The irony.
Islam has put suicide bombers on the map but probably has prevented more suicides than anything else on earth.
But on a flip side.. I think 3k atheist Japanese people suicide killed people
Religion/Spirituality Atheism Discussion
- Thread starter blackslash
- Start date
Islam has put suicide bombers on the map but probably has prevented more suicides than anything else on earth.
But on a flip side.. I think 3k atheist Japanese people suicide killed people
If it wasn't a fact then id also say its an excuse.
But it is a fact that you can't dispute and inturn not an excuse. Only idiots use phrases like how the world works, lol.
We barely know anything yet. We dont even understand over 90 of matter.
I guess the people who invented astrology, science, mathematics, and biology simply didn't know how the world worked (whatever that means, lol).
Tesla didn't know how the "world worked"
Religion really doesn't impact crime on a local level. If anything, things may increase without the influence of the church in some areas. Mainly churches that provide after school programs and such.
Dragonfly Jones
Siiiiiiiilence Punk!!
I'm just going by what the stats say
places like Amsterdam, Denmark, Sweden etc that are mostly atheist/non belief tend to have much lower crime rates than places where religious belief is more prominent
Religion doesn't have a direct correlation to crime though...show me those numbers. You're making a general assumption and tying it to religion.
you are the guy having problems in that departmentcausation and correlation
you can't see the the veil that religion provides to miscreants as correlating with calamities in the world
you can't see how religion promotes an idiocracy
No, there are quite a few idiotic atheist in this thread.
The irony and ignoranceCambodia under Pol Pot:
Germany under Hitler
Stalin's Russia:
Whenever you have a set of beliefs that puts you above reproach/judgement/condemnation/etc, it inevitably leads to abuse of power
the projection
who is considered more above reproach than god and his messengers?
we tolerate kid fukkers as respectable men because of religion, and this guy wants to say that atheists behave as if above reproach
prove it
Supercoolmayo
Superstar
So life would be exactly the same?
NERO
All Star
How do we define good and evil? In a society unshackled by the moorings of a rule set provided by higher power(s), the new rule set would need be based on something. Probably legality. The upshot is that legality can be changed as the rule-makers see fit which allows for some flexibility. The drawback is that legality can be changed as the rule-makers see fit allowing for flexibility. We have a conundrum. Another problem how we determine who determines who the rule-makers are? Is it a simple majority rules type situation? Who protects the weak in a simple majority rules type of situation? Why protect the weak at all? If it is about survival of the fittest then clearly the weak aren't fit so they don't need to be protected.
Question: What if you are deemed to be weak by science and the rule-makers decide that the weak need to be exterminated? If that decision comes down you could be unable to escape this conclusion using science because the analysis has already determined that you are one of the weak. This possibility is why I would not want to live in a world where objectivity rules and logical conclusions are followed without consistent moral consideration made for those who are unable to protect themselves.
Another way to explain this is that if I were to follow a survival of the fittest mentality without some higher moral code to rely on then there is no reason for me to consider anyone who does not help me survive and advance. If you have something I want then I will take it if I can get away with it. If you have a woman I want then I will take her too if I see fit. If you are in my path then I will crush you if I see you as weak. There is no right and wrong. There is only strong and weak and survival. I think the world would rapidly degenerate into piracy. Now, one could argue we are already living in a world where the strong prey on the weak and this is true but I think that faith keeps a kind of governor on the baser instincts of large swaths of the unenlightened, providing order, structure and a safety net for those perceived as weak.
Another issue is that "strong" and "weak" are relative terms and for the strongest there would always be more weak people to take advantage of. I think in this scenario humans would wipe themselves out sooner or later.
Question: What if you are deemed to be weak by science and the rule-makers decide that the weak need to be exterminated? If that decision comes down you could be unable to escape this conclusion using science because the analysis has already determined that you are one of the weak. This possibility is why I would not want to live in a world where objectivity rules and logical conclusions are followed without consistent moral consideration made for those who are unable to protect themselves.
Another way to explain this is that if I were to follow a survival of the fittest mentality without some higher moral code to rely on then there is no reason for me to consider anyone who does not help me survive and advance. If you have something I want then I will take it if I can get away with it. If you have a woman I want then I will take her too if I see fit. If you are in my path then I will crush you if I see you as weak. There is no right and wrong. There is only strong and weak and survival. I think the world would rapidly degenerate into piracy. Now, one could argue we are already living in a world where the strong prey on the weak and this is true but I think that faith keeps a kind of governor on the baser instincts of large swaths of the unenlightened, providing order, structure and a safety net for those perceived as weak.
Another issue is that "strong" and "weak" are relative terms and for the strongest there would always be more weak people to take advantage of. I think in this scenario humans would wipe themselves out sooner or later.
Last edited:
The irony and ignorance
who is considered more above reproach than god and his messengers?
we tolerate kid fukkers as respectable men because of religion, and this guy wants to say that atheists behave as if above reproach
A)
Don't lump me in with pedophile worshippers breh. B) Please note "set of beliefs", that includes all other religions as well. As I mentioned in the other thread on this topic, atheism is a religion like any other, so thus, with ANY set of beliefs that places you beyond reproach, including atheism and all major religions, fascim/dictatorship is inevitable
don't worry it's the royal "we"A)
