Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion? Showing 3,301-3,350 of 12,463

[Drew]

What is responsible for cults like the Branch Davidians, Heaven's Gate, or the Manson Family, religion.

[Drew]

Shannon wrote: "Drew wrote: "What is responsible for most of the wars around the world wherein the military uses such weapons, religion."

Disagree on this one. Responsible for many but not most, at least histori..."

okay, so there were a few that weren't, my point still stands very strong.

[[deleted user]]

Drew wrote: "Shannon wrote: "Drew wrote: "What is responsible for most of the wars around the world wherein the military uses such weapons, religion."

Disagree on this one. Responsible for many but not most, ..."


We had this discussion a few weeks ago. There are a lot more than a few ... had quite a list going.

Now, I'm not saying religion hasn't caused many wars throughout history. Don't get me wrong. It's just that ... many think religion has caused most wars, but that's just not accurate.

[cHriS]

Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "A single drop of rain contributes to a flood. "
So you would agree that the catholic church's position on contraception is a contributing factor in the spread of aids then?"

Well since you Gary or Johndoe are unable to give any numbers and Johndoe has withdrawn his statement I guess you three have been checkmated on that one.


One drop of rain, one Catholic with aids.

[cHriS]

Drew wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would not be valid proof anyway..."

Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would not be valid proof anyway..."

Science was responsible for it
ok stop there, otherwise you are just passing the buck.

If you atheists want to take credit for some of the things science has given us, then you must take credit for all of the things science does.

[Travis]

cs wrote: "Drew wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would not be valid..."

So, you take credit for 300 molested children?

Might want to stop playing this game.

[Shanna]

300 is conservative....

[Gary]

cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would not be valid proof anyway. "

By your own argument please provide proof that my statement had no validity stating precise numbers.

cs wrote: "You then go on to say that this unknown number of Catholic Africans, who are persuaded to not use condoms, unlike us non African folks who don’t seem to be as gullible, are five times more likely to be infected."

Still trying to imply racism? I wasn't saying African's were more gullible, I was saying Catholics were. The 5 times more likely is because that is what happens if you don't use something that protects at least 80% of the time. Welcome to maths.

cs wrote: "But you then go on to say “a large number of people in Africa are devout Catholics”. a large (but exact numbers unknown) proportion of those millions are five times more likely to die because of that advice."

So are you denying that there are Catholics in Africa? Are you denying that self-professed Catholics will be tempted to do what the Church tells them is moral?

Well done you just invalidated your own point about religion being the source of ethics, as if people do not obey what the church says, how can it make them behave in a prescribed manner?

cs wrote: "What utter rubbish. But that’s not all, you then say "

By your own argument please provide proof that my statement was 'utter rubbish' stating precise numbers.

cs wrote: "Even MORE rubbish, you are making this up as you go along.

By your own argument please provide proof that my statement was 'rubbish' stating precise numbers.

Of course you could always look up the Catholic Catechesism of the Catholic church, Article 6 2370 "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil

So you are still refusing to answer direct questions and still demanding impossibly exacting numbers to support other peoples points while expecting your own statements to be taken as gospel without even a accompanying logical argument. You have moved on to try to accuse those who disagree with you of bigotry, and started to 'rubbish' arguments with arrogant dismissal. Is it going to be name calling next, or just skipping straight to Godwin's? :-)

[cHriS]

Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would not be valid proof anyway..."

catholic/aids issue

see post about, this has now been resolved.

Cerebus, Gary & Johndoe were unable to substantiate Johndoe's statement about Africa/Catholics/aids, and Johndoe has now sort of withdrawn it by giving another example in the hope that this one will go away.

[Gary]

cs wrote: "If you atheists want to take credit for some of the things science has given us, then you must take credit for all of the things science does. "

Take credit for? Science is the seeking of knowledge, what is then done with that knowledge is up to the person who wields it.

Using the process of science we have learnt how to do amazing things, and terrible things. However, the morality of what is done with it is still down to the ideology of the people who wielded it.

The A bomb was developed as a weapon by several cultures, all religious to varying extents. The USA used it, because they made the moral choice to use the powerful weapon. It didn't get used because 'science' told them to, it got used to try to end a war. Whether that was right or wrong to do is another question.

