Should Uninformed Opinion Be Respected?

Should Uninformed Opinion Be Respected?

Posted in the Atheism Forum

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Swimming With Ignorant Snarks”

Since: Nov 10

Great White Snark

#1 Aug 27, 2014
Should indoctrination and brainwashing of defenseless children with unscientific and unsubstantiated faith-based nonsense that is little more than witchcraft superstition be considered informed opinion?

Informed opinion deserves a certain amount of respect. Continuation of Hebrew myth that is historically, archaeologically and scientifically lacking does not. Being politically correct where religion is concerned is dangerous to all societies.

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#2 Aug 27, 2014
Snark Hunter wrote:
Should indoctrination and brainwashing of defenseless children with unscientific and unsubstantiated faith-based nonsense that is little more than witchcraft superstition be considered informed opinion?
Informed opinion deserves a certain amount of respect. Continuation of Hebrew myth that is historically, archaeologically and scientifically lacking does not. Being politically correct where religion is concerned is dangerous to all societies.
.....

......28Aug14.....If you think that Hebrew teachings pertain to a myth, then you otta
do a real writeup when it comes to the muslimes and their Quoran which brainwashes
them beginning at the age of 4.

...At least Hebrew children do not end up being murdering bastards like these muslimes.
Real people who have common sense would take a Hebrew any day over a muslime
schidt-for-brains.

Just sayin'.

Tuco Blondie

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#3 Aug 27, 2014
Respected? No.
Acknowledged? Yes.

Let the idiot parade have their say, but be sure to offer them the opportunity to become informed. Choosing to stay in the idiot parade should be optional.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#4 Aug 27, 2014
Tuco Blondie wrote:
<quoted text>.....
......28Aug14.....If you think that Hebrew teachings pertain to a myth, then you otta
do a real writeup when it comes to the muslimes and their Quoran which brainwashes
them beginning at the age of 4.
...At least Hebrew children do not end up being murdering bastards like these muslimes.
Real people who have common sense would take a Hebrew any day over a muslime
schidt-for-brains.
Just sayin'.
Tuco Blondie
You should learn the Arabic religions history. Islam is Judaism tweaked, Christianity is Judaism tweaked. The god of Abraham is Allah tweaked, the god of Abraham is Jehovah tweaked, the god of Abraham Yahweh, is a tweaked Pagan god.

Christianity and Islam sprang from Judaism, and Judaism incorporated Pagan ritual to get Pagan converts. Like all religions it was done to better fill the wallets of those liaisons to the gods, you know all the Rabbis, priests, Imams, spell casters, preachers, ministers and witch doctors.

Jewish truth At age 3 years and one day, a toddler girl was old enough to become a wife to a Hebrew man.
Christain truth, a Christain girl could be sold into sexual slavery, thereby making money for her father.
Muslim truth any boy or girl (even newborns) can be thighed* by a Islamic man, and it is not even glanced at unless the girl child is injured enough to require surgery.

All three religions begin indoctrination in very early childhood and all three require you to stone sinners, and to kill those who are not of the same "ism", and in war, to kill all non-virgin females.

*Look it up. BTW: Did you know that Jehovah will make you cook and eat your children?

It's all just so nasty.
Patrick

United States

#5 Aug 27, 2014
"You should learn the Arabic religions history. Islam is Judaism tweaked, Christianity is Judaism tweaked. The god of Abraham is Allah tweaked, the god of Abraham is Jehovah tweaked, the god of Abraham Yahweh, is a tweaked Pagan god." LOL

Is it possible these are only your opinions?
Seem to sum up complex religions with bumper sticker slogans?
Rather thick with unsupported generalizations --"All three religions begin indoctrination in very early childhood and all three require you to stone sinners," --

Have not seen any stoning of sinners in the greater New York to Mass. area recently.
Good cup of coffee and talking with a friend might help.

I Love Coffee!

Mmmm, steamy, hot and black.....I love it...anywhere, any kind!

In the Starbucks coffee house, on the corner of 3rd and Pine...
As the radio plays the oldies...while we're driving Route 99
With the family around a table, and some lovely friends of mine
And the best is in my comfy chair...a mug...a book.....DIVINE!!
religionislies

London, UK

#6 Aug 28, 2014
Patrick wrote:
"You should learn the Arabic religions history. Islam is Judaism tweaked, Christianity is Judaism tweaked. The god of Abraham is Allah tweaked, the god of Abraham is Jehovah tweaked, the god of Abraham Yahweh, is a tweaked Pagan god." LOL
Is it possible these are only your opinions?
Seem to sum up complex religions with bumper sticker slogans?
Rather thick with unsupported generalizations --"All three religions begin indoctrination in very early childhood and all three require you to stone sinners," --
Have not seen any stoning of sinners in the greater New York to Mass. area recently.
Good cup of coffee and talking with a friend might help.
I Love Coffee!
Mmmm, steamy, hot and black.....I love it...anywhere, any kind!
In the Starbucks coffee house, on the corner of 3rd and Pine...
As the radio plays the oldies...while we're driving Route 99
With the family around a table, and some lovely friends of mine
And the best is in my comfy chair...a mug...a book.....DIVINE!!
Creationism is a disease that infects the Atheism forum with bad poetry.

