patrick.net

Bap33 says

It seems odd that faith in science bothers you not,

Faith in science does bother me, quite a lot. In particular, the use of "junk science" that juries believe because they are scientifically illiterate and think they are experts because they watch CSI and other Hollywood bullshit representation of science.

Remember, an innocent human being was put to death in Texas on the basis of junk science. That's is offensive to me on many levels. "Faith" in science is bad. It can be manipulated by unethical prosecutors.

Science is built on skepticism and verification. Experiments must be repeatable. Everything is questionable, but you don't get to ignore evidence that doesn't support your ideas. There are no authority figures and no dogma.

Throughout the history of science, rich and poor men alike have contributed, regardless of race, nationality, or politics. Science knows no social or political boundaries. It is the great uniter of man. As a process, mankind has never created anything nearly as great. As for results, science has consistently produce more than we could imagine. It is the only human endeavour that has a near perfect track record, and whose few mistakes were quickly and definitively corrected. It is a self-correcting, constantly refining process. Yet, the people who dislike it are persuaded by 9-9-9.

Cloud says

Dawkins is more angry, dogmatic and arrogant about his mission to convert believers than any preacher I have ever seen trying to convert non-believers.

If that's the truth, then you obviously have never run across Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell. If that is indeed the case, count yourself lucky.

Cloud says

That's quite a God-like quality to got their sNotFaith; reading people's minds and intentions.

That must be what christians don't understand about logic. You dont have to be like god or a mind reader to read what a person writes, and develop logical conclusions about what they are saying. it works well, you should try it sometime.

Cloud says

Then goes on like a knight in shinning armor to rescue DAN because Clint is taking him to the woodshed :

I wasn't defending Dan, being more educated and more articulate then I am, he doesn't need anything from me.

Infact, I wasn't defending anyone... I was challenging what I saw was a flaw in an argument in a discussion I'm apart of. That's what I meant about logic... Christians seem to be at a loss for it. Maybe that explains their dogmatic need for a spiteful, angry, godhead who treats them all like dogs...

Cloud says

Many homosexuals dying and suffering from aids
died and were helped by Catholic and chrisitan charities, a fact that will piss of Dan and No Faith.

Doesn't piss me off at all. Doesn't even bother me a little. See how you talk about stuff like you know what you are talking about when you really have no idea at all what you're talking about? it seems to be a trend with you.

Cloud says

Ok waiting for you to respond to me.

If I missed something interesting or important, it wasn't intentional. Please point it out and I'll do my best to respond to it.

Cloud says

You laugh at me like a typical arrogant atheist, telling me I shouldn't find Dawkin's abuse on a 21 year old digusting and THAT I have no business defending her.

1. Please explain how he abused her?
2. I didn't say you had no business defending her. i said, you sound like you think she should be treated differently because of her age, or her sex, when in reality her sex is totally irrelevant, and she is old enough to attend college, which is where people go to be educated and to have their biases challenged, so I still don't see the need to defend her.

Of course, I understand why you do, and from the sound of it, I wouldn't be surprised if you also thought instead of being educated/challenged in college, that she should instead be at home, barefoot and pregnant with a baby in one hand and a bible in the other.

Cloud says

But like a gay lover you help Danny boy out?

Unlike you, I am neither a closeted homosexual ashamed of my sexual preferences, nor am I a closed minded biggot who hates people based on nothing other than their sexuality, so calling me gay has absolutely no affect on my attitude or my self esteem. I just laugh at you, because I'm an arrogant atheist.... which is much better than an arrogant christian, in my opinion.

Cloud says

Also, wierd and kinda game is calling yourself a player in the "big game."

I did no such thing... That proves your lack of reading comprehension skills. We were talking about her, a student at a university, standing up infront of her peers and professors, some of the most educated and intelligent people in our country, and asking a question to one of the most celebrated and respected humanist philosophers of our time. That is what I was calling the big game.

Cloud says

So strange you and Dan adopt the same zealot qualities that the most obnoxious God pushers do.

