Prove there's a god.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#774726 Aug 29, 2014
Liam wrote:
1. Celibacy is a discipline for Catholic Priests of the Latin rite. Or "Roman Catholic" as the English speaking world labels it. Every Priest is aware of this sacrifice prior to their ordination. For the 22 Catholic rites of the east, there is not a celibacy rule. Of the 500 million Orthodox Church, celibacy is also not a rule.
It promotes situational pedophilia. It needs to go. And it will.

Can you guess why there is celibacy rule, and why it will disappear? Hint: follow the money.
Liam wrote:
2. True there has been a 'cover up' I guess. But you have to understand that most of these cases were from a time period where pedophilia wasn't understood. Every organization - secular included- didn't think of child sexual attraction as crime but a condition that's treatable. Now for some reason, only the Catholic Church gets blasted for not punishing the guilty when the US government, the school system, military, athletic organizations did the same damn thing.
There is nothing to understand. How is pedophilia misunderstood? Who doesn't think that pedophilia is a crime in a culture where it its illegal? And how does there is pedophilia outside the church when deciding how to deal with it inside the church?

Christians don't seem to know how they are perceived when they function as apologists for organized pedophilia. Any attitude other an unqualified statement that the crimes are egregious, intolerable, and need to be prosecuted vigorously demeans your character and values. Decent people simply will not accept such arguments, and will think less of you for being willing to make them.

And you really have no duty to defend or promote a church that expects you to do so while covering up crimes. It asks you to defend the indefensible. Let the priests do that themselves.
Liam wrote:
3. Today the Catholic Church has a zero tolerance policy. Not that its fully perfect ... but at least its better than yesterday. Hopefully other organizations will follow.
What evidence is there that the church is "better than yesterday"?

And who believes your church when it claims zero tolerance? It's obviously willing to say and do anything to protect its treasure.

And no organization should follow the Catholic church. None comes close to its crimes. It is the world's largest sex syndicate, and in America, it should be prosecuted under the RICO (racketeering) statutes.

Sorry to be so blunt, but you've chosen the wrong side of this issue, and you should be ashamed to be defending such an institution.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#774727 Aug 29, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
Atheism is not "lack of belief". Atheism is a belief - that no god exists. I am about 90 percent certain that you do not lack belief, but are typical of the Topix atheists, and firmly believe no god exists, but want to shirk any burden derived from being honest about it. That's been my experience.
What burden do you imagine one assumes by adding "I believe that there are no gods"? What incentive is there to lie about such a thing?

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#774729 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
A few? What fraction of Catholic priests do you suppose have either had sex with children, are aware of or suspect another priest of such abuse but have not come forward with their suspicions, or have actively suppressed the discovery and investigation of such things? It's got to be 30-70%. You virtually never hear of one priest ratting out another to the secular authorities.
That's what makes it institutionalized pedophilia. It pedophilia combined with both an active and a passive cover-up of it. And its occurring among full time, professional Christians. What should we think about Christianity if a lifetime of being a Christian, of reading the bible, and of praying and worshiping is so compatible with such a thing?
.....

.....30Aug14.....Qualify your ' 30 - 70%.

While NOT taking the side of those monsters who began as priests and took advantage
of their positions in Roman Catholic communities, for every one that turned out that
way....over the past 2000 years there have been millions of clergy made up of Popes, Cardinals, Arch Bishops, Bishops, Priests, Christian Brothers, Nuns and the faithful....the greater
percentage consists of good, kind, caring, considerate, honest people.

Ps:.....Its more like lesser than 5%. But if you think this way, then you just don't know
that MOST pedophilia is done within the families.

T
uco Blondie

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#774730 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Alright you Christians. Here's a guy that obviously accepts Christ as his god, meaning that unless he was lied to, he is filled with the Holy Spirit and has received its gifts and fruits. He probably at least intermittently attends a church where he hears sermons and others hear him, reads his bible with the benefit of the Spirit and its promised discernment, and communes with his god through prayer.
Yet look at what a failed human being he is. Where is the power of this god and Spirit? Please explain what happened there, and why any unbeliever should believe the other claims and trust the other promises of Christianity?
.....

