patrick.net

Quigley says

It would be far more likely for a Ferrari to be created by an explosion in an auto parts factory.

Not really. Richard Dawkins addressed this objection with the metaphor of Mount Improbable. Evolutionary mutations happen a little bit at a time, over billions of years, with natural selection favoring whatever works. We have four limbs and a vestigial tail leftover from our primate ancestors, who share more than 90% of our DNA. Tiny mutations, over time, add up. If you look only at the leap from molecules to cells, or cells to humans, then it can seem as improbable as leaping up a cliff, but if you look at the long record of incremental change, then you see the gentle slope leading around the side of the cliff and up to the top. The "intelligent design" believers are a type of creationists, and are rejected by most scientists.

FortWayne says

Romans, the Sodom and Gomorrah.

The Romans built the greatest empire the world had ever seen, and the empire lasted more than 1,000 years. Same-sex marriage existed at the time of Cicero, and Rome continued to prosper for 300 years, until Constantine imposed Christianity. Within one century after that, the city of Rome fell, and humanity fell into a dark age.

Even now, many secrets of Roman technology are only being re-discovered. Roman plumbing delivered more water than any city anywhere until New York in 1986. Within the last three decades, the secrets of Roman concrete have been re-discovered. Roman nanotechnology was rediscovered within one decade ago.

Sodom and Gomorrah may never have existed, and besides their story doesn't say what you say. There is no evidence of their existence outside the Bible, which says the sin of Sodom was rape. In the New Testament, Paul criticized homosexuality, which he saw all around him, but none of the quotations attributed to Jesus or the original disciples do. To the contrary, Luke 17:34-36 (emphasizing belief as the requirement for rapture) refers to two same-sex couples, wherein the believers get raptured up. The Christians rejected expressly the prohibitions of Leviticus:

"Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."

You try to distract from your sins by hating neighbors whom you should love, and your lies defile you.

Strategist says

No one asked these people to become terrorists and kill babies. It was their choice, inspired by Islam.

You missed the point, honey. The point is that a Christian crusade led to the rise of ISIS. So yes, Christianity does make the world a worse place.

You can't fight irrationality with more irrationality.

FortWayne says

Those are unrelated to the topic. We were talking about Romans, the Sodom and Gomorrah. Way to go off on tangent instead of dealing with reality Dan, so typical of you.

Off topic, my ass. Let me remind you of the history of the posts.

First you make the baseless assertions that (FortWayne says)

Christianity brings cohesiveness, LGBT crap destroys society.

Then curious2 refutes this with the empirical fact that (curious2 says)

NO society, anywhere in human history, has ever been destroyed by LGBT.

You then double down on your assertions, again with no evidence to back them up. FortWayne says

That is completely not true. It has been destroyed by LGBT, by failure of morality. LGBT is a symptom of failing morality.

I counter with two more historic examples that Christianity, not homosexuality, has destroyed civilizations. Dan8267 says

Was Nazi Germany a moral society? It was a Christian society and very anti-gay.

Were the Spanish conquistadors moral? Were not the genocides of Native Americans by Christians a huge moral failure? Or are you going to blame that on the gays as well.

So, yes, it is quit relevant. The real history of the world is very relevant to exposing the lies you tell. I can give hundreds of examples of civilizations deliberately destroyed by Christians. You cannot give a single example of a civilization destroyed by homosexuality.

History 100
Fort Wayne 0

I find Fort Wayne's arguments that homosexuality destroys the moral fabric of society and society itself to be utterly hypocritical. If Fort Wayne had any moral backbone, he would be objecting to the real moral decay that our society has engaged in. Yet, Fort Wayne defends the truly horrific and immoral actions our society undertakes. Pictures say more than words could.

And you claim that consensual loving relationships between homosexuals is what's destroying the moral fabric of our country? How fucking crazy are you? Why don't you express any outrage over the above morally bankrupt and despicable actions? You never have possessed the moral high ground, and you are an illustration of how religion corrupts and twists morality into something disgusting and perverted.

And you give us yet another reason to revoke religious privilege and ban religions starting with Christianity.

curious2 says

Christianity caused the fall of Rome, setting back western civilization for 1,000 years until the Enlightenment and our Republic broke religion's hold on power.

Another reason to ban religion.

Dan8267 says

I see nothing wrong with the pictures. Have you seen the beheading pictures?

Strategist says

Have you seen the beheading pictures?

That's not a fair question.

Strategist says

I see nothing wrong with the pictures. Have you seen the beheading pictures?

And that is why you are morally bankrupt. According to your god in the gospel according to Matthew 5:38-47,

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Are you saying that Jesus is wrong? That going against your god's commandments of "thou shalt not murder" and "love your neighbor" is justify if they have wronged you?