So you admit you are a zealot... That's very interesting. And you're not ashamed of being a religious zealot? How does that work for you?

Cloud says

Most believers are quiet about their faith. All the jAtheist I've meet and have debated on the internet are savage.

You truly have no idea how many atheists you've met, or which people you have met may be atheists.

And you know nothing about me... So your attempted provocations have no impact on me. You'll have to go find someone else to ridicule, because it's not having your intended effect on me.

@Dan,
good post, but I was responding to a comment about faith by another.

You have defended and established your position in a fine manner, and I knew already that you challenge all things - science and religion - with the same fever. It is your focus expessed on this site that leads me to have no doubt that God has an amazing plan for revealing himself to you ... your fire was put there by Him, so I bet He has a pretty cool plan for you. Even if your rle is to force those who profess belief to defend and reflect -- that's for the better good too. In my opinion.

Man, I was waiting for it as the religious fanatics always go to the next level with their yes-we-have-no-bananas type of logic and right on cue it's the advanced version of: he works in mysterious ways.

Dan, you're smart and that's because of god only you just haven't noticed or even acknowledged it ...............yet.

Same old bs just a different method of delivery.

Cloud says

Thunder Lips, honestly not following you?

Cloud, in the countries I mentioned, atheists are a substantial portion of the population. About a third of Frenchmen are atheists; about 3/4 of Scandinavians are atheists.

Yet in those countries, the people who are Firemen or Police routinely risk their lives to enter burning buildings to save people or apprehend crazy people wielding clubs or knives and threatening those nearby.

Bap33 says

Dan, I humbly submit that gravity, and the frictions it creates, are the only things that stop perp-mot. Without gravity, and wind, and debris, and all other forms of friction, something should keep on moving for ever.

Gravity does not "create" friction. For example, there is no friction between the Earth and the sun. Friction is the result of two separate objects being connected by pressure on some common surface area. This pressure can be due to gravity or any other force (mechanical, magnetic, etc.). The force exerting the pressure does not matter.

"Gravity, wind, and debris" are not "forms of friction". The equations for effects of fluid viscosity (including air) are completely different from the equation for the force of friction, and they are derived from different entities.

Also, it is best not to think of "motion" per se, but rather acceleration, as motion is a relative phenomenon anyway. Consider the orbit of the Earth. This orbit does require gravity, but it does not have friction. The Earth does, however, accelerate. Even if the Earth's orbit were circular and its speed constant, the Earth would be accelerating towards the sun as it orbits around the sun. In fact, this acceleration is necessary to maintain orbit almost by definition.

A planet orbiting a star is pretty much the closest you can get to the situation you describe as "without friction or debris". Nevertheless, even a planet orbiting a star will not stay in orbit forever due to gravitational tidal forces and frame dragging. No orbit can be stable over eternity.

[And please don't ask about frame dragging. It involves relativity and you are not ready for that. It would just confuse and mislead you. Stick to classical physics until you master that.]

ReasonNotFaith says

Cloud says

But like a gay lover you help Danny boy out?

Cloud is clearly a troll. He fakes outrage at minor jokes and then gay bashes. Ironically, meeting Cloud would probably turn any gay guy straight.

ReasonNotFaith says

Cloud says

Many homosexuals dying and suffering from aids
died and were helped by Catholic and chrisitan charities, a fact that will piss of Dan and No Faith.

Like all trolls, Cloud likes putting words into people's mouths.

Yes, many homosexuals did die from AIDS when it first appeared. This is less true today, now that we have treatments for the disease. Today, poor people, particularly Africans, are most in jeopardy of AIDS because

1. The medication is not readily available to them.
2. The pope has convinced many not to use condoms, which are extremely effective in preventing the spread of the disease.

Conclusion: science does good, religion does bad.

Now it does upset me that many young gay men died of AIDS. It also upsets me that many people die of cancer, starvation, lack of clean drinking water, etc. I'd try to explain that to Cloud, but how do you explain the human emotions of empathy and compassion to something like Cloud?