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#7 Aug 28, 2014
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>You should learn the Arabic religions history. Islam is Judaism tweaked, Christianity is Judaism tweaked. The god of Abraham is Allah tweaked, the god of Abraham is Jehovah tweaked, the god of Abraham Yahweh, is a tweaked Pagan god.
Christianity and Islam sprang from Judaism, and Judaism incorporated Pagan ritual to get Pagan converts. Like all religions it was done to better fill the wallets of those liaisons to the gods, you know all the Rabbis, priests, Imams, spell casters, preachers, ministers and witch doctors.
Jewish truth At age 3 years and one day, a toddler girl was old enough to become a wife to a Hebrew man.
Christain truth, a Christain girl could be sold into sexual slavery, thereby making money for her father.
Muslim truth any boy or girl (even newborns) can be thighed* by a Islamic man, and it is not even glanced at unless the girl child is injured enough to require surgery.
All three religions begin indoctrination in very early childhood and all three require you to stone sinners, and to kill those who are not of the same "ism", and in war, to kill all non-virgin females.
*Look it up. BTW: Did you know that Jehovah will make you cook and eat your children?
It's all just so nasty.
.....

.....29Aug14.....Its most obvious that you go by the book yourself. And if you Really & truly do so, then you are fulla schidt to the eyeballs. And then some toooo.

God killed no one at anytime, anywhere, anyhow, anywhy, anywhat, anywho.

But as sure as there is schidt in a cat....HE is there.

Tuco Blondie
religionislies

London, UK

#8 Aug 28, 2014
Tuco Blondie wrote:
<quoted text>.....
.....29Aug14.....Its most obvious that you go by the book yourself. And if you Really & truly do so, then you are fulla schidt to the eyeballs. And then some toooo.
God killed no one at anytime, anywhere, anyhow, anywhy, anywhat, anywho.
But as sure as there is schidt in a cat....HE is there.
Tuco Blondie
delusional idiot with no evidence of god.
Thinking

Harlow, UK

#9 Aug 28, 2014
No. Respect should be earned.
Patrick

United States

#10 Aug 28, 2014
The Royal Family of Britain, which the government tries to sell as one of the country’s tourism attractions, spends the public money in a way which is nothing short of a disgrace.

The British public has considered a thorough and detailed review of the royal family’s finances as a long overdue, which it seems is coming true following a change in the law that allows the Members of Parliament (MPs) to take a closer look into the royals’ finances.

Now, Queen Elizabeth II and the royal family face an inquiry into their expenses which would decide whether they provide value for money to the taxpayer.

“When Prince Charles [the second in line to the throne] spends tens of thousands of pounds of public money on personal holidays without a whisper of outrage from our politicians there is clearly something wrong”, says Graham Smith, chief executive of the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic.

“It is crucial that any such investigation abandons all sense of deference for the royals and has a good hard look at how the palace is wasting taxpayers’ money”, adds Graham Smith.

Therefore, the inquiry, to be launched later this year by the House of Commons’ powerful Public Accounts Committee (PAC), will grill the Queen’s closest allies, The Independent reports.

According to the report the PAC will decide on the scope of the investigations after the National Audit Office (NAO) gets access to the Queen’s finances next month.

The NAO is to prepare a report on the Queen’s finances that will be the basis for the PAC’s further action, deemed to include calling palace officials before the Commons to explain on their finances.

“[Committee chairperson] Margaret [Hodge] wants to do it - but obviously it’s got to be a decision of the whole committee,” the paper quoted a source as saying.

Republic says it has been pushing for greater scrutiny of royal costs - estimated by the group to be over £200million a year - and has recently written to the PAC chair Margaret Hodge calling for an investigation into Prince Charles’s tax avoidance.

“The issue of tax must also be thoroughly investigated - it is not acceptable that the Queen and her eldest son are exempt from the same tax regimes as the rest of us”, said the chief executive of the Republic.

Some of the spending to be scrutinized are expected to be the royal transport costs including the Royal Train and the Royal Flight, the royals’ entertainment and the upkeep of palaces.

