Once again, i find it both hilarious and disgusting to note the sanctimony of many people here who profess to be christians, and find themselves in a scurrilous thread intended to bash atheists, and they pile on by comments which are intended to bring atheists into disrepute. The innuendo here is thicker than the cigarette smoke in a country bar on Saturday night.
Amazing how Christians are always trying to bring atheists into disrepute and atheists are only trying to spread peace, love and goodwill to Christians. For this, we are truly thankful.
Mr. Setanta,
Sir, many times in this thread we Christians have stated that we did not agree with the title of this thread, nor it's premise. And, we still do not believe an atheists life is pointless.
And just who is bashing you, Mr. Setanta? You tell me and I will take care of that right away.
Oh, and I don't go to bars. Not good for you.
BBB,
I will ask you again, what church do you go to that would think it is okay for you to use God's name in vain? Also, you rushed to the aid of someone in a Muslim Question thread because I made a disparaging remark about their prophet marrying a six year old girl and having sex with her at age nine. Why are you not rushing to God's aid and instead defaming Him? I honestly would like to know the answer to this question, because it puzzles me deeply.
Let me see. Four people find a particular post offensive and make a comment on it. These four people are now sanctimonious and are bringing atheists into disrepute. Nobody can bring an atheist into disrepute except that said atheist themselve. Gosh, gee whiz.... we get blamed for everything. :-)
It's 'cause you guys never did live down the crusades and salem 'witch' trials.
Um... Newflash, Doktor S. Us guys were not there.
Doktor S wrote:It's 'cause you guys never did live down the crusades and salem 'witch' trials.
Doktor S,
Just how old do you think WE are?!
Oh, and BTW, I wasn't around for the slavery days either. :wink:
But it's the same religion handed down two thousand years ago and its followers that must take the blame.
cicerone imposter wrote:But it's the same religion handed down two thousand years ago and its followers that must take the blame.
Mr. Cicerone Imposter,
Surely you are making a joke here?
Oh I get it! :wink: You don't think God should hold accountable mankind for the sins of Adam and Eve but it's okay to hold all Christians accountable for something some other Christians did how many years ago?
Yep, perfectly clear to me now!
What, no christians involved in the crusades? My mistake!
Or are you saying that because 'you' personally didn't slaughter anyone, there's no reponsibility to be had?
As soon as you claim the banner of christianity (or anything else) you are by proxy supporting all that it supports.
Your religion may be ideally one of peace and love, but history tells a very different story of what it becomes in practice
It's about time I welcome Doktor S, whom I tend to agree with.
On this thread, I am kicking off, as every time I see the title it annoys me again.
I'm kicking off anyway, relative to my usual number of posts, as I'll be travelling.
Consider yourselves thought of on the trip, one and all, as I drive though the forest, the Bay, the hill country, the ribald city, the desert, the desert, the desert, where the hell is the gas station.....
whatever. I am not pointless and neither are you. Our ideas of what is pointless need, of course, some working out.
I see muscles on both sides - not so much from arguments on a2k, which I see mostly as weak, as from theological discussions before I punted.
In any case - ahhhhhhh, happy winter frolic.
No disrespect, but that is the same as saying that C.I. relatives were responsible for attacking the U.S. in 1941. See how silly that is?
Doktor S wrote:What, no christians involved in the crusades? My mistake!
Or are you saying that because 'you' personally didn't slaughter anyone, there's no reponsibility to be had?
As soon as you claim the banner of christianity (or anything else) you are by proxy supporting all that it supports.
Your religion may be ideally one of peace and love, but history tells a very different story of what it becomes in practice
Please see my above post to Mr. Cicerone Imposter.
Intrepid also doesn't understand anything about WWII as well as most other things he talks about. But I tire of repeating myself, so I hope somebody else will take the time to explain it to this ignoramous.
Don't get me going on the crusades. Ok, I won't. Good night, Gracie.
cicerone imposter wrote:Intrepid also doesn't understand anything about WWII as well as most other things he talks about. But I tire of repeating myself, so I hope somebody else will take the time to explain it to this ignoramous.
Trust me, Mr. Cicerone Imposter. I am sure that everyone can see the validity of your statement.
C.I.,
You seem to be missing the entire point of what I said. Whatever my knowledge of WWII, and it is considerable, is not the point at all. You make a statement without fact and when you are called on it, you come up with the above post. You may want to watch your name calling there Mr. Imposter.
ossobuco wrote:Don't get me going on the crusades. Ok, I won't. Good night, Gracie.
Wishing you a safe and wonderful trip, Ossobuco.
Yes, Osso, please be safe and Happy Holidays to you!
Intrepid wrote:No disrespect, but that is the same as saying that C.I. relatives were responsible for attacking the U.S. in 1941. See how silly that is?
A more valid analogy would be to say a current supporter of the nazi party is somewhat responsible for prior and current actions venerated by that party.
It's a choice, you see.
You can't hold accountable through genealogy, as that
isn't a choice.
Christians aren't christians by geneology