What does not upset me is the acknowledgement that AIDS spread fastest through the homosexual male community because

1. They did not use condoms until AIDS. For some reason, gay men don't worry about impregnating other gay men. I'd explain this to Cloud, but I don't think he'd understand.

2. Gay men were having sex with many partners which allows for STDs to spread more rapidly.

3. The mechanics of gay male sex allow for easier transference of the virus as oppose to heterosexual sex or lesbian sex.

Acknowledging these truths is not offensive to me. In fact, not acknowledging these truths is offense. The first step to solving a problem, any problem, is acknowledging it's existence. The second step is understanding the problem. Knowing the above information allows us to curtail the spread of AIDS including in the homosexual community. Why would we not want this?

Finally, have you ever noticed that only men who are insecure in their own sexuality feel the need to gay bash?

Bap33 says

It is your focus expessed on this site that leads me to have no doubt that God has an amazing plan for revealing himself to you ... your fire was put there by Him, so I bet He has a pretty cool plan for you.

If it involves hooking up with Taylor Swift, I'm all for it.

upisdown says

Dan, you're smart and that's because of god only you just haven't noticed or even acknowledged it ...............yet.

If I'm smart because of god, why did he make so many other people stupid?

I'm more incline to believe the brain behaves like a muscle in one particular way: the more you use it, the stronger it becomes.

Bap33 says

It seems odd that faith in science bothers you not, while faith in God bothers you much. Why is the two faiths not the same to you?

Bap- it sometimes takes a leap of faith for scientists to make a discovery, but science cannot rely on faith alone; if it did, it won't be called science - it will be religion.

For even a leap-of-faith type speculative theory, you need adequate empirical / observational evidence that's independently verifiable and repeatable as well.

Bap33 says

And, with enough time and guidence, science might prove God enough for analytical minds to embrace God too. Right? Isn't that a possible outcome?

If the use of the word God as you have meant above, means anything super-natural or meta-physical (outside the laws of physics), science can never concern itself anything like that because it is not even in science's domain. Science can clearly separate BS from facts.

Dan,

Heh, heh, but what he wrote and directed towards you was still personal albeit not derogatory though, so he's exhausted every dogmatic excuse or out and out fairy tale answer he can pull out of his ass.

Ya ever notice that the religious flacks only try to claim and relate to all positive or good things that happen in life? But, when some really disgusting and violent thing like an earthquake, tsunami, or even that woman in NYC that burned to death in an elevator...............out comes the benign bullshit non-answer, answer: he works in mysterious ways

Where's all the hoopla and fanatical desrciptions then for when any of of those things happen???? Then it's crickets.

If they would take the same credit or acknowledge all the bad things the exact same way that they do all the good stuff maybe people would give thier thoughts and theories a little more attention.

Cloud says

It is a mess because it has lost its roots.

It hasn't, the roots of Europe is the Greco-Roman philosophers, their spirit reborn in the Enlightenment leading to Freedom (something unheard of under the Pope, Henry the 8th, Luther or Calvin), leading to proper Science starting in the 19th Century.

When I compare 12th Century France under the iron grip of Christianity, to 21st Century France, I'll take the latter. Even the poorest Frenchman can get a boil removed, has antibiotics against infections, doesn't go days between meals, drinks clean water, etc. etc.

I'll judge by the fruits. Europe without God is doing a lot better now than when Europe was really into God.

He rewards his followers very strangely if you ask me; just look at how fervent his African followers are, and yet how they suffer.

thunderlips11 says

I'll judge by the fruits. Europe without God is doing a lot better now than when Europe was really into God.

And I suspect the same would be true for both America and the Middle East.

Bap33 says

It seems odd that faith in science bothers you not, while faith in God bothers you much.

You talk about faith in science, as if science was just another bullshit religion, nothing more than a silly story pulled straight out of some lunatics ass.

Faith (as I use the term) refers to belief or reliance on information or concepts without any evidence.