This also includes the Royal Estate assets including Regent Street in London, Ascot racecourse and Windsor Great Park, 265,000 acres of farmland, as well as Britain’s national seabed stretching out 12 nautical miles around the country.

However, it could be a hard question to answer whether the royals are worth the money they spend irrespective of its easiness to audit their expenses.

For example, the Queen will receive £36.1million in April to fund official duties. The sum enjoys a 16 percent increase on the £31million paid by taxpayers last year.
PatrickisaCreati onist

London, UK

#11 Aug 28, 2014
Thinking wrote:
No. Respect should be earned.
Creationists liars trying to spam the Atheism forum again *yawn*
Thinking

Harlow, UK

#12 Aug 29, 2014
Patrick/Lincock spams news articles when stumped, but rarely quotes his sources.
Patrick wrote:
The Royal Family of Britain, which the government tries to sell as one of the country’s tourism attractions, spends the public money in a way which is nothing short of a disgrace.
The British public has considered a thorough and detailed review of the royal family’s finances as a long overdue, which it seems is coming true following a change in the law that allows the Members of Parliament (MPs) to take a closer look into the royals’ finances.
Now, Queen Elizabeth II and the royal family face an inquiry into their expenses which would decide whether they provide value for money to the taxpayer.
“When Prince Charles [the second in line to the throne] spends tens of thousands of pounds of public money on personal holidays without a whisper of outrage from our politicians there is clearly something wrong”, says Graham Smith, chief executive of the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic.
“It is crucial that any such investigation abandons all sense of deference for the royals and has a good hard look at how the palace is wasting taxpayers’ money”, adds Graham Smith.
Therefore, the inquiry, to be launched later this year by the House of Commons’ powerful Public Accounts Committee (PAC), will grill the Queen’s closest allies, The Independent reports.
According to the report the PAC will decide on the scope of the investigations after the National Audit Office (NAO) gets access to the Queen’s finances next month.
The NAO is to prepare a report on the Queen’s finances that will be the basis for the PAC’s further action, deemed to include calling palace officials before the Commons to explain on their finances.
“[Committee chairperson] Margaret [Hodge] wants to do it - but obviously it’s got to be a decision of the whole committee,” the paper quoted a source as saying.
Republic says it has been pushing for greater scrutiny of royal costs - estimated by the group to be over £200million a year - and has recently written to the PAC chair Margaret Hodge calling for an investigation into Prince Charles’s tax avoidance.
“The issue of tax must also be thoroughly investigated - it is not acceptable that the Queen and her eldest son are exempt from the same tax regimes as the rest of us”, said the chief executive of the Republic.
Some of the spending to be scrutinized are expected to be the royal transport costs including the Royal Train and the Royal Flight, the royals’ entertainment and the upkeep of palaces.
This also includes the Royal Estate assets including Regent Street in London, Ascot racecourse and Windsor Great Park, 265,000 acres of farmland, as well as Britain’s national seabed stretching out 12 nautical miles around the country.
However, it could be a hard question to answer whether the royals are worth the money they spend irrespective of its easiness to audit their expenses.
For example, the Queen will receive £36.1million in April to fund official duties. The sum enjoys a 16 percent increase on the £31million paid by taxpayers last year.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#13 Aug 29, 2014
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>You should learn the Arabic religions history. Islam is Judaism tweaked, Christianity is Judaism tweaked. The god of Abraham is Allah tweaked, the god of Abraham is Jehovah tweaked, the god of Abraham Yahweh, is a tweaked Pagan god.
Christianity and Islam sprang from Judaism, and Judaism incorporated Pagan ritual to get Pagan converts. Like all religions it was done to better fill the wallets of those liaisons to the gods, you know all the Rabbis, priests, Imams, spell casters, preachers, ministers and witch doctors.
Jewish truth At age 3 years and one day, a toddler girl was old enough to become a wife to a Hebrew man.
Christain truth, a Christain girl could be sold into sexual slavery, thereby making money for her father.
Muslim truth any boy or girl (even newborns) can be thighed* by a Islamic man, and it is not even glanced at unless the girl child is injured enough to require surgery.
All three religions begin indoctrination in very early childhood and all three require you to stone sinners, and to kill those who are not of the same "ism", and in war, to kill all non-virgin females.
*Look it up. BTW: Did you know that Jehovah will make you cook and eat your children?
It's all just so nasty.
You still have nothing to say. If it weren't for c&p you likely become imaginary. Luckily for you, it helps you to actually exist.

