Christian and Athiest in the same house!

[ch33zw1z]

good luck with that. bible thumpers are always "holier than thou!!"

 

[swimscubasteve]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Yep. Every "there oughta be a law!" proposal like this needs to be looked at reversed. You think it should be illegal for kids to attend religious services? What if is was illegal for them NOT to? You think it should be illegal to allow smoking in bars? What if it was illegal NOT to? And on and on. Everytime you seek to create a law specifically for the purpose of your prejudice, you damn well better think about what your prejudice would look like reversed.

Your logic is incredibly flawed. Let's follow it through:

There should be a law against murder. You suggest that we consider a law making murder a requirement?

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Sorry to say, but decisions about religion should be made BEFORE marriage. Otherwise, I think you're setting yourself up for disaster.

QFT! How did you two even end up together? It defies logic. An atheist and a Christian are inherently incompatible, unless the Christian is merely a nominal Christian (as are many these days).

Not true. The factor that matters is respect. If they can respect each others beliefs, it can work. Same as any two different belief systems I imagine.

They're inherently different world views and completely incompatible. The only way they can co-exist is for one party or the other not to be a true practitioner of their belief system.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Atheists need to realize that there beliefs are just as "without" proof or fact as a believer in G-d, and they just believe the polar opposite.

Agnostics at least acknowledge that there is no way to prove either way (which is the most logical), but there belief requires no faith or belief, and can somehow seem without purpose. Purpose and drive is what makes humans great, but again they are the most logical. But a "free" choice presented by G-d cannot have proof or bias, otherwise it isn't a choice now is it. (Platinga Defense)

Science was spurred and financed by religion for millenia. They aren't polar opposites. Belief in G-d and nonbelief in G-d are polar opposites.

English motherfvcker, do you speak it!?

WTH?

Wan sum flied lice? Me so sawly? Want wide on wickshaw? Yes, master? :roll:

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ch33zw1z
good luck with that. bible thumpers are always "holier than thou!!"

Whew! I'm so glad we're not making sweeping generalizations about the OP's wife! Why that might look like prejudice!



:roll:

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Yep. Every "there oughta be a law!" proposal like this needs to be looked at reversed. You think it should be illegal for kids to attend religious services? What if is was illegal for them NOT to? You think it should be illegal to allow smoking in bars? What if it was illegal NOT to? And on and on. Everytime you seek to create a law specifically for the purpose of your prejudice, you damn well better think about what your prejudice would look like reversed.

Your logic is incredibly flawed. Let's follow it through:

There should be a law against murder. You suggest that we consider a law making murder a requirement?

No he is saying that, you should look at the situation from the opposite viewpoint to see if it is an absolute.

A law for murdering is absurd, therefore, there should be a law against it.

 

[BrokenVisage]

Big surprise a thread like this has 100+ replies already.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Yep. Every "there oughta be a law!" proposal like this needs to be looked at reversed. You think it should be illegal for kids to attend religious services? What if is was illegal for them NOT to? You think it should be illegal to allow smoking in bars? What if it was illegal NOT to? And on and on. Everytime you seek to create a law specifically for the purpose of your prejudice, you damn well better think about what your prejudice would look like reversed.

Your logic is incredibly flawed. Let's follow it through:

There should be a law against murder. You suggest that we consider a law making murder a requirement?

I had no idea that laws against murder were created specifically because of prejudice. I thought they existed because actual harm had been done and thus reparations to society were required.

Learn to fsckin' read, ok?

:roll:

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: DurocShark
Yesterday he finally said, "Why would I want to go listen to a bunch of people worshipping their fantasies?" I had to leave the room. That was a great line! But I didn't want to make my wife look like a fool by laughing.

You sound like a real jerk. Kids don't come up with stuff like that on their own and certainly wouldn't be so disrespectful to his mother unless he was following your example. Congrats.

You nailed this one. :thumbsup:

The only thing he 'nailed' is another nail into the coffin of his bigotry and stupidity. Please don't encourage the worthless wastes of human flesh.

And what do your patently-obvious rage issues say about atheism?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Wow.

Just...wow.

There's a big difference between taking out the trash and being indoctrinated into a religion. There's also the question of mutual respect, good role models, and positive psychological development.

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Why would you say that? My kids will go to church when they are young. I will stress the importance of Christianity, but when they come to an age to decide for themselves, I hope that I will be a good influence and not someone who will try to control their choices.