Science, on the other hand, is our observations of the world around us. No reputable scientist claims that science is perfect, without error, or that it can describe/prove everything. Those observations aren't just claims, they are able to be repeated by different people, at different places. If it can't be, it's thrown out. Nothing in science is considered holy. When new information is obtained that warrants it, anything in science can be thrown out or disproven. That's the beauty of it. it's also the real big difference between science and religion.

You can't change what you said yesterday that god said is the law.

I certainly can change my understanding of how gravity works when I discover new information about the properties of gravity.

Bap33 says

It is your focus expessed on this site that leads me to have no doubt that God has an amazing plan for revealing himself to you ... your fire was put there by Him, so I bet He has a pretty cool plan for you.

Ridiculous claptrap.

Cloud says

Dawkins, a very minor "scientist" will be forgotten in 10 years....

I never said he was a great scientist. You do like to twist people's words around.

And he wont be forgotten in 10 years, you will be. Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris will be remembered like Nietsche, and like Martin Luther King Jr, as people who bravely stood up to religion and publically resisted it, so that all people could fully enjoy their civil liberties and more fully enjoy their lives without influence from religious radicals.

Cloud says

free the slaves

The Bible endorses slavery. Southrons used to wipe the floor with Yankee Abolitionist types in the 19th Century when they brought the Bible into the debate.

Not only does the Bible explicitly permit slavery, it presents the human relation with God to be ideally presented as a good slave to master relationship.

Abolitionists could only point to a "Hippy Jesus Feeling" for justification for abolition.

In fact, you'll find that "Hippy Jesus Concept trumping the actual Biblical Word" is a unifying factor is all three examples.

Cloud says

Where are religious radicals hurting anyone in America?

Muslims flying airplanes into buildings, zealots shooting Dr, Tiller in Kansas, blowing up abortion clinics, you figure it out...

Cloud says

You are free to practice whatever religion you want.

That's not true at all. Our rights are under attack every day by religious radicals.

Cloud says

It was religion that helped free the slaves

Oh really? which religion helped free the slaves?? Oh that's right, the same religion practiced by slave owners... Your arguments don't make any sense at all.

Cloud says

The Founding Fathers were believers and put God into the Declaration of Independence.

You're even ignorant about the founding of our country. Most of the founding fathers were in fact, not christian. Many of them were christian, but many others were diests, and several other religions, a few even atheists.

We're not going to stand by and allow radical christians to revision our history so they can turn this country into a theocracy.

ReasonNotFaith says

Cloud says

It was religion that helped free the slaves
Oh really? which religion helped free the slaves?? Oh that's right, the same religion practiced by slave owners... Your arguments don't make any sense at all.

lol .... ummm ... read a few lines by Honest Abe when the chance comes.

Cloud says

by the way Not Faith, why did all those "deists" put the words "endowed by our creator" in one of the, if not the, most important document this country has?

To understand that, maybe you need to understand what the word diest means, and also what the culture of the country was like at the time. it's not hard to understand, if understanding is the goal, which i know is now your goal.

Cloud says

Something like 150,000 men, most of them Christians died to free the slaves. The movement to free the slaves started largely in Northeast churches.

Yes, but the Northeastern Churches lost almost every debate, formal and informal, since the Southern Churches had the Word of God explicitly behind them. When you go by the actual Words in the KJV, and not by an abstract concept of hippy Jesus, slavery wins.

Be happy to cite chapter and verse showing that at the very least, the OT and NT consider slavery to be a normal condition for people in a society. Otherwise they wouldn't use analogies involving slaves and laws on managing slaves and for slaves to be obedient to their earthly masters.

Here we go:

Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money."

In other words, beating your slave to death will be punished, beating them so they can't function for a day or two is A-okay.

Servant does not mean a paid, hired butler or doorman or cook, as we will see:

Exodus 21:1-4: "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself."

HEBREW slaves will be freed in their seventh year. Non-Hebrew slaves are slaves for life, unless it pleases the Master to free them.

This is instruction is restated in Deuteronomy 15, Verses 12-18.

