains 212 replies, has 38 voices, and was last updated by 
X11 2 years, 2 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
Insult my beliefs with sound argument if you must
OK but please state them, so far you have failed to define what you believe, if I have missed them I apologise.
Please state you beliefs and define the properties and words in your claim.
Also WTF about dates??.
@zarathustra, he quoted me re the date thing, didn’t make sense.
I guess he has the hots for you.
The great irony is that Cu Chulain is making my point. Comments like
“If YOU understood it I doubt its that complicated.”
insulting my intelligence is not very Christian.
I was specifically calling out the behaviour on this thread. and comments like that simply prove my argument. But go ahead… keeping digging a deeper hole.
Great. But since your religion is supposed to be a guide to better living shouldn’t that number be 0% amongst the people who practice this most whole heartedly?
Show me one person with 0% vice or sin in their person. Someone of any background. You can’t be serious.
Are you saying its acceptable that 1% of your priests molest children?
No child molestation is acceptable. But a body as big as 1 billion human beings is going to have some degenerates in it. That goes for any group. A few bad cells does not make the whole body sick.
Now, are you postulating 1% as a working figure in your hypothesis, or are you using it as a figure of speech?
If it’s the former then two things:
1) How did you arrive at 1%?
2) What is the occurrence of pedophilia in the general public? If its higher than 1% then the Catholic Church has less pedophiles in it than secular society. Oops.If its the latter and a figure of speech then its not an honest argument.Do you expect me to answer “1% is an acceptable percentage for child molesters in the church”? Ludicrous. 0.00000001% is unacceptable, but that’s life. The institution itself is not to blame for miscreants within its own ranks. Which brings me on to…
Isn’t it the duty of your church to weed these people out?
Yes it absolutely is. The Catholic Church was blamed for covering up abuse and protecting offending priests. Again, this was the actions of individuals in the church, not church policy. They have and are being dealt with.
Every single official Catholic website I visit, whether its a particular church, diocese, monastery or religious order has the Catholic Church Safeguarding Policy prominent on their homepage. Many also have a PDF version of this policy for downloading. No organisation puts more into this than the Catholic Church.
The church does not condone this behaviour and it excommunucates and defrocks guilty clergy PDQ.
The whole problem is these guys have positions they can’t defend so all they got is intellectual f~~~ery.
They don’t get the best response they could give is;
“I have blind faith”
The atheist has no real counter for that nor should they.
The church does not condone this behaviour and it excommunucates and defrocks guilty clergy PDQ.
The church condones it by their proven record if cover ups, denials, moving offending priests to new areas, hiding them, paying hush money to legally silence victims etc. Several big legal cases as we speak.
Chu is right about the priests are only human and make mistakes etc. This just proves that belief makes has zero effect and god has no effect.
Insult my beliefs with sound argument if you must
OK but please state them, so far you have failed to define what you believe, if I have missed them I apologise.
Please state you beliefs and define the properties and words in your claim.
I believe the Big Bang theory is the most likely to answer the question of the origin of the universe. I don’t believe it to be true per se, but with our current scientific method and research I think its the best theory.
As for arguing over my faith, what’s the point? You have your world view I have mine. Never the twain shall meet.
But logic and sound argument should be intrinsic to reasonable men. ANY argument, however ridiculous, if its argued honestly using the faculties of the brain given over to reason and not emotion, should be heard AND KNOCKED DOWN WITH LOGICAL COUNTER ARGUMENT. That precludes smoke and mirrors, ad hominem, insults, straw men and oneupmanship.
As for arguing over my faith, what’s the point? You have your world view I have mine. Never the twain shall meet.
Exactly, you flat refuse to put up a defendable position but instead write numerous list micro analyzing others.
FYI the BB, evolution are scientific concepts, they have zero impact on my atheism.
Also;
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases
X11 are you asking me out on a date? I’m celibate, and preferred the ladies when I wasn’t, sorry I can’t help you.