@Patrick, you say that Christianity is different from Islam because Jesus is always teaching people to be good. How do you square that with the fact that his followers completely and utterly reject those teachings and hold the same beliefs as Muslims?

Side note: Many of the people tortured and murdered in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib had nothing to do with terrorism. But I guess torturing innocent people doesn't bother Christians like Fort Wayne. Again, how is Christianity a religion of peace?

Dan8267 says

According to your god

Atheists have God's?

Dan8267 says

Many of the people tortured and murdered in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib had nothing to do with terrorism.

Bullshit. They should all be tortured for information and then shot.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

According to your god

Atheists have God's?

Sorry, I was having a discussion with Fort Wayne and you interrupted. I thought your response was his.

No, you're not a hypocrite. You're just morally wrong. Fort Wayne, however, is clearly a hypocrite as he's accepting, even approving, of something that goes completely against his so-called moral code and Christian values.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

Many of the people tortured and murdered in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib had nothing to do with terrorism.

Bullshit. They should all be tortured for information and then shot.

Wrong again. In a witch hunt a lot of innocent people get accused. A man wants his neighbor's flock or holds a grudge against the neighbor and tells the American soldiers that his neighbor is a terrorist and ISIS sympathizer. The American soldiers storm the man's house and bring him to the torture center to see what he knows. He knows nothing and dies from the torture. Are you OK with that?

Fort Wayne seems suddenly silent. I guess he can't face questioning.

Dan8267 says

Wrong again. In a witch hunt a lot of innocent people get accused. A man wants his neighbor's flock or holds a grudge against the neighbor and tells the American soldiers that his neighbor is a terrorist and ISIS sympathizer. The American soldiers storm the man's house and bring him to the torture center to see what he knows. He knows nothing and dies from the torture. Are you OK with that?

And what if he knows something that could save a lot of lives, but you don't get that information because you don't torture him.
Are you OK with that?

Strategist says

And what if he knows something that could save a lot of lives, but you don't get that information because you don't torture him.

Are you OK with that?

Hitler, Stalin, and Mao each killed more people than all the terrorists and all the criminals in all of human history combined. So yes, I'm OK with that. I'd rather live in a world where I have to fear a one in a million chance of being killed by a terrorist than a one in a thousand chance of being killed by the state. The state is far more dangerous. So yes, I'll take chaos over structured evil any day. It's by far the more rational choice.

Terrorism has never been and will never be an existential threat to free society. State tyranny most certainly is. No democracy or republic has EVER fell to terrorism. Many have fell to tyranny.

Strategist says

And what if he knows something that could save a lot of lives, but you don't get that information because you don't torture him.

My above answer was a practical one, but let's address the moral question.

Remember Jaycee Dugard? She was the pretty white blonde girl who was kidnapped at 12 years old, and raped and abused for 18 years, giving birth to two children from rape.

So let's say that Jaycee's dad knows "something" that could save a lot of lives, a major terrorist attack, but he won't tell you even under torture. Would you rape Jaycee in front of him to get him to talk? That's the moral question.

My answer is hell no. What's yours?

Wow, this thread suddenly went silent. Moral dilemmas too tough? Do they challenge black-and-white worldviews?

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

And what if he knows something that could save a lot of lives, but you don't get that information because you don't torture him.


Are you OK with that?

Hitler, Stalin, and Mao each killed more people than all the terrorists and all the criminals in all of human history combined. So yes, I'm OK with that. I'd rather live in a world where I have to fear a one in a million chance of being killed by a terrorist than a one in a thousand chance of being killed by the state. The state is far more dangerous. So yes, I'll take chaos over structured evil any day. It's by far the more rational choice.

Terrorism has never been and will never be an existential threat to free society. State tyranny most certainly is. No democracy or republic has EVER fell to terrorism. Many have fell to tyranny.

We don't live in a Hitler, Stalin, or Mao country. We live in the 21st century America. Get real.

Dan8267 says

So let's say that Jaycee's dad knows "something" that could save a lot of lives, a major terrorist attack, but he won't tell you even under torture. Would you rape Jaycee in front of him to get him to talk? That's the moral question.

My answer is hell no. What's yours?

I would torture the dad, not the girl.

FP says

Not everything is in the Bible. Try reading something else.

My protestant beliefs teach me to never use anything other than God's Word as the authority for my life.

Dan8267 says

This is a false argument. It is not merely the case that bad people use religion as an excuse. That statement is based on the false assumption that religion does not influence people's behavior and worldviews.

I'm gonna cut you off right there Dan. My point, which you completely missed, was that false interpretation, and actions that result there of, do not a religious zealot make. Quite the opposite, people who go off half-cocked without taking the time to fully understand their systems beliefs usually commit heresy, and are therefore heretics.