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#14 Aug 29, 2014
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>You should learn the Arabic religions history. Islam is Judaism tweaked, Christianity is Judaism tweaked. The god of Abraham is Allah tweaked, the god of Abraham is Jehovah tweaked, the god of Abraham Yahweh, is a tweaked Pagan god.
Christianity and Islam sprang from Judaism, and Judaism incorporated Pagan ritual to get Pagan converts. Like all religions it was done to better fill the wallets of those liaisons to the gods, you know all the Rabbis, priests, Imams, spell casters, preachers, ministers and witch doctors.
Jewish truth At age 3 years and one day, a toddler girl was old enough to become a wife to a Hebrew man.
Christain truth, a Christain girl could be sold into sexual slavery, thereby making money for her father.
Muslim truth any boy or girl (even newborns) can be thighed* by a Islamic man, and it is not even glanced at unless the girl child is injured enough to require surgery.
All three religions begin indoctrination in very early childhood and all three require you to stone sinners, and to kill those who are not of the same "ism", and in war, to kill all non-virgin females.
*Look it up. BTW: Did you know that Jehovah will make you cook and eat your children?
It's all just so nasty.
.....

.....30Aug14.....Yes. Yes. Yes. Of course the Old Testament which is the basis for Judaism and Islam and ' somewhat ' to Christianity....is NOT a perfect book. It was put together (over time) by the wise men of each generation as a ' Guide ' for the people to follow. Remember that 99.9% of the people could neither read nor write. The Old Testament was devised as a rule to keep the people in line and the thoughts of going to hell did just that. It was good having such a book because it kept everyone from murdering one another to take their belongings. One can well imagine what it would have been like amongst these older generation ' without the Old Testament ' based on what goes on having the Old Testament.

Anyhows, along came Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God who taught the peoples of the day how to pray and what Life was all about. He preached in a gentle way and went about His Father's business here on earth and showed mankind the way to Heaven. His teachings became
what is commonly referred to as the ' New Testament.' If one adheres to the teachings of Jesus Christ, then one shall have no fear in one's life. Jesus was taken into custody by the Romans at the behest of the Jewish hierarchy who had become fearful that this ' new ' preacher in their midst was going to interfere with their church. They eventually had Jesus killed off and this terrible deed follows them to this very day as ALL peoples ' blame ' the murder of Jesus on the Jews. Fortunately before he died, Jesus chose 12 apostles of whom He appointed Peter ( petros - the rock ) to head up His church when He had left the earth. This was done and Peter's successors continue to this very day with Roman Catholics having good Pope Francis. What a comparison this man is when you stack him up against the muslimes imams, and the Jewish religious leaders.

There have been many ' splinter ' groups of Christian churches. Even Henry VIII, when he was denied the right to divorce his wife to marry another....broke from the Catholic Church and formed his own religion....Anglicanism. He too, forced his people to follow him. Either that or be executed. What could a poor farmer or fisherman do back in those times. And so you have Anglicanism ( The Church of England ) today....although the time is drawing nigh when this faction will be once again back into the fold of the Roman Catholic church.

Ps:.....The Holy Roman Catholic Church is the one and only True Church

Tuco Blondie.

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#15 Aug 29, 2014
religionislies wrote:
<quoted text>
delusional idiot with no evidence of god.
.....

.....30Aug14.....You so-called atheists ( no such thing ) always keep your bag of
adjectives handy to the left-hand side of your computers on which to draw when
you cannot say something sensible.

Ps:....When it comes to you ' religionLessSlys', there's more brains in a bottle
of wadda.

Tuco Blondie

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#16 Aug 29, 2014
Thinking wrote:
No. Respect should be earned.
.....

.....30Aug14.....and how much were you paid to ' educate ' this murderer
from the UK that chopped the head of the US of A journalist James Foley...!!!

Ps:.....Have you earned any respect today...???....or any day...!!!...You lot
have these muslimes ' festering' around your doors and there is a very
good chance that you are one yourself. Hmmmmmmmmm.