Without science you wouldn't have the A bomb, jets to fly into buildings or crusader swords.

Without science you wouldn't have Christianity, as without the knowledge of carpentry they would have been unable to create a cross.

You are the one who claims that religion (or a religious culture) leads to superior morality. Science does not lead to superior morality intrinsically (but morality and ethics are a science unto themselves).

[cHriS]

Gary wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would not be valid proof anyway. "

By your own argument please provide ..."

Still trying to imply racism? I wasn't saying African's were more gullible, I was saying Catholics were. The 5 times more likely is because that is what happens if you don't use something that protects at least 80% of the time. Welcome to maths.

Catholics were more gullible?

So are you now expanding this to world wide or is it just Africa?

If it's worldwide then that changes things; but if it's just Africia we are talking about, then we are talking about Catholic Africans. And if you think that is racism to call them gullible, well thats just what you have done.

Welcome to maths

It's good to know you know maths, and yes I understand 80% is 5 times.

So tell me what I should multiply 5 by to get the total Africian Catholics that have died from aids because they were told not to use a condom by the Pope.

Oh, and then if you would like to explain for the others reading this why the Pope only told Africans not to use condoms.

[Gary]

cs wrote: "catholic/aids issue

see post about, this has now been resolved.

Cerebus, Gary & Johndoe were unable to substantiate Johndoe's statement about Africa/Catholics/aids, and Johndoe has now sort of withdrawn it by giving another example in the hope that this one will go away"

Ah so you are opting for "declaring self winner" and accusing others of using your own favourite tactic of changing the subject.

Hypocrisy and arrogance. Another shining example of the problem of religious adherents.

You have demanded exact numbers in support of the point and yet have provided none yourself.

Oh and "checkmate"? Really? Some of us are debating in intellectual honesty, not fighting tooth and nail to 'win' despite the weakness of our thesis.

[cHriS]

Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Drew wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would n..."

Oh so you can give numbers to some things.

Your figure of 300. Is that Priests you are hinting at or are you including all occupations.

Whats your occupation?

[Drew]

cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Drew wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates a..."

Another red herring, this person is a ridiculous and sad person who obviously can't explain any of his beliefs. Might as well be talking to a wall.

[cerebus]

cs wrote: "Well since you Gary or Johndoe are unable to give any numbers and Johndoe has withdrawn his statement I guess you three have been checkmated on that one.
"
I said nothing about numbers, I asked a question and you, yet again, avoided answering. So again, I ask, your drop of rain analogy suggests you agree that the catholic church's position on condoms is a contributing factor in the spread of aids.
If you think this is 'checkmate' then you nderstand chess as well as you understand science.

[cerebus]

cs wrote: "see post about, this has now been resolved"
Is smugness another of the virtues you gain from religion?

cs wrote: "Cerebus, Gary & Johndoe were unable to substantiate Johndoe's statement about Africa/Catholics/aids, and Johndoe has now sort of withdrawn it by giving another example in the hope that this one will go away."
You assume too much.....

[cerebus]

@cs, I will ask the question as plainly as possible. Do you agree that the catholic church's position on condom usage is a contributing factor in the spread of aids?

Note several things about the question.
1) there is no estimate of the size of the contribution in the question.
2) the answer to this question is not an end to the discussion.
3) it is an honest question, not an attempt to trap you.

[Maria]

People are dying of AIDS because they are too weak to practice abstinance. Priests included. Any religion that refuses to discipline their leaders for abhorrent behavior - just move them to a parish where nobody knows them so they can start buggering young boys there - is not a religion. Everyone with a grain of sense knows that the Catholic church is a BUSINESS, not a RELIGION.

[[deleted user]]

ok wat about this would you reather live in a world where in the fouture with all the tech we have will destroy everybody beacause we are greedy or in a world that we can live in peace i mean thankfull that we got science but i think religion is 10000000000000000000000 times more important

[Hazel]

Yair, why do I get this feeling that your school reports are less than glowing...