As for argumentation here, you don’t use honest to goodness logic and I’ll flag it up. Insult my beliefs with sound argument if you must, if you can’t your stuff is going under the microscope. Your call.
Pretty much done here… hard to have a conversation with someone who thinks a book offer is a date. Just to be clear I was offering to send you a book not ask you out on a date. Is that clear? If you would like to read the book I will send it to you.
LOL, it wasn’t directed to you. We are all too fast on the post button.
No thanks on the book offer. I’m not being rude, thanks for the offer, I’ve too many unread books on my shelves as it is. But I respect the offer, thanks.
As for arguing over my faith, what’s the point? You have your world view I have mine. Never the twain shall meet.
Exactly, you flat refuse to put up a defendable position but instead write numerous list micro analyzing others.
Check my posting history. I have never started a thread saying Christianity is right and atheism wrong. I respond to outright trolling and bad logic, and I defend my faith.
The amount of insults and trolling you alone throw around this board is staggering. I’m not sure you’re aware of how obnoxious your views about my faith are.
I try not to get mad seeing my faith insulted relentlessly on a MGTOW forum. So, I argue logically and put holes in your bulls~~~. To be honest its not hard, you’re not that clever.
Joe Bauers and others here hold the same views as you, but they argue in good faith, you don’t.
My input on the constant bulls~~~ religion threads is to defend the outrageous allegations put on my views, without a thread of reason or even good taste involved.
I ACCEPT atheism exists, I have no quarrel with atheists. But you seem to have a pathology when it comes to religion. You cant accept there are Christians on this forum. You use a lot of effort trolling them and insulting them. I can’t explain it, but I can strip your arguments apart no worries.
Nah, I respect people right to believe what they want.
Everybody I know and care for are Christians, your assertions are false.
I get it, you just gonna poke holes in everyone else’s claims and not put your own up for critique, that’s cool.
For instance, it cannot prove whether we live in a simulated reality, because the observer could presumably not exit such a reality. I cannot prove you truly exist, and can feel pain, and that only I exist, and no others
Do you find it interesting that everybody is not insane acts like there is an external universe of things. You know we get up, eat, s~~~, work to pay bills, plan for the future, avoid jumping off buildings and touching hot things.
Solipsism is the most degenerate, useless philosophy that impacts nothing, changes nothing, solves nothing, predicts nothing.
When theists break out these but science can’t PROVE there is an external universe beyond our senses therefore God I want to shove my c~~~ in their ear and f~~~ some sense into them.
I’m not a theist. And I agree with your opinion of solipsism.
I was not implying that the limits to our knowledge, in any way prove or imply, that there is an external universe beyond the senses; I prescribe to Occam’s razor; the simplest explanation is usually correct–in this case, you’re real, I’m real, and everything around us is real.
I was mostly noting that people have different standards of proof for ideas that clash with their beliefs, than ones that agree with their beliefs.
Stentorian: On Sheldrake: I watched it. I had never heard of him before. ‘One free ‘miracle’?’. Even to an Engineer like me, with limited knowledge of astophysics, scientists aren’t claiming a ‘miracle’. A ‘miracle’ implies work of a divine agency; scientists don’t understand where the energy came from, nor do they understand the state of the energy — at these energy densities, all the four known forces are thought to be unified–strong force, weak force, gravity, and electromagnetism, after which the four known forces decoupled from one another to the physics we have understanding of, once there had been sufficient separation and cooling.
The ‘slowing down’ of expansion is most certainly NOT the ONLY reason for positing dark energy; it was also posited because more matter is required to explain the rotational speed of galaxies–observations that go back decades. We don’t know much about dark matter, but it’s the best explanation we have for too-quick galactic rotation at the outskirts, for ordinary matter to explain. ‘Flaky’ as Sheldrake indicates? Thus far, there are no alternative gravitational theories that explain lensing and other observed phenomena.