Because too many religions are about the church and not about belief, or morality, or spirituality even. I know some people have had very positive exposure to religion in their lives. I never have. Spirituality, yes; religion, no.

There is SO MUCH of religion trying to control in this world. It's not supposed to be about control. You wanna convert, convert by example. Be such a wonderful person that people choose to emulate you. People need to grow and develop before they are able to make informed decisions. Any decision made without information (or worse yet, with bad information) is more likely to cause harm than to help.

Everyone is trying to force everyone. Fit into society, be this, be that, believe this, etc. It's sooo hard to watch the erosion of the individual.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: Mursilis
Of course, 'good' is an ambiguous word today. But my problem with sourceninja's conclusion is that it's a logical fallacy; poor behavior by some "Christians" doesn't really go to the central question of theism any more than poor behavior by atheists (think Stalin's mass murder, for example) proves there is a God.

Logical posts and objective views need a QFT, and also bolsters my viewpoint on the people of ATOT.

Thanks! Philosophy minor WTF!!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Yep. Every "there oughta be a law!" proposal like this needs to be looked at reversed. You think it should be illegal for kids to attend religious services? What if is was illegal for them NOT to? You think it should be illegal to allow smoking in bars? What if it was illegal NOT to? And on and on. Everytime you seek to create a law specifically for the purpose of your prejudice, you damn well better think about what your prejudice would look like reversed.

Your logic is incredibly flawed. Let's follow it through:

There should be a law against murder. You suggest that we consider a law making murder a requirement?

No he is saying that, you should look at the situation from the opposite viewpoint to see if it is an absolute.

A law for murdering is absurd, therefore, there should be a law against it.

Exactly. Sorry about the previous reply but his ignorant attack pissed me off for a second there.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: ch33zw1z
good luck with that. bible thumpers are always "holier than thou!!"

I disagree. Most Christians I know are hyper-aware of their flaws and remain humble as a result. And those Christians who ask God for forgiveness but continue "sinning" anyway are what people say they are: "holier than thou" hypocrites.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

I don't really mean it, but sometimes I feel like it. You do realize though that your argument isn't valid, since there's a big difference between saying, "you have to be able to make an informed decision", and "the decision has been made for you."

If you really think that way, then you must also believe that laws about age of consent, driving, drinking, voting, renting pornography, joining the military, serving as president, etc are all equally unreasonable. There are some things that people simply need to decide for themselves, and they need to be able to make a good decision about it. That's why we have age limits on ANYTHING in America. I'm just saying religion is very similar.

 

[swimscubasteve]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Atheists need to realize that there beliefs are just as "without" proof or fact as a believer in G-d, and they just believe the polar opposite.

Agnostics at least acknowledge that there is no way to prove either way (which is the most logical), but there belief requires no faith or belief, and can somehow seem without purpose. Purpose and drive is what makes humans great, but again they are the most logical. But a "free" choice presented by G-d cannot have proof or bias, otherwise it isn't a choice now is it. (Platinga Defense)

Science was spurred and financed by religion for millenia. They aren't polar opposites. Belief in G-d and nonbelief in G-d are polar opposites.

English motherfvcker, do you speak it!?

WTH?

Wan sum flied lice? Me so sawly? Want wide on wickshaw? Yes, master? :roll:

Hellloooo, Pulp Fiction. I was just giving you sh*t about the incomprehensibility of your post. No harm meant.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: hans030390
I'm thinking your son could have been a bit more respectful. I'm christian, and I respect other's beliefs, and I dont think she should be pushing the kids to believe anything. I dont think you should try putting anything on them either, which it sounds like you haven't.

The problem is that most Christian's can not see the perspective of the non-believer. As a Christian, you can not judge a non-believer by the same code of ethics that you have. And it is a fine line between telling someone who is willing to listen and proselytizing. I have a close friend that is stubborn and gets irritated whenever anyone talks about religion, so I choose not to talk about those things unless he brings them up. I pray for him, and try to treat him with as much respect as I can give, but that is it.

We don't have enough information to see if the wife was actually encouraging the son to go, or heavy handedly pushing the son to go (which it sounds like she was doing the latter).