[Maria]

Actually some science and some religion is a good thing. In both cases I think we have to be careful of the extremists. Some religious fanatics do way more harm than good. Example - extreme pro-lifers think nothing of killing doctors, patients and innocent bystanders with bombs in abortion clinics - all in the name of saving a cell blob that will eventually become a human being. However, that is the extreme. Most prolifers are not that way. Just like most Muslims are horrified at what was done on 9/11 - by extremists of their faith. In most cases, religion is making it's "normal" followers kinder, gentler, healthier, more tolerant people - which is a good thing.

[Maria]

Hazel wrote: "Yair, why do I get this feeling that your school reports are less than glowing..."

LOL - I didn't want to bring that up, but yeah,YAIR - try some capital letters and some punctuation, man!

[cerebus]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "ok wat about this would you reather live in a world where in the fouture with all the tech we have will destroy everybody beacause we are greedy or in a world that we can live in peace i mean thank..."
I'd rather live in a world with punctuation.

[[deleted user]]

look the reason i say i dont give a crap about science is because im passing ALL my clases eccept science and i dont know if its because my teacher is B or just beacuse science is dificult idk

[Maria]

Cerebus wrote: "-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "ok wat about this would you reather live in a world where in the fouture with all the tech we have will destroy everybody beacause we are greedy or in a world that we can live in ..."

AGREED!!!!

[Maria]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "look the reason i say i dont give a crap about science is because im passing ALL my clases eccept science and i dont know if its because my teacher is B or just beacuse science is dificult idk"

It is because you are unable to express yourself using the written word. Is English your first language? Just trying to help, dude.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Is YAIR code for 'pwn'?

[cHriS]

Cerebus wrote: "@cs, I will ask the question as plainly as possible. Do you agree that the catholic church's position on condom usage is a contributing factor in the spread of aids?

Note several things about the ..."

No.

[cHriS]

Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "In other words it was a random statement that has no validity and it is not important to give estimates as these would not be valid proof anyway..."

No went to the a bomb because, atheists here think it's clever to point out to anyone who puts religion over science, the internet.

[Drew]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "ok wat about this would you reather live in a world where in the fouture with all the tech we have will destroy everybody beacause we are greedy or in a world that we can live in peace i mean thank..."

Religion doesn't mean peace folks, in fact, the opposite. Religious people are intolerant of anyone who isn't of their mindset, they constantly try to demoralize and degrade anyone who doesn't believe the way they do. You call that peace?

[cHriS]

Drew wrote: "-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "ok wat about this would you reather live in a world where in the fouture with all the tech we have will destroy everybody beacause we are greedy or in a world that we can live in ..."

I'm intolerant of you and the way you think. I bet you are an atheist who reads Dawkins. Lets start another war.

[[deleted user]]

no my first language is spanish but i was always an A or B or C or D staright student haha lol but anywaise

[Travis]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "look the reason i say i dont give a crap about science is because im passing ALL my clases eccept science and i dont know if its because my teacher is B or just beacuse science is dificult idk"


It's why I gave up on religion. I kept finding myself thinking "God is such a bitch."

[[deleted user]]

shut up travis dont ever talk about god like thaT AGAIN MOFO

[Maria]

cs wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "@cs, I will ask the question as plainly as possible. Do you agree that the catholic church's position on condom usage is a contributing factor in the spread of aids?

It may be a contributing factor, but if the adherents to this crazy Catholic rule decide to engage in behavior that spreads AIDS, which is usually homosexual relations and illegal drug use - then they have a lot more to worry about than breaking the condom rule. Aren't these considered to be serious sins for Catholics as well? (Priests are the exceptions, I guess - LOL). Common sense has to rule.

[[deleted user]]

IM CATHOLIC AND THATS ALL A LIE!!!!!!!!

[Maria]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "shut up travis dont ever talk about god like thaT AGAIN MOFO"

YAIR - I think God prefers his name (or in this case his title, "God" is a general term, not his name) to be CAPITALIZED. And who are you to tell anyone else how to talk about anything.

[Maria]

"Religion doesn't mean peace folks, in fact, the opposite. Religious people are intolerant of anyone who isn't of their mindset, they constantly try to demoralize and degrade anyone who doesn't believe the way they do. You call that peace?"