More evidence that limited time slave owning applied only to Hebrews comes from these verses in Leviticus:

Leviticus 25:44-46 "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

Only those who enslave fellow Hebrews are punished:
Deuteronomy 24:7: "If a man be found stealing any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and maketh merchandise of him, or selleth him; then that thief shall die; and thou shalt put evil away from among you."

Apparently, slavery among Hebrews was only for debt.

Now no doubt you can go and find hand-wringing, excuse making, "apologetics" for Slavery, but even these defenders can't deny: Slavery was present in Israel and the Bible thought it necessary to codify laws for the handling of slaves. It did not prohibit Slavery.

How about the new Testament?

Slavery alive and well in the time of Jesus:
Mark 14:66: "And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:"
Matthew 18:25: "But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made."

The most obvious, Paul's Letter to the Ephesians:
Ephesians 6:5-9: "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him."

To the Colossians:
Colossians 4:1: "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven."

Cloud says

If an Atheist kills oh lets say millions and milliions of people making the Crusades look like a Sunday picnic, as was the case with Uncle Joe Stalin, can I then call all Atheists evil people and killers?

Stalin was an Authoritarian Dictator. He didn't kill people because they weren't atheists, he killed them because of their Class (Kulaks) and/or their dissent to his rule. Maybe he was inspired by what he learned at the Orthodox Seminary he attended previous to his career as a Tyrant. Plenty of Christian Monarchs have also not only killed in the name of Religion, but also terrorized entire classes of people for money. Including Christian Groupings, like the Knights Templar or the Cathars where the motive was almost certainly financial: The King of France, other Monarchs and the Pope wanted the lands, their loans forgiven, and all their gold and silver.

Atheists don't claim that being atheist makes you morally superior, though we like to think the elimination of religion will provide more moral clarity rather than acts of evil committed in the name of Dogma. Religionists, on the other hand, insist that a belief in their Deity increases moral behavior. Atheists also don't call murderers like Thomas More, a "Saint" for burning countless people for reading a book translated into English.

Cloud says

Thunder, there is no debate here. The biggest killers in the last century were the leaders who were not only Atheists but who systematic got rid of religion in their mob society.

Cloud says

The rest of the religious wars are mere skirmishes compared to what China, North Korea, what Stalin and Pol Pot have done.

"John Wayne Gacy killed more people than the Zodiac Killer, therefore, people should admire the Zodiac Killer and loathe John Wayne Gacy."

Here's some "mere skirmishes" where deaths were motivated at least in part by religious belief, or committed by those who consistently pumped their morality or the morality of their followers which they claimed stemmed from religion:

Hitler - Tens of Millions. Catholic Fascist.
Mussolini - Tens of Thousands of Eithiopians. Many Spaniards. Catholic Fascist.
Croat Ustashi - Hundreds of Thousands of Serbs, Jews, Gypsies, and Bosniaks. Catholic Fascist.
Croatia, Yugoslav War - Tens of Thousands of Serbs and Bosniaks. Catholic Republic.
Serbia, Yugoslav War - Tens of Thousands of Bosniaks and Croatians and Albanians. Orthodox Republic.
Franco - Hundreds of Thousands of union members. Catholic Fascist.
Argentine Oligarchy of the 70s - Tens of Thousands. Catholic Fascist.
Pinochet - At least Tens of Thousands. Catholic Fascist.
Leopold II - Millions of Congolese. Catholic Monarch.
Turkish Republic - Millions of Greeks, Armenians, Kurds, and dissenters. Islamic Military Oligarchy.
General Yakubu Gowon (Biafra) - Hundreds of Thousands. Anglican Military Oligarchy.
LBJ/Richard M. Nixon (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia)- Hundreds of Thousands. Quaker and Episcopal Elected Executive.
George W. Bush/Barak Obama (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya)- Hundreds of Thousands. Evangelical/UCC (or sekrit Mooslim) Elected Executives of Corporate Socialist Republic.
Saudi Arabia (Najam and Eastern Province) - Tens of Thousands of Shi'a Twelvers. Islamic Monarchy with Theocratic Council.
Saudi Arabia (all over) - Tens of Thousands of non-Wahabi Muslims, esp. more liberal Sunni town-dwellers and Shi'a, early 20th Century. Islamic Monarchy with Theocratic Council.
Bahrain - Hundreds of democracy activists/shi'a minorities. Islamic Monarchy.
Burundi (Micombero) - Hundreds of thousands of Hutu. Catholic Tutsi Dictatorship.
Congo/Zaire (Mobutu Sese Seko) - Hundreds of Thousands if not a million. Christian Military Dictatorship. Warm relations with US.
Liberia: President Chuck Taylor, VP Foday Sankoh - Millions. Evangelical Military Oligarchy.
Guatemala (Montt)- Hundreds of Thousands. Catholic-turned-Evangelical; Military Oligarchy.
Indonesia (Suharto) - Millions of Indonesians and New Guineans and Timorese. Muslim Oligarchy.
Sudan - Hassan Turabi. Hundreds of Thousands. Islamic Dictatorship with Theocratic Council.
Israel, Lebanon - Thousands. Mostly by Christian Militia proxy. Jewish Nationalist (zionist) Republic.
Israel, West Bank - Thousands. Mostly by cutting off services. Jewish Nationalist (zionist) Republic.