One of my coworkers, she "preaches to everyone, and when she found out a coworker was lesbian, she judged her and said she was sinning (who isn't, and the person isn't even Christian <so no need to rebuke just point out that all people sin and are not able to be sinless> ). She is one of the people that people don't talk to, and gives Christians a bad name, but I am sure she is a "model" Christian in her own life. My coworkers know I am a believer, but they also know that I won't preach to them. Rather I will show them by action, and if they approach me about the subject I am more than able to talk about it.

The problem is that his son has clearly been indoctrinated the other way. Referring to religeon as "believing in fantasies" evinces a closed mind towards beliefs other than his and obviously indicates his father isn't "fairly" answering his sons questions. Point of fact, there are no questions about atheism.....people are atheist based on having nothing else worthy, to them, to believe in, so they're probably spending the majority of their time discussuing religeon and not atheism so the kid is getting the skewed opinion of his father.

edited out.

AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Just f'ing die Hero...seriously man, I can't stand you any longer.

LOL! I read that before you edited it. Be happy I didn't quote you.

Temper, temper Mo Capitain.

heheeh, he gets my goat like no one has since dave. Most neocons and religious people irritate me...he truly makes me jump out of my seat and hit things around the house. I should thank him...the workouts I get on the heavy bag after he posts are always my best.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Wow.

Just...wow.

There's a big difference between taking out the trash and being indoctrinated into a religion. There's also the question of mutual respect, good role models, and positive psychological development.

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Why would you say that? My kids will go to church when they are young. I will stress the importance of Christianity, but when they come to an age to decide for themselves, I hope that I will be a good influence and not someone who will try to control their choices.

Because too many religions are about the church and not about belief, or morality, or spirituality even. I know some people have had very positive exposure to religion in their lives. I never have. Spirituality, yes; religion, no.

There is SO MUCH of religion trying to control in this world. It's not supposed to be about control. You wanna convert, convert by example. Be such a wonderful person that people choose to emulate you. People need to grow and develop before they are able to make informed decisions. Any decision made without information (or worse yet, with bad information) is more likely to cause harm than to help.

Everyone is trying to force everyone. Fit into society, be this, be that, believe this, etc. It's sooo hard to watch the erosion of the individual.

I can agree with this to an extent, but there is nothing wrong with trying to bring up your kid in the way you think they should go. I want my kid to be successful in life (when I have a kid), so I will stress the important of education. I want my kid to be a great moral person and also have beliefs similar to mine, so I will stress the importance of Christianity to me. When they get to an age where they will make their own decision though, I hope I can back off and let them decide.

I agree though, that religion shouldn't be about political power and control, which it is many of the times. But that comes from peoples agendas, not the sound theology. Anyone who gets power/prestige always craves more of it, and many times becomes corrupted by it (even someone with strong ideals). I have been told to do this and lead that, because people know that I am good at it, but I tend to try to delegate it to someone else because I am afraid of this situation. At least that is part of the reason, but now I am just ranting.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Yep. Every "there oughta be a law!" proposal like this needs to be looked at reversed. You think it should be illegal for kids to attend religious services? What if is was illegal for them NOT to? You think it should be illegal to allow smoking in bars? What if it was illegal NOT to? And on and on. Everytime you seek to create a law specifically for the purpose of your prejudice, you damn well better think about what your prejudice would look like reversed.

Your logic is incredibly flawed. Let's follow it through:

There should be a law against murder. You suggest that we consider a law making murder a requirement?

No he is saying that, you should look at the situation from the opposite viewpoint to see if it is an absolute.

A law for murdering is absurd, therefore, there should be a law against it.

Exactly. Sorry about the previous reply but his ignorant attack pissed me off for a second there.

No harm, no foul.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: DurocShark
Yesterday he finally said, "Why would I want to go listen to a bunch of people worshipping their fantasies?" I had to leave the room. That was a great line! But I didn't want to make my wife look like a fool by laughing.

You sound like a real jerk. Kids don't come up with stuff like that on their own and certainly wouldn't be so disrespectful to his mother unless he was following your example. Congrats.

The kid is 14 years old, yes they do! What do you think his kid is retarded? I say by the time most kids hit the age of 10 or 12, they're about fully aware of their world and environment, it's more or less since kids mature at different rates..

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Yep. Every "there oughta be a law!" proposal like this needs to be looked at reversed. You think it should be illegal for kids to attend religious services? What if is was illegal for them NOT to? You think it should be illegal to allow smoking in bars? What if it was illegal NOT to? And on and on. Everytime you seek to create a law specifically for the purpose of your prejudice, you damn well better think about what your prejudice would look like reversed.