Tuco Blondie

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#17 Aug 29, 2014
Patrick wrote:
The Royal Family of Britain, which the government tries to sell as one of the country’s tourism attractions, spends the public money in a way which is nothing short of a disgrace.
The British public has considered a thorough and detailed review of the royal family’s finances as a long overdue, which it seems is coming true following a change in the law that allows the Members of Parliament (MPs) to take a closer look into the royals’ finances.
Now, Queen Elizabeth II and the royal family face an inquiry into their expenses which would decide whether they provide value for money to the taxpayer.
“When Prince Charles [the second in line to the throne] spends tens of thousands of pounds of public money on personal holidays without a whisper of outrage from our politicians there is clearly something wrong”, says Graham Smith, chief executive of the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic.
“It is crucial that any such investigation abandons all sense of deference for the royals and has a good hard look at how the palace is wasting taxpayers’ money”, adds Graham Smith.
Therefore, the inquiry, to be launched later this year by the House of Commons’ powerful Public Accounts Committee (PAC), will grill the Queen’s closest allies, The Independent reports......
The NAO is to prepare a report on the Queen’s finances that will be the basis for the PAC’s further action, deemed to include calling palace officials before the Commons to explain on their finances.
“[Committee chairperson] Margaret [Hodge] wants to do it - but obviously it’s got to be a decision of the whole committee,” the paper quoted a source as saying.
Republic says it has been pushing for greater scrutiny of royal costs - estimated by the group to be over £200million a year - and has recently written to the PAC chair Margaret Hodge calling for an investigation into Prince Charles’s tax avoidance.
“The issue of tax must also be thoroughly investigated - it is not acceptable that the Queen and her eldest son are exempt from the same tax regimes as the rest of us”, said the chief executive of the Republic.
Some of the spending to be scrutinized are expected to be the royal transport costs including the Royal Train and the Royal Flight, the royals’ entertainment and the upkeep of palaces.
This also includes the Royal Estate assets including Regent Street in London, Ascot racecourse and Windsor Great Park, 265,000 acres of farmland, as well as Britain’s national seabed stretching out 12 nautical miles around the country.
For example, the Queen will receive £36.1million in April to fund official duties. The sum enjoys a 16 percent increase on the £31million paid by taxpayers last year.
.....
.....30Aug14.....The last time things were checked out, Prince Charles is the ' first in line to the throne ' and NOT the second in line.
Ps:.....While NOT being a royalist, it makes common sense to maintain the Royal Family. While it costs much money to do so, MORE money is generated for the public coffers than most other
appurtenances that the UK has to offer. Besides, the general public like having their Royal Family and don't mind one bit having to cough up some of their tax money to cover the costs. The UK ( along with the US of A, Canada, Australia, France & Germany ) should stop sending AID to foreign countries and same untold millions of pounds....enough to build a house for every British commoner.
.....as an aside, the UK should be charging muslimes a ' special tax ' to live in that country seeing as it is now overflowing with miscreants who take dole-money to live and to finance their ill-gotten ways....and as an example....the UK justice system should take the family of this murderer who cut the head of the US of A journalist ( James Foley ) and put them all in jail and throw away the key. Martyrs they say. There are nothing more than murderers.
Tuco Blondie

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#18 Aug 29, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Patrick/Lincock spams news articles when stumped, but rarely quotes his sources.
<quoted text>
.....
.....30Aug14.....'dinking' spams news articles when stumped, but rarely quotes his sources.
Tuco Blondie
Thinking

Harlow, UK

#19 Aug 29, 2014
I don't think this man represents America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nidal_Malik_Hasa...

You are a retarded troll.
Tuco Blondie wrote:
<quoted text>.....
.....30Aug14.....and how much were you paid to ' educate ' this murderer
from the UK that chopped the head of the US of A journalist James Foley...!!!
Ps:.....Have you earned any respect today...???....or any day...!!!...You lot
have these muslimes ' festering' around your doors and there is a very
good chance that you are one yourself. Hmmmmmmmmm.
Tuco Blondie
Patrick

United States

#20 Aug 29, 2014
"The woman you embrace,...
the child's hand you hold, may be all there is in this world."
-Michael Wood Documentary-
Hope all enjoy this Friday with good friends, those you love and a good brew !
Peace

Back in the Coffee House

As I sit here, sipping my over-priced latte', I wonder
I wonder about next year
about next month
about tomorrow,
and I realize:
I realize soon
it will be next year
and even sooner, next month
let alone tomorrow,
So why is it I'm so infatuated with such a sudden future?
Maybe it's because
Tomorrow has the ability to make dreams come true
It bares a place to reside in,
when there is no longer enough time in today,
It has a way of making promises
that you don't even care whether or not they come true,
as long as they feel good to hold, for tonight:
Tomorrow can also pass you by,
but it seems never to fail
to come right back, for today.
I guess the only reason
I spend so much energy imagining
the possibilities that tomorrow holds
Is because, I can't help but wonder
what if maybe they'll be a day,
A today, tomorrow, just once, forgets to come.

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 Scientific, Philosophical Case for God's Existe... 1 hr superwilly 88
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 4 hr superwilly 6,056
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr Into The Night 93,405
News American Atheists terminates its president over... Apr 20 Eagle 12 - 19
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Apr 14 blacklagoon 3 4,141
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Apr 14 Into The Night 258,515
News The Anti-Christian Movement Apr 10 blacklagoon 3 11