Sounds like the religion your really against is the religion of man, not God.

Dan8267 says

More evidence that religion rots brains. It's not something without extremely bad consequences, including in America today. No one would be foolish enough to believe in creationism if not for religion.

My example came out of YOUR field of work. You're so closed off to anything but hating God, you can't even see intelligent design when it's smacking you right in the face.

Dan8267 says

However, its followers have committed the greatest atrocities in all of human history and continue to do great harm to America today.

I'm gonna get right in your face and make you justify your BS position. What did believers of Jesus Christ ever do to YOU. Not humanity, not 500 years ago. YOU personally.

curious2 says

the empire lasted more than 1,000 years

That's actually a sad commentary on our own society. We may be farther along the continuum in our 200 plus years than it took Rome 1,000 years to attain--like maybe we're already at Rome's 800th year. I think most Romans would blush at the level of both heterosexual and homosexual promiscuity. What do you think a plague like AIDS would have meant for those so-far-advanced Romans? We have the benefits of modern science and medicine and AIDS is still incurable and subject to eternal permutations as different strains become immune to drugs. It's barely manageable, but at great expense and personal inconvenience. AIDS was first observed in 1981, 36 years ago. A person would have had to be about ten to be fully aware of AIDS and by 15 people were dying all around that same person in their mid-teens. Can you imagine, a person only 46 years old today can't remember a world without AIDS--in just one generation! Yet not one militant gay person in the 70's could have been convinced that what they were doing had the capacity to kill them, but in a few years they would be dying right and left. It was the level of promiscuity that finally gave the fragile virus, probabaly around for over 100 years, the proper environment to replicate and begin killing. The heterosexual promiscuity of the 70's, exemplified in such movies as 1976's Looking for Mr. Goodbar, the true story of a sexually insatiable young woman who gets herself killed, also gave us the plague of genital herpes that is incurable and often leads to anal/oral/penile cancers, Such things 200-300 years into the Roman empire would have killed it off by the 400th year because they would have had no idea what was causing the diseases nor the ability to cure them.

NuttBoxer says

Dan8267 says

However, its followers have committed the greatest atrocities in all of human history and continue to do great harm to America today.

I'm gonna get right in your face and make you justify your BS position. What did believers of Jesus Christ ever do to YOU. Not humanity, not 500 years ago. YOU personally.

Probably nothing, but still not a fair question. What did Muslims personally do to anyone on Patnet? Probably nothing. Not a reason to support the atrocities they practice on others.

Strategist says

We don't live in a Hitler, Stalin, or Mao country. We live in the 21st century America. Get real.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Germany was one of the most enlightened civilizations in the early 20th century. They had a long history of scientific advancement and refined culture. Yet Germany decayed very quickly into Nazism. It is utter foolishness to think that there is something magical about the United States that makes it impervious to tyranny and atrocities. In fact, America's history is full of atrocities from genocide to slavery to apartheid to nuking noncombatant civilians, to lethal medical experiments on unsuspecting civilians to blatant election fraud to torture. The idea that America could not commit crimes against humanity is empirically false. You need to get real about history.

In any case, the moral question still stands even if you do not have the courage to answer it. If you cannot answer it, then your opinion should carry no weight. The same goes for Fort Wayne. So again, do you rape Jaycee to get her father to talk and save American lives?

If you set up a system in which "bad people" get tortured for the greater good of society, the people performing the torture won't have any qualms about torturing, including rape torturing, underaged girls, even toddlers to get what they want. Torturers don't have moral backbones. They don't draw lines. To them the ends always justify the means.

Strategist says

I would torture the dad, not the girl.

Cop-out. Let's say the dad doesn't talk or you don't have custody of him and cannot get custody of him in time. Do you torture the daughter to get him to tell you what you want?

Sounds like the answer is no, in which case you are admitting that torture should not be used unless you are absolutely certain of a person's guilt. This is not how it was applied in Gitmo or Abu Ghraib. You just want to pretend that the people deciding who gets torture never, ever make a wrong call. That's bullshit. Our country has executed at least two individuals who were utterly innocent beyond any doubt even unreasonable doubt. Our country has probably executed hundreds of innocent persons. So pretending that we've never tortured an innocent person is ridiculous.

And quite frankly, anyone who is OK with torturing an innocent person is no better than ISIS.

Dan8267 says

trategist says

We don't live in a Hitler, Stalin, or Mao country. We live in the 21st century America. Get real.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

The only threat to our freedoms in this day and age is Islam. You talk about eternal vigilance, but ignore the threat from Islam.