I could go on...

Cloud says

Thunder, what the hell are you talking about, People Magazine shit, John Wayne what's his name?

One of the worst serial killers in US History:

http://www.prairieghosts.com/gacy.html

Cloud says

Thunder Lips...I'll take all my Popes and all the religious, including the Founding Fathers and those who help the poor and our leaders who give BILLIONS to poor nations to help with starvation and AIDS...

The best thing to do for poor people to prevent poverty, starvation and AIDS is to use condoms and provide access to abortion. What do many Protestants and Catholics say about abortion and condoms?

The Founding Fathers were all over the map, including Deists and Unitarians. Most were very liberal Episcopalians, and would be considered liberal Christians even by today's standards. Jefferson did not believe in the miracles on the Bible, and translated a Bible Version himself that eliminated all reference to the miraculous.

Cloud says

I'm sorry, what was that...can't hear you? Bosnia.

As Stalin said, a few deaths is a tragedy, but hundreds is a statistic. I see you agree with him.

I'm sure all those dead Serbs agree with you that mentioning Croatian Catholic genocide is "Fucking Kidding Me".

Cloud says

Hitler was an atheist too.

Nope. Lapsed Catholic at worst. Mentioned God several times in Mein Kampf, and his very first treaty was with the Vatican. Prayers were said every year by the Catholic Church, officially, for the health of the Fuhrer, and this continued until his death in 1945.

Goebels however, was Excommunicated. For marrying a Protestant.

Cloud says

lover the cut and paste debate style...

Yep, took the numbers from around the web to refresh my memory. I'm sure I missed a lot. Doesn't make it any less valid, in fact, it's more so because you can check my assertions.

Of the top of my head, how many Hindus and Muslims killing each other in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh is another one I missed.

Cloud says

Um Hitler lied about everything and every treaty he made...

But his support from the Catholic Church is a FACT, not just my opinion.

Google is your friend.

Cloud says

They loved God and freedom.

These don't go together. Read the Bible, or any history of the middle ages.

You make my point - as religion weakens and becomes more liberal before finally being dispensed with, Freedom grows.

Judge by the Fruit. Religious countries and times suck balls. The less religion, the freer and more prosperous the people.

Cloud says

You are an alien to those who seek freedom.

Not really. The practice of abandoning all religion and embracing freedom is perfectly compatible.

For all your examples like Stalin/North Korea etc, equally if not more valid examples can be quoted for religious fanaticism as destroyer of civilizations as well. There's a lot more religious wars fought in the course of human history, so face the facts and stop spewing BS.

Cloud says

The atheists here on this site seemed to be saying there is a direct threat of a theocracy here in the US.