Definitely not. But just as you can't lump all non-religious people into the category of heinous, horrible people, you can't really generalize all religious people as intolerant zealots. They're not all like that. There are extremes in all beliefs.

[Travis]

Maria wrote: "-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "shut up travis dont ever talk about god like thaT AGAIN MOFO"

Oh relax, if god doesn't think it's funny, he can smite me.

You should be worrying about important things, like dealing with your caps lock disorder and fixing that sticky ! button on your keyboard.

[Maria]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "IM CATHOLIC AND THATS ALL A LIE!!!!!!!!"


OOOOH, I must have struck a nerve - look at all the capital letters! What's a lie? That it's a crazy rule? Or that priests engage in homosexual behavior? Or that this type of behavior does not help spread AIDs. Explain yourself.

[[deleted user]]

im at skool and all the capitla letters wast just an an accident look anywaise y are we fighting about this thank god we have him and science so lets just be gratefull ok?

[John]

cs wrote: "Do you mean that you with drew it because you were not able to verify it."
I withdrew it because you keep doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes and yelling "lalala, No Links!, lalala". And since it's way more fun to watch you being a hypocrite I'm just robbing you of your fodder with which you are consequently trying to ignore my argument. Though I see that others are doing a good job at providing even more arguments. I might also suggest taking a look at the reactions of the Catholics who actually work with people suffering from ADIS when Pope Ratzinger made the mistake of seeming progressive and realistic (= suggesting to accept condoms to stop the spreading of diseases). Hint: They seemed ready to throw a party until the vatican went and said that the Pope was "misunderstood".

But now to the fun part:
I changed my argument. Now show us what your christian morals are made of and defend them.


Yair, have you ever read the bible?
"God is such a bitch" was one of the nicer thoughts I had during it. But it was quite a mix, going from "senile" to "psychopathic asshole", depending on the chapter I was reading (the latter during "Leviticus". In the context of it being part of the bible, the content and the fact that people take this seriously and see it as "the word of gawd" one of the most abominable and despicable pieces of literature I ever read).


Maria wrote: "It may be a contributing factor, but if the adherents to this crazy Catholic rule decide to engage in behavior that spreads AIDS, which is usually homosexual relations and illegal drug use - then they have a lot more to worry about than breaking the condom rule.
It's estimated that about 12 million women and 8 million men are infected with AIDS around the globe.
Unborn Children can be infected because their mother has AIDS.

So no, it doesn't require homosexual relationships or drugs to spread.

[Maria]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "im at skool and all the capitla letters wast just an an accident look anywaise y are we fighting about this thank god we have him and science so lets just be gratefull ok?"

I don't think we're fighting - this is a cool discussion. Let's try to express our views and get along. And YAIR - pay attention to your class and do this later, man.

[[deleted user]]

!!!!!!!ok lets see johndoe you little peace of crap like i said im not a big relgous guy but dont talk about god like dat or u wouldnt be alive

[[deleted user]]

maria well i dont like how some of these people are calling god the B word i mean do u go church?

[John]

-Y_A_I_R- wrote: "!!!!!!!ok lets see johndoe you little peace of crap like i said im not a big relgous guy but dont talk about god like dat or u wouldnt be alive"

Wow, insults. Now I'm really impressed...

Regarding the alive part, I present to you: The dominant theory as to how life came to be (there are others out there, but this is the most plausible).
A self-replicating molecule formed when a series of fatty acids congealed into vesicles which, made permeable by convection cycles in a prebiotic Earth, trapped nucleotide monomers which self-ligated via hydrogen bonds and covalent bond ligation, polymerizing within the vesicle to form a primitive cell after which the surrounding ions increased the osmotic pressure allowing the cell to acquire lipids from other vesicles, which catalyzed competition and, thus, evolution.

No god required.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Yair, you can leave anytime. All opinions are valid, even yours. But no one is pushing your fingers on the keyboard. I'm not even sure you are who you say you are.

[[deleted user]]

wat do you mean am i who i say i am wat cain of question is that??????????

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Still here? Still want to play, then. Many of us think if god exists he is a son of a bitch. He kills babies, thousands, every day.

[[deleted user]]

yea you on crack!