The Big Bang doesn’t just ‘fit their equations’, it is the BEST explanation to date. Certainly inflation is a theory, but there are MANY observed facts supporting it. Gravitation is also a theory, with many FACTS that support it — the motion of the planets, for instance.
If you look into Sheldrake further, you learn about morphic resonance, which has been debunked by scientific study. ‘Morphic Reonance: A process whereby self-organising systems inherit a memory from previous similar systems’. He is not an expert in astrophysics.
This discussion to me has little to do with religion; most Christians I know accept a 14 billion year old Universe and biological evolution.
Zarathustra: Logically, it doesn’t matter what Christians do — that has nothing to do with whether Christ was the son of God. Christians can be good or bad, just like atheists or Muslims. Most people are sheeple, followers. That is why I responded earlier in thread, Hitler was irreligious, but he sure had a lot of Christian followers.
Of course, none of this excuses the Roman Catholic church for despicable crimes and cover-ups, from child rapes, to persecution of Jews, but none of that, proves or disproves Christ. If you think the child sex abuse was bad, it is small potatoes; research what the Roman Catholic Church did BEFORE the Reformation!
Cu Chulainn: Yes, covering up abuse WAS church policy, executed over decades by hundreds of Cardinals, Bishops, and other high Churchmen. That doesn’t PROVE Christianity is false, it just shows the Church leadership as deeply flawed. Part of it also had to do with the belief God forgave the sins and the sinners would be redeemed; not looking at reality and basic human psychology and recidivism, as well as, of course, protecting the Church above all else. You are correct, the Roman Catholic Church HAS now reformed in this area and roots out the abuse.
Personally, as a non-believer, I have no problems with Christians, as long as one denomination is not in the majority controlling politics and civic life. That usually leads to corruption, and you can replace Christianity with any other religion in that.
Goodkid43: Yes, the celibate priesthood attracts homosexuals who want to escape from their sexuality. The evil is in the cover-ups by the Church, relocating known pedophiles to rape again, and believing that their [church] justice supercedes civil justice systems. As the individual who started this thread, what is your response to my points about homicide rates in secular countries? Where is your EVIDENCE that secular individuals commit more violence?
FrankOne, let me be frank with you (I have been waiting to use that line !).
GoodKid43 did not ask that question in an honest way, it was a statement with a question mark at the end intended to provoke a fight.
If GoodKid43 cannot ask a question in an honest way, and says “F~~~ You” to Atheists, then how can you expect them to answer a question in an honest way ? They have been silent so far.
I think it is because they got what they want.
Frank V.
You still don’t know what either of those words mean. And after me repeatedly telling you what they do mean.
But you persist in trying to use them.
If you see a ball fly past you away to your right, where do you think the ball came from?
It’s a simple question.
Why are you incapable of answering it?
Why should any of us take anything you have to say seriously when you are incapable of answering even that simple question?
My first error was presuming that you are an objective and rational human being. You’re neither one of these things.
A rational and objective human being, would not blindly dismiss everything I have put forth. And then lay claim to my not understanding what proof is.
That is the very definition of a baseless assertion.
Now, as I see that I am dealing with someone who is neither objective or rational. But instead, merely bent on proving himself right. Then it would be both pointless and irrational for me to continue to engage someone like you, while you continuously strive only to prove yourself in the right.
To the degree where I thought you were a reasonable, logical person. I answered and tried to have an exchange.
Your dismissal of anything I put forth, is narrow minded. And limited. Your arguments and inherent position on the subject, which itself is theoretical and very far from provable. Once again informs me you’re just out to make yourself right.
You’re disingenuous in your approach and your responses. You posses intellect, but it is used only to place yourself in the right. You’re not the least bit objective or broad minded in your arguments or responses.
You keep repeating something about b~~~~, and expecting me to answer. When you’ve blindly dismissed whatever I have said. Why would I have any interest in having a discourse with someone who approaches discussion in this way?
I am interested in communicating with sincere and open minded people. Regardless of whether I may agree with that person or not. If the other party is sincere, then something can be learned. Irrespective of differences.