I would strongly urge you get educated on the evils of religion. You are totally ignorant about the kind of damage religion has done to this country.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/pOTkVhfMWcw

Haven't you noticed the corelation between religion and dictatorship? Hitler used religion as a building block just like other dictators because the blind beleivers would listen to him as long as he wrapped his message in religion. Once his power and control was unquestioned or absolute, he no longer needed religion as much to maintain that power. the modern day version uses patriotism too.
North Korea and China don't need religion as the leaders/dictators have total control. But, if you follow their beginning of their dictatorship back far enough, you will find religion used as a justification or messaging to begin their climb to power.
It's called the "divine right", but where's the atheist version of that?

Thanks for reminding me about something, upisdown.

Stalin firmly embraced the Russian Orthodox Church during WW2 as a means of inspiring the country against the Nazis. He also unearthed many deeds of Russian noblemen from history who resisted the Swedes and the Teutonic Order.

Ironically the orthodox church is almost an exact copy of the catholic church right down to the costumes, goofy hats, and the exotic pageantry. The only visible difference is the beards, but maybe it's because of how cold it is in Russia compared to Italy.
Here in the US religion is referred to the same way with our political process with the constant references to a candidate's chosen religion. The most recent republican debate was centered mainly on fear and hate. Fear of imaginary actions and some real ones in regards to religous dogma and the need to purge "activist judges". Then there's the hatred of other religions and the ironic justification(the candiate's or mainstream religion) for that hatred. Would that explain why Mitt Romney is so despised within the republican party, because his religion isn't a mainstream religion?
Religion has always been about power and control of others, but what is funny is that people willingly accept and seek out/participate in their servitude.

thunderlips11 says

Here's some "mere skirmishes" where deaths were motivated at least in part by religious belief, or committed by those who consistently pumped their morality or the morality of their followers which they claimed stemmed from religion:
Hitler - Tens of Millions. Catholic Fascist.
Mussolini - Tens of Thousands of Eithiopians. Many Spaniards. Catholic Fascist.

my good man .... lol ... a slight stretch for the holidays, no?

To any pussy who says “There are no atheists in fox holes” from the comfort of their home having never been in a fox hole himself, I suggest that you keep your unfounded assertions to yourself when engage in conversation with any of the plethora of hard-core atheist bad-asses in our military that even a cursory Google search would reveal. Hell, I’ve heard that every member of Seal Team 6 was an atheist.

The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, MAAF, maintains a roster of Atheists in Foxholes, just in case there are any rumors that we don't exist. The next time you hear someone repeat that old myth, just send them here to see how atheists have served honorably in combat - always have, always will. And boy is that list long and distinguished. Feel free to pursue that list at your leisure, and feel free to have a nice big cup of shut-the-fuck-up about things you don't know.

And if that's not enough in itself, there's this nice quote from a U.S. Marine

I am writing to you about something that I seen on your web page. Looking at my Email address you can probably guess that I am a U.S. Marine, I am also an atheist, which can be kind of difficult sometimes with my mostly religious peers. With this being said, I have some experience with the foxhole conversions, but my view is a little different than most. Most of the conversions I have seen have been to atheism.

Not that this would be admitted or last after combat is over, but even the marines praying every night when we were in the rear weren't pleading for god's help in combat. They were acting just like atheists, ducking and covering, shooting back; trying to save themselves. Never once did I see someone stop and pray for help. They use religion do get them through day to day, but when it hits the fan so to speak, they don't take chances relying on god.

I particularly like the telling part at the end: They use religion do get them through day to day, but when it hits the fan so to speak, they don't take chances relying on god. Somehow when your ass in one the line, a M16 means a lot more than a prayer. And those guns don't spit out Communion wafers.

Maybe the bullshit about there being no atheists in the military comes from the fact that atheists are registered as "no religious preference" against their will because recruiters deliberately misregister atheists. Wow, if you refuse to count atheists, the total comes out to be zero. This shit would be funny if it wasn't so serious.

He also said “don’t be surprised if, when you’re in the Corps, no matter how many times you try to change it to Atheist, it comes back as No Rel Pref.”