But, like I pointed out in another post, you have age limits in America based on the idea that important decisions should be made by the individual only after they're able to. drinking, military, driving, voting, sex, etc.

 

[swimscubasteve]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Personally I wish it was a class A felony for anyone under 18 to attend religious services. People have to wait till 16 to drive, 18 to vote, and 21 to drink. I have no clue why they're not required to put off religious decisions until they're able to properly process the entire body of available information.

Imagine how angry you'd be if some religious people tried to make it a felony not to bring your minor child to religious services, and yet you propose essentially the same thing, only reversed? :roll:

Yep. Every "there oughta be a law!" proposal like this needs to be looked at reversed. You think it should be illegal for kids to attend religious services? What if is was illegal for them NOT to? You think it should be illegal to allow smoking in bars? What if it was illegal NOT to? And on and on. Everytime you seek to create a law specifically for the purpose of your prejudice, you damn well better think about what your prejudice would look like reversed.

Your logic is incredibly flawed. Let's follow it through:

There should be a law against murder. You suggest that we consider a law making murder a requirement?

No he is saying that, you should look at the situation from the opposite viewpoint to see if it is an absolute.

A law for murdering is absurd, therefore, there should be a law against it.

Exactly. Sorry about the previous reply but his ignorant attack pissed me off for a second there.

WTH? Why would you think that looking at laws from opposite viewpoints is a good idea? Why don't you just look at the reasons for which the law is being proposed.

In this case, although impractical, it seems like a good idea to allow children not to be brainwashed with something as subjective as religion at such an early age.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Sorry to say, but decisions about religion should be made BEFORE marriage. Otherwise, I think you're setting yourself up for disaster.

QFT! How did you two even end up together? It defies logic. An atheist and a Christian are inherently incompatible, unless the Christian is merely a nominal Christian (as are many these days).

Not true. The factor that matters is respect. If they can respect each others beliefs, it can work. Same as any two different belief systems I imagine.

The same kind of respect you've shown me? Oh ya.....give me some more of that please. :roll:

I'm sorry man, you are ABSOLUTELY right that I am a hypocrite when it comes to you. You are the oil to my water (or vice versa). Nearly everything you say honestly offends me on some level, and I just can't take it anymore. I'm probably in the same situation with you as that kid is with his mom. Sometimes two people just can't coexist. I hate that I'm this way with you, but honestly, I doubt if it will change. You truly make me that angry.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: swimscubasteve
WTH? Why would you think that looking at laws from opposite viewpoints is a good idea? Why don't you just look at the reasons for which the law is being proposed.

In this case, although impractical, it seems like a good idea to allow children not to be brainwashed with something as subjective as religion at such an early age.

Critical thinking is clearly not your strong point. Here's a tip: atheism IS a religion. This thread is all about the brainwashed calling the brainwashed brainwashed. Try to learn to play nice with people of other religions, ok?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
But, like I pointed out in another post, you have age limits in America based on the idea that important decisions should be made by the individual only after they're able to. drinking, military, driving, voting, sex, etc.

Those "important decisions" are not personal decisions but ones that carry societal responsibility. Do you see that?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: DurocShark
Yesterday he finally said, "Why would I want to go listen to a bunch of people worshipping their fantasies?" I had to leave the room. That was a great line! But I didn't want to make my wife look like a fool by laughing.

You sound like a real jerk. Kids don't come up with stuff like that on their own and certainly wouldn't be so disrespectful to his mother unless he was following your example. Congrats.

You nailed this one. :thumbsup:

The only thing he 'nailed' is another nail into the coffin of his bigotry and stupidity. Please don't encourage the worthless wastes of human flesh.

And what do your patently-obvious rage issues say about atheism?

I have nothing against any belief system (or lack thereof). I've been on both sides of the argument, and can see where each side comes from. Where I get pissy is when people tell anti-religious people not to generalize or stereotype, and then say that atheists don't believe in anything, or other such nonesense. I mean, nobody on any side doubts that there are whacko extremists. I doubt if even Hero would say that Hitler was a fine example of a Christian.

I also get highly agitated when people try to force others into their own belief system. As much as I loved to debate people on it, I never actively tried to convince people to give up religion when I was an atheist...I just wanted to win the point by point in the argument. It wasn't about proving me right, it was about proving them wrong. I just want everyone to have the information and be able to choose for themselves when they're able to do so.