But with you, it’s just one big loop, where you presume yourself to be right, while you dismiss what I say as baseless assertion. That is arrogant. Narrow minded, and in no way leads to anything fruitful or meaningful.
So I will disengage from any further discourse with you, on this subject, given your biases and rigid state of mind. Your interest does not lie in learning or discourse. But rather, self aggrandizement and an attempt to place yourself in the right.
That’s all I have to say on the matter. Agree to disagree, and just move on.
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
FrankOne, let me be frank with you (I have been waiting to use that line !).
GoodKid43 did not ask that question in an honest way, it was a statement with a question mark at the end intended to provoke a fight.
If GoodKid43 cannot ask a question in an honest way, and says “F~~~ You” to Atheists, then how can you expect them to answer a question in an honest way ? They have been silent so far.
I think it is because they got what they want.
Frank V.
Yes, 7 pages of fighting and an original poster who doesn’t defend his position.
In summary, individuals have AGENCY and can choose to be moral or immoral, their religion or lack thereof, does not make them moral or immoral.
With the only exception being extremists whose religion involves killing people. And to anyone who has studied religions, that does NOT mean entire mainstream modern world religions.
Haha @stentorian the fraud is running out of people that will engage his bulls~~~.
Soon he will just be talki g to himself saying how smart he is.
Sheldrake LMFAO.
This is the point where I shrug, admit I tried, and pour a drink before kicking back.
Frank V.
Nah, I respect people right to believe what they want.
Wrong. You’re the most offensive, ignorant prick I have met on this forum. Outside of your trolling and insults. You’re just a small person of very low character. Which is readily observable in the way you conduct yourself.
Please don’t use words like respect, when you present yourself as a hostile, ignorant entity. Who evades and dodges real questions, and answers in hyperbole and insults.
I try not to get mad seeing my faith insulted relentlessly on a MGTOW forum. So, I argue logically and put holes in your bulls~~~. To be honest its not hard, you’re not that clever.
Cú Chulainn that’s exactly right. He is not clever. Just ignorant and rude. He does not back up his statements. Ignores aspects which will deflate his bulls~~~.
Dodges, evades. Contradicts himself.You’re coming at him using fair means. He is coming at you from a very low place.
All clear examples that he is a troll. Just as you observed.
I would say that people who are this low in character and substance. Are not even worth responding to.
He’s just here to sling mud. Create conflict. Is not contributing anything except negativity. As all trolls and ignorant assholes do.
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
Haha @stentorian the fraud is running out of people that will engage his bulls~~~.
Soon he will just be talki g to himself saying how smart he is.
Sheldrake LMFAO.
I think perhaps you believe that people can’t see you, for exactly what you are.
Just a low life. Small and pathetic. Like all trolls, your only sustenance is conflict and negativity.
I have zero interest in your comments or remarks. You’re just a sad individual who tries really hard to stir s~~~ up. Nothing more.
Say whatever you like. Makes little difference to me.
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
Stentorian: On Sheldrake: I watched it. I had never heard of him before. ‘One free ‘miracle’?’. Even to an Engineer like me, with limited knowledge of astophysics, scientists aren’t claiming a ‘miracle’. A ‘miracle’ implies work of a divine agency; scientists don’t understand where the energy came from, nor do they understand the state of the energy — at these energy densities, all the four known forces are thought to be unified–strong force, weak force, gravity, and electromagnetism, after which the four known forces decoupled from one another to the physics we have understanding of, once there had been sufficient separation and cooling.
FrankOne, I appreciate your knowledge in this area. Your points are very well thought out.
I am going to take some time to reflect on what has been said. And then respond, as I think you communicate in a very objective and meaningful way. This topic does interest me. I am always open to learning and expanding my understanding.
Need to step back and distance myself form the negative aspects of this thread. Which are not conducive to any real learning or deeper understanding.
“He who takes an eel by the tail, or a woman at her word, soon finds he holds nothing.”
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