Cloud says

The reason I can say your atheist friends have killed so many more, by the millions in the last hundred years is because Communism seeks the destruction of religion.

Okay Cloud, I've explained this before and I'll explain it again. Stalin didn't kill Kulaks for being nominally Orthodox or whatever. He killed them because they were a potential source of trouble down the road and they resisted collectivization. Same reason why Pol Pot killed people who wore glasses, they might be intellectuals and plot to overthrow his regime. Same reason why Blackjack Pershing rounded up random Pinoys and shot them whenever a US soldier was shot by a Filipino Freedom Fighter. The same reason why the Border Ruffians and the Freestaters were hacking each other to death in Kansas in the 1850s, for control.

Atheism doesn't propose that atheists are morally superior. Religion does promise that people are "New Men in Christ" or "The Chosen People". Atheism doesn't give cover for bad behavior, Religion does.

Cloud says

Thunderlips, why is this? Why would Uncle Joe Stalin, The Chinese atheists, Pol Pot, the dead North Korean who was well on his way to starving millions.... why do these killers

always want to wipe out religion, make it illegal and kill those who practice why?

For the same reason the Most Christian Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, stamped out Islam in Spain and expelled the Jews.

For the same reason the Teutonic Order killed any Lithuanians who would not convert.

For the same reason Henry the 8th killed his own dissenters, protestant or catholic, depending on which side of the bed he woke up on.

They didn't want any place where resistance to their rule might collect and grow, and wanted all their subjects to follow the same religion as they did.

Cloud says

Why did all those "deists" put the words "endowed by our creator" in one of the, if not the, most important document this country has?

The Declaration of Independence isn't a document of governance, and not connected to this government, either. Furthermore the signatories of the DoI and those who attended the Constitutional Convention are not all the same batch of people. It's a document explaining why the colonies were revolting from Britain. The Continental Congress no longer exists and was replaced by the United States of America in 1792.

Also, if it was so important, why isn't in the Constitution itself, instead of "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Cloud says

And yeah the Declaration is one of the most sacred and revered document this country has, if not "the" most.

How can you argue otherwise

Read my post. The Declaration of Independence is not a governance document, it gives the reasons for leaving the British Empire. It was not written by the United States Government set up in 1792. It was published at a meeting of the Continental Congress in 1776, 16 years before the USA was created.

The Constitution is the governance document of the United States of America.

The Declaration of Independence has no force of law. A congressional resolution calling December 21st Chocolate Chip Cookie Celebration Day has more weight.
Cloud says

Ok let's say I agree all evil comes from the religious.

You can agree with yourself. I didn't say that ALL evil comes from Religion.

Cloud says

First of all Clint, I would not ever strongly urge you to do anything. Again, feeling bad about taking Dan to the woodshed?

FYI - Dan and I were simply mutually exchanging ideas. The purpose of any debate is to try and get to the truth, not win (in the literal sense of the word 'win').

Secondly, I was strongly urging you to get educated on the evils of religion purely because you were stating stuff like how Bill O Reilly states on fox news. "they hate us for our freedom" kind of crap. The strong urge is because of your ignorance, that's all. It is up to you whether to consider it or leave it.

Cloud says

Are there any leaders you respect in our country's history?
Cause if you can murmur a few...as hard as that might be, I will show you, in all probablilty, a Christian.

Did I say all Christians are evil? I think if religion mixes up with politics, you end up getting evil things. There's literal proof in front of our very eyes for this.

Cloud says

Let's back up....maybe you are a liberal and think our country sucks and is evil... in which case we can not agree on anything.

I am simply a guy interested in getting to the truth, regardless of political views. I suggest that once you stop arguing for/against either side (liberal/conservative), you'll start seeing the importance of getting to the truth as well.

Cloud says

This is why most of the US military are religious are conservative and FIGHT not for religion but for freedom that provides the right to practice religion.

OK. Simple question: Why did US wage war on Iraq? Was it because Iraq was interfering with the US's rights to practice religion?