Pat Robertson suggests woman's atheis...

Pat Robertson suggests woman's atheism was caused by rape or abuse

There are 56 comments on the The Kansas City Star story from Mar 25, 2014, titled Pat Robertson suggests woman's atheism was caused by rape or abuse. In it, The Kansas City Star reports that:

Well, this is certainly a theory we hadn’t considered. Pat Robertson speculated on his show Monday that an atheist woman didn’t believe in God because she had been abused by her father or raped.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Kansas City Star.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#1 Mar 26, 2014
Pat Robertson is part of the reason why I am atheist.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2 Mar 26, 2014
emperorjohn wrote:
Pat Robertson is part of the reason why I am atheist.
Me too.

What sort of god who gave a crap, would permit the likes of Roberson to represent it?
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#3 Mar 27, 2014
emperorjohn wrote:
Pat Robertson is part of the reason why I am atheist.
Why dignify a dimwit? I know what you mean, but I'm only influenced by the intellectual and intelligent.

I'm not a believer because I'm rational. That's how I'd put it.

Religion = superstition
Theology = mythology
Thinking

Cupar, UK

#4 Mar 27, 2014
god didn't look out for this victim.
Cujo

Regina, Canada

#5 Mar 27, 2014
More like, the reason Pat is a Christian, was because of Dad's belt buckle, if he didn't go to church. That would be the more likely scenario.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#6 Mar 27, 2014
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Why dignify a dimwit? I know what you mean, but I'm only influenced by the intellectual and intelligent.
I'm not a believer because I'm rational. That's how I'd put it.
Religion = superstition
Theology = mythology
Different atheists have different reasons for why we convert.For some, it is primarily sentiment, for some, primarily science. For others, equally both. Some convert because they realize how horrible the bible, some because they went through or seen people go through situations and seen no evidence of a deity doing anything to help out. Others just never believed in the shitty fable.
As for me, I was more of the fist kind. I believed in the garbage of the buybull until I began to read all of the horrible stories from it. Even when I was exposed to the fact that the creation myth has no evidence while evolution is fact, I still held firm, believing that I can reconcile the two, telling myself that I could adhere to both, like many cafeteria Christians do. Whenever my twin would challenge me on that I would call him a blasphemer. I was afraid of not believing in a God, because I was telling myself that I needed a higher power to be moral. It wasn't until I was really exposed to the horrors of the bible, that I began to say that this tyrant was not worth worshiping even if science proved him to be true. Once that thought sank in, I no longer tried to adjust science and religion.
I felt great relief, not only was this God not worthy of worship, but he wasn't even real. For most people, science is not enough to stand against religion. If confronted with inconsistencies, they would just try to pretend that they didn't exist.
I remember when I was in school, in class; the kids were discussing the difference between evolution and creation in the bible. One boy answered that in school he accepted evolution but in church he accepted creation. People fear a godless world, believing that it will lead humans to be evil.
People like Pat Robertson do the greatest service to our cause by running their nasty mouths. They made people like me hate myself in order to justify their bigotry. People aren't living the church in droves because of the difference between creation and evolution, they are leaving because they are exposed to the nastiness and hypocrisy of people like Pat.
If I am not mistake, Bob said that he was a religious xtian for decades and despite the discrepancies between science and religion, he was willing to go on, until he was exposed to the evil in the bible.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#7 Mar 27, 2014
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Different atheists have different reasons for why we convert.For some, it is primarily sentiment, for some, primarily science. For others, equally both. Some convert because they realize how horrible the bible, some because they went through or seen people go through situations and seen no evidence of a deity doing anything to help out. Others just never believed in the shitty fable.
As for me, I was more of the fist kind. I believed in the garbage of the buybull until I began to read all of the horrible stories from it. Even when I was exposed to the fact that the creation myth has no evidence while evolution is fact, I still held firm, believing that I can reconcile the two, telling myself that I could adhere to both, like many cafeteria Christians do. Whenever my twin would challenge me on that I would call him a blasphemer. I was afraid of not believing in a God, because I was telling myself that I needed a higher power to be moral. It wasn't until I was really exposed to the horrors of the bible, that I began to say that this tyrant was not worth worshiping even if science proved him to be true. Once that thought sank in, I no longer tried to adjust science and religion.
I felt great relief, not only was this God not worthy of worship, but he wasn't even real. For most people, science is not enough to stand against religion. If confronted with inconsistencies, they would just try to pretend that they didn't exist.
I remember when I was in school, in class; the kids were discussing the difference between evolution and creation in the bible. One boy answered that in school he accepted evolution but in church he accepted creation. People fear a godless world, believing that it will lead humans to be evil.
People like Pat Robertson do the greatest service to our cause by running their nasty mouths. They made people like me hate myself in order to justify their bigotry. People aren't living the church in droves because of the difference between creation and evolution, they are leaving because they are exposed to the nastiness and hypocrisy of people like Pat.
If I am not mistake, Bob said that he was a religious xtian for decades and despite the discrepancies between science and religion, he was willing to go on, until he was exposed to the evil in the bible.
You and I share a similar story-- I tried to reconcile a benevolent deity with what I saw of the world for years.

