A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

[Harbal]

Atheism frees us to choose our morality

...but tells you it's all a delusion anyway, so there's no reason to "choose" anything in particular.

What a bankrupt, vacuous, amoral thing it is. The longer we talk about it, the more clear its emptiness becomes.

Hobbes has hit the nail right on the head and your feeble response is nothing more than a feeble response.

Hobbes is far too polite to say what needs to be said but I have no such inhibitions: You're a thoroughly despicable fellow, Sir, an utter twat.

[Immanuel Can]

You're a thoroughly despicable fellow, Sir, an utter twat.

Lovely...and this is relevant...not at all.

I'll tell you what is relevant, though. You're mad because I rained on your picnic. I showed you that Atheism is vacuous and amoral.

I can't blame you for being irritated. Even if it's a house of straw, you were living in it. And I burned it.

But you're better off, believe it or not. You may not know it yet, but you are.

[Harbal]

You're a thoroughly despicable fellow, Sir, an utter twat.

Lovely...and this is relevant...not at all.

You've quoted me completely out of context, you Satanist.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Are you suggesting that the reason all those jews were murdered had nothing to do with religion?

Wow.

What a case of "blame the victim." Are you suggesting that because many Jews were religious they "brought it on themselves"?

That's obscene.

Are you suggesting they were killed because of atheism? Are you denying that jews have been percecuted by kristians for millennia? It's your fucked up religion I'm blaming, so don't try to twist what I write, pompous arse-wipe.

[Harbal]

I rained on your picnic.

Yes, you strike me as the sort who would get a kick out of raining on picnics.

I showed you that Atheism is vacuous and amoral.

I think this obsession you have with "Atheism" is something you need to deal with for the sake of your mental health.

I can't blame you for being irritated.

Well you must admit you are fucking annoying. Still, at least your acknowledging it.

Even if it's a house of straw, you were living in it. And I burned it.

Not to worry, I'm well insured.

But you're better off

Than you, you mean? Well yes, I suppose I am.

[Dubious]

Chum, in case it escaped you, it's not what Kant WAS, since everyone in those days was affiliated or identified by some version of Christianity.

Ah. So if what they did is something you consider "good," it was never because they were Christians. But if you consider what they did "bad," then anybody who lived in a nominally "Christian" society or said the word "God" occasionally, WAS a Christian.

Got it.

Prejudice is such a clear way of thinking, isn't it? It's so unencumbered by things like sweet reason, fairness and facts.

No idea how you derived that. I'm no psychiatrist! Argue with Kant. He more than anyone laid the foundations of secular morality without any mention of God though God is not specifically excluded. To theists like yourself facts are fairy-tales. Those who give facts some credence don't believe in fairy-tales. Sounds simple doesn't it...but is it simple enough for a zombie theist to understand? That is the question!

You really do have a way of grinding every cogent thought into paste and use that to bake your own cookies

[Arising_uk]

Name it. One word is all it will take. What is one of the moral values Atheism necessitates?

Not killing an unbeliever for being an unbeliever.

[Arising_uk]

148 million were killed by your fellow Atheists in the last century. You might not have personally committed it, but others of your ideology were not so squeamish.

Well since religion appears on the up lets wait and see what they do now they are heavily armed this time. So recently a lot of American Christians appear to have been responsible for around a couple of a million deaths, not a bad start.

[Arising_uk]

...
History. You should read some of it. It would help a lot.

And numbers. You should learn to count.

Then you'd be impressed by the fact that the total of human deaths in religious wars is no greater than 7% of the total deaths, of which 3.5% are attributable solely to the "Religion of Peace." The remaining 3.5% are the total of all the dead in ALL the other religious wars in the entirety of history -- Sikhs, Hindus, Catholics, Buddhists, Animists...and so on. ...

Can you give the population numbers involved so we can understand the percentages correctly please.

Many "religious" traditions have never caused a single war. Their count is 0%.

Which ones?

But as I said, you'll need to understand numbers first. ...

Lies, damn lies and statistics comes to mind.

Now answer my very simple question, if you can.

Never mind. I know you can't.

Just did.

[Arising_uk]

The Jews were killed by atheists because the Jews were religious, ...

Really? I thought it because they were scapegoated for the draw in WWI.

Do you know why many Germans went with this? Because they were Catholics.

Hitler and the Nazi's were not Christian by any measure, no matter what anti-theists claim.

Many were Catholics and the Catholic Church and Catholics helped round the Jews up in many countries. Do you know why? Because they were Christians.

[Arising_uk]

...
...but tells you it's all a delusion anyway, so there's no reason to "choose" anything in particular. ...

Of course there is, the world one wishes to live in with others.

What a bankrupt, vacuous, amoral thing it is. The longer we talk about it, the more clear its emptiness becomes.

This is because you fear yourself without your 'God', mote in one's eye an' all that.

[Dubious]

Atheism frees us to choose our morality

...but tells you it's all a delusion anyway, so there's no reason to "choose" anything in particular.

What a bankrupt, vacuous, amoral thing it is. The longer we talk about it, the more clear its emptiness becomes.

Hobbes has hit the nail right on the head and your feeble response is nothing more than a feeble response.

Hobbes is far too polite to say what needs to be said but I have no such inhibitions: You're a thoroughly despicable fellow, Sir, an utter twat.

I would like to offer myself as second if a duel can be arranged. I'll make sure IC's pistol isn't loaded.

[uwot]

What a bankrupt, vacuous, amoral thing it is. The longer we talk about it, the more clear its emptiness becomes.

That point with regard to your Atheism was conceded a long time ago. What is clear is that you only believe in things that you have invented to fit your personal narrative: your God and your Atheism. What is not so clear is whether your refusal to discuss atheism is due to the narcissism associated with the belief that only your definitions are valid, or the repressed fear that you are not clever enough to defend your beliefs by honest means. Whatever the reason, it has eaten a large hole in your integrity and credibility. If that is what your god requires, you should question its motive.

I would like to offer myself as second if a duel can be arranged. I'll make sure IC's pistol isn't loaded.

That won't be necessary, Mr Can's Atheism is a blank.

[Dubious]

What a bankrupt, vacuous, amoral thing it is. The longer we talk about it, the more clear its emptiness becomes.

That point with regard to your Atheism was conceded a long time ago. What is clear is that you only believe in things that you have invented to fit your personal narrative: your God and your Atheism. What is not so clear is whether your refusal to discuss atheism is due to the narcissism associated with the belief that only your definitions are valid, or the repressed fear that you are not clever enough to defend your beliefs by honest means. Whatever the reason, it has eaten a large hole in your integrity and credibility. If that is what your god requires, you should question its motive.

I would like to offer myself as second if a duel can be arranged. I'll make sure IC's pistol isn't loaded.

That won't be necessary, Mr Can's Atheism is a blank.

It would be best for Mr Can to dispense with theism completely. Doing so may grant access to some part of his brain which hasn't been discovered yet. As it stands, he reminds me of a shyster lawyer who intentionally mutilates all testimony by the witness, inserts things that were never said; annuls, ignores or lampoons any response made which counters his theism, powered only by some kind of sick revenge motive against atheists. In regarding the latter, his mind has gone completely infra-red. Mr Can is either living in his own hell or playing games to get attention.

Either way, he's obviously not the man to expound on theism or atheism. This requires a different mentality, one which realizes you cannot broach a reasonable defense simply by negating every counter argument...the only technique he understands. For me, the Can types are best denoted as Zombie Theists...brain dead, except for a single, demented uninfringed function.

[uwot]

It would be best for Mr Can to dispense with theism completely.

That's like asking a thirteen year old boy to stop wanking.