Dan8267 says

Cop-out. Let's say the dad doesn't talk or you don't have custody of him and cannot get custody of him in time. Do you torture the daughter to get him to tell you what you want?

I would not torture someone i know is innocent. What's the point?
To answer your question directly. I would not torture or rape the daughter. We have to draw the line somewhere.

We can start by banning people from Salafi-Wahabi countries or countries where Salafi-Wahabis control large swaths of territory.

NuttBoxer says

Quite the opposite, people who go off half-cocked without taking the time to fully understand their systems beliefs usually commit heresy, and are therefore heretics.

This is a No True Scottsman argument. The left applies it to whitewash Islamic terrorism. The right applies it to whitewash atrocities and other evil actions committed by Christians.

Achmed the Muslim commits murder in the name of Islam because he believes his god demands the blood of the Jews. Larry the leftist then retroactively disassociates Achmed with Islam stating that Achmed could not be a true Muslim because the Quran explicitly states
1. None of you have faith until you love for your neighbor what you love for yourself.
2. Whoever wishes to be delivered from the fire and to enter Paradise should treat the people as he wishes to be treated.
3. None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.
4. None of you is a believer if he eats his full while his neighbour hasn’t anything.
5.Do unto all men as you would wish to have done unto you; and reject for others what you would reject for yourselves.
6. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you.
7. There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm.

And that's just a few examples.

So, by your criteria, no terrorist can be a Muslim by definition, and therefore no Muslim is a terrorist. 9/11, the Boston Marathon bombing, and ISIS have nothing to do with Islam. Sounds exactly what the wacky left says.

[stupid comment limit]

Similarly, the KKK has nothing to do with Christianity even though it is an organization made entirely of Christians who believe the dirty Jew killed their god and that the Christian god made the white man superior to all other races.

Hell, by your criteria Fort Wayne is not a Christian because he does not follow Jesus's teachings, particularly the parts about
1. Not throwing the first stone.
2. Love your neighbor as yourself.
3. Turn the other cheek.
4. Do good to those who hurt you.

So, Fort Wayne, do you accept NuttBoxer's assessment that you are not a Christian?

WaPoIsHitler Lipsovitch says

We can start by banning people from Salafi-Wahabi countries or countries where Salafi-Wahabis control large swaths of territory.

It would be a good start. Profiling and discriminating at times is necessary for our safety.
I would ban ALL religious Muslims from entering the country, and do everything to deport those already in the country. We don't need crazy people in this country.

NuttBoxer says

Sounds like the religion your really against is the religion of man, not God.

There is no religion of god. There are only the religions of man. That is not an opinion or value judgement. It is a fact.

No moral entity, nonetheless the embodiment of morality, would allow atrocities to be committed in his name.

NuttBoxer says

Dan8267 says

However, its followers have committed the greatest atrocities in all of human history and continue to do great harm to America today.

I'm gonna get right in your face and make you justify your BS position. What did believers of Jesus Christ ever do to YOU. Not humanity, not 500 years ago. YOU personally.

Nothing. The messenger is irrelevant. I've never been raped. I'm still against the legalization of rape. I've never been murdered. I'm still against the legalization of murder. I've never been tortured. I'm still against the legalization of torture.

You see, I have this psychological condition called empathy which allows me to value the lives of others. Either you get that or your don't. If you don't get that, there is nothing I can do to explain my worldview to you.

Strategist says

The only threat to our freedoms in this day and age is Islam

That is a foolish statement. Not only is Islam not the only threat to our freedoms, it is not even one of the major threats to our freedoms. The NSA is far more of a threat to your freedoms than any dumbass terrorist could ever be. Your entire prospective of the sizes of problems is all fucked up.

The U.S. federal government has far more capacity to torture and/or kill you and your family than Achmed over in Afghanistan does. The U.S. government has killed far more of its own citizens than all terrorists combined. The U.S. government does more every single day to restrict your rights and liberties than any rag head ever could.

If America is to ever fall, it will be from within.

Strategist says

I would not torture someone i know is innocent. What's the point?

Maybe you wouldn't, but they guy hired to do the actual torturing most certainly would. The points of torturing an innocent person are
1. You don't know if he or she is innocent, so err on the side of safety and torture away.
2. It can make other people talk.

If you support torturing anyone, then you in effect support torturing innocent persons even if that is not your intention. It is the inescapable consequence of your support of torturing anyone. That is why you should be against all torture. Christ, Strategist, look more than one move ahead. Acknowledge that there are unintended consequences of policies.

Dan8267 says

Would you rape Jaycee

Would you torture her? True, you'll have to know some history.

or her?

No. I would not torture Irma Grese or Ilse Koch. Would you? Would you rape them to get revenge?

I answered your question clearly and honestly. Answer mine clearly and honestly if you are not a coward.