I had pretty much already given up on the bible's version of things-- presuming that it was simply a human tale of misery and woe.

But it gradually hit me-- if there was an actual god, who cared about what people did?

Why on **earth** would that god permit all the competing and warring **religions** to even exist in the world, at the same time?

Bottom line:

If there really was a god, who cared about humans?

There could be but a **single** religion -- ever, in all the history of earth. The sole religion that was backed by an actual, gives-a-damn god.

What mere human agency or human fabrication would possibly stand up to a religion based on a **real** deity?

Hmmm?

It's that Divine Advantage¬ô-- no mere human could even start in that race, let alone compete.

Of course-- many godbots will exclaim-- "The DEBBIL! ITS TEH DEBBIL, I TELLS YA!"

Which is not an actual argument-- if there really is a devil?

Then there cannot possibly be a **caring** god also--

--- no god who truly cared, would allow such as the devil to exist.

Just as a truly caring human parent, would **never** permit a vicious and rabid dog, to play in the same yard as his children.

If a **human** parent would do that?

A **divine** god would do -- better still.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#8 Mar 27, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
You and I share a similar story-- I tried to reconcile a benevolent deity with what I saw of the world for years.
I had pretty much already given up on the bible's version of things-- presuming that it was simply a human tale of misery and woe.
But it gradually hit me-- if there was an actual god, who cared about what people did?
Why on **earth** would that god permit all the competing and warring **religions** to even exist in the world, at the same time?
Bottom line:
If there really was a god, who cared about humans?
There could be but a **single** religion -- ever, in all the history of earth. The sole religion that was backed by an actual, gives-a-damn god.
What mere human agency or human fabrication would possibly stand up to a religion based on a **real** deity?
Hmmm?
It's that Divine Advantage¬ô-- no mere human could even start in that race, let alone compete.
Of course-- many godbots will exclaim-- "The DEBBIL! ITS TEH DEBBIL, I TELLS YA!"
Which is not an actual argument-- if there really is a devil?
Then there cannot possibly be a **caring** god also--
--- no god who truly cared, would allow such as the devil to exist.
Just as a truly caring human parent, would **never** permit a vicious and rabid dog, to play in the same yard as his children.
If a **human** parent would do that?
A **divine** god would do -- better still.
Especially when the buybulll states that God created the Devil and that he created evil.
That's like the parent buying the vicious dog and placing it right next to their child and then blaming the child it he.she gets bitten.
Thinking

Cupar, UK

#9 Mar 28, 2014
And the idiot child (believer) blaming the dog (devil), not the parent (god).
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Especially when the buybulll states that God created the Devil and that he created evil.
That's like the parent buying the vicious dog and placing it right next to their child and then blaming the child it he.she gets bitten.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#10 Mar 28, 2014
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Different atheists have different reasons for why we convert.For some, it is primarily sentiment, for some, primarily science. For others, equally both. Some convert because they realize how horrible the bible, some because they went through or seen people go through situations and seen no evidence of a deity doing anything to help out. Others just never believed in the shitty fable.
As for me, I was more of the fist kind. I believed in the garbage of the buybull until I began to read all of the horrible stories from it. Even when I was exposed to the fact that the creation myth has no evidence while evolution is fact, I still held firm, believing that I can reconcile the two, telling myself that I could adhere to both, like many cafeteria Christians do. Whenever my twin would challenge me on that I would call him a blasphemer. I was afraid of not believing in a God, because I was telling myself that I needed a higher power to be moral. It wasn't until I was really exposed to the horrors of the bible, that I began to say that this tyrant was not worth worshiping even if science proved him to be true. Once that thought sank in, I no longer tried to adjust science and religion.
I felt great relief, not only was this God not worthy of worship, but he wasn't even real. For most people, science is not enough to stand against religion. If confronted with inconsistencies, they would just try to pretend that they didn't exist.
I remember when I was in school, in class; the kids were discussing the difference between evolution and creation in the bible. One boy answered that in school he accepted evolution but in church he accepted creation. People fear a godless world, believing that it will lead humans to be evil.
People like Pat Robertson do the greatest service to our cause by running their nasty mouths. They made people like me hate myself in order to justify their bigotry. People aren't living the church in droves because of the difference between creation and evolution, they are leaving because they are exposed to the nastiness and hypocrisy of people like Pat.
If I am not mistake, Bob said that he was a religious xtian for decades and despite the discrepancies between science and religion, he was willing to go on, until he was exposed to the evil in the bible.
Thanks for sharing that, E.
I had 'a Christian upbringing', though I was never really a believer. Religionists muddle-up all sorts of things together, not just morality with religion. Religious dogma hampers critical thinking and objective thought. As you say, it makes some people think that one cannot be moral and not religious.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ghwbush.h...

Galileo's dispute with Papal Authority illustrates how religion can impede objectivity. Freed from the need to preserve or defend faith in Biblical and religious 'beliefs' Galileo was able to follow the evidence and come to enlightening and obvious conclusions that were apparently quite obscure to the more religious people of the time. Nowadays such religionists need Creationism or have a need to doubt science supporting evolution.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#11 Mar 28, 2014
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Especially when the buybulll states that God created the Devil and that he created evil.
That's like the parent buying the vicious dog and placing it right next to their child and then blaming the child it he.she gets bitten.
And then, refusing the administer the rabies cure to said child, unless the child grovels and **BEGS** the parent to forgive the kid for being bitten in the first place...

... ugg.

The bible is an ugly religion.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#12 Mar 28, 2014
Thinking wrote:
And the idiot child (believer) blaming the dog (devil), not the parent (god).
<quoted text>
Yep.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#13 Mar 28, 2014
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for sharing that, E.
I had 'a Christian upbringing', though I was never really a believer. Religionists muddle-up all sorts of things together, not just morality with religion. Religious dogma hampers critical thinking and objective thought. As you say, it makes some people think that one cannot be moral and not religious.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ghwbush.h...
Galileo's dispute with Papal Authority illustrates how religion can impede objectivity. Freed from the need to preserve or defend faith in Biblical and religious 'beliefs' Galileo was able to follow the evidence and come to enlightening and obvious conclusions that were apparently quite obscure to the more religious people of the time. Nowadays such religionists need Creationism or have a need to doubt science supporting evolution.
Exactly!

The non-answer "goddidit" is a game-stopper.

There can be no further inquiry into the phenomena (whatever it may be), once the "goddidit" card is played.

That's the last card in that game, once it is played.

Which is why religion stifles creativity and progress.
Richardfs

Merrylands, Australia

#14 Mar 29, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly!
The non-answer "goddidit" is a game-stopper.
There can be no further inquiry into the phenomena (whatever it may be), once the "goddidit" card is played.
That's the last card in that game, once it is played.
Which is why religion stifles creativity and progress.
The odd thing is that I have never seen an equation or Scientific Theory with a 'goddidit' term.
Richardfs

Merrylands, Australia

#15 Mar 29, 2014
I have a question:-
Why is it that televangelists seem to be a US phenomena?

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#16 Mar 29, 2014
Richardfs wrote:
I have a question:-
Why is it that televangelists seem to be a US phenomena?
Because religious fundamentalists don't like technology all that much?

And the US Christian evangelists are light years ahead of their fundamentalist competition?

And none of them innovate ways to spread their message. They rely on people who aren't chained to their holy books to learn something more.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#17 Mar 31, 2014
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for sharing that, E.
I had 'a Christian upbringing', though I was never really a believer. Religionists muddle-up all sorts of things together, not just morality with religion. Religious dogma hampers critical thinking and objective thought. As you say, it makes some people think that one cannot be moral and not religious.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ghwbush.h...
Galileo's dispute with Papal Authority illustrates how religion can impede objectivity. Freed from the need to preserve or defend faith in Biblical and religious 'beliefs' Galileo was able to follow the evidence and come to enlightening and obvious conclusions that were apparently quite obscure to the more religious people of the time. Nowadays such religionists need Creationism or have a need to doubt science supporting evolution.
Galileo was truly a sad story. A man whose only desire was teaching the truth, only to be persecuted for it by a corrupt church using a pre historic book.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#18 Mar 31, 2014
Richardfs wrote:
I have a question:-
Why is it that televangelists seem to be a US phenomena?
Because the US can be stupid country sometimes, notwithstanding our contributions to the world. It is the reason why we don't have public health care, common sense gun laws, and why many states still have debates on creationism.
Plus Europeans are getting tired of priests and pastors after centuries of dealing with their bull.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#19 Mar 31, 2014
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
Because religious fundamentalists don't like technology all that much?
And the US Christian evangelists are light years ahead of their fundamentalist competition?
And none of them innovate ways to spread their message. They rely on people who aren't chained to their holy books to learn something more.
I heard that they are growing in Nigeria where they preach a gospel of materialism. The idea that the rich are rich because it is god's will. Like the Medici Pope said when they asked him why was he spending so much money. "God made us rich so why don't we enjoy it."
http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/articles/...

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#20 Apr 1, 2014
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
I heard that they are growing in Nigeria where they preach a gospel of materialism. The idea that the rich are rich because it is god's will. Like the Medici Pope said when they asked him why was he spending so much money. "God made us rich so why don't we enjoy it."
http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/articles/...
Prosperity Gospel.

God blesses those with wealth.

It's the Divine Right of Kings and nobility titles all over again.

Instead of Crown Prince, it's now CEO. Duke is CFO. Marquis is CIO and so on.

Only thing that has changed is the noble titles are now Cxx of a Corporation (kingdom) but the same historical idea remains the same.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 17 min Regolith Based Li... 75,476
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 1 hr John 6,109
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 1 hr John 209
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 10 hr Nemesis 4,070
Majority of Scots now have no religion (May '16) 11 hr John 164
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 13 hr Eagle 12 - 32,055
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 16 hr Eagle 12 - 581
More from around the web