.....30Aug14.....Agreed. The poster does NOT profess to be a True follower of Jesus Christ
by holding such feelings within himself.
He has NO idea what Christianity is all about. While he ' rubs his hands ' in glee and hopes
to see so-called self-proclaimed atheists ( no such thing ) as you cower at the feet of God, in actual reality God is the final judge and as this man judges, so shall he be judged.

Tuco Blondie

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#774731 Aug 29, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
Finger waggers? Show me a group of more vile finger-waggers than the global warmists, the militant aborters, feminist screechers, the race-baiters. and the big government-wealth-transferors.
The Christians.
Buck Crick wrote:
Each of those groups will take your money, your home, and your life if needed for their religious cause. That IS NOT even a hypothetical proposition. It has happened repeatedly.
Even if that were true, taking your money and home are not finger wagging.

Christianity is one nonstop act of scornful judgment. The basic vocabulary of Christianity is finger wagging. Sinner, judgment, the fall, curses, disobedience, atonement, fool, vile, pride, idolatry, adultery, whoremonger, fornication, homosexuality, impiety, blasphemy, lust, damnation. Wag, wag, wag.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#774732 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
It promotes situational pedophilia. It needs to go. And it will.
Can you guess why there is celibacy rule, and why it will disappear? Hint: follow the money.
<quoted text>
There is nothing to understand. How is pedophilia misunderstood? Who doesn't think that pedophilia is a crime in a culture where it its illegal? And how does there is pedophilia outside the church when deciding how to deal with it inside the church?
Christians don't seem to know how they are perceived when they function as apologists for organized pedophilia. Any attitude other an unqualified statement that the crimes are egregious, intolerable, and need to be prosecuted vigorously demeans your character and values. Decent people simply will not accept such arguments, and will think less of you for being willing to make them.
And you really have no duty to defend or promote a church that expects you to do so while covering up crimes. It asks you to defend the indefensible. Let the priests do that themselves.
<quoted text>
What evidence is there that the church is "better than yesterday"?
And who believes your church when it claims zero tolerance? It's obviously willing to say and do anything to protect its treasure.
And no organization should follow the Catholic church. None comes close to its crimes. It is the world's largest sex syndicate, and in America, it should be prosecuted under the RICO (racketeering) statutes.
Sorry to be so blunt, but you've chosen the wrong side of this issue, and you should be ashamed to be defending such an institution.
Finally! I agree with you 100% IANS.

The Vatican~ Official Sponsor Of The Anti Christ and Pedophilia

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#774733 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I learned that as an American. You go into a poor part of town, like a ghetto, and your car had better not break down.
Then I saw third world poverty, which was much more severe - bare feet, dirt floors, rags for clothes - but saw happy people that didn't seem dangerous or criminal. I decided that the difference was that this second set of people didn't feel poor. They didn't feel cheated. They didn't have richer people around them except us, whom they knew nothing about, and apparently didn't resent or envy.
I decided that poverty combined with a sense of injustice - of not getting your fair share, and perhaps of knowing that you are looked down upon due to class or race prejudice - is what leads to crime rather than poverty per se.
So, poverty in America will be associated with crime if it's in the city, but less so say for hillbillies or other rural types all living more or less alike apart from other kinds of people.
Would you agree with that?
.....

.....30Aug14.....Alright. Give us the names of the Third World countries you visited
that you write about herein.

Ps:....Odds are that you haven't been outta your back yard.

Most crimes are committed in the cities ( everywhere ) because people
are jam-packed and over the past 25 years in particular, there have been
lawyers making fortunes off the backs of the taxpayers representing the
crooks that come down the pipes, get smacked on the wrists and go on
walking down the street.....after collecting 10 - 20% of the lawyer's fee
money that he got from the taxpayer.(Note: People in general always
refer to ' money from the government'.....the government has NO money...
its money from the taxpayer..and the taxpayer has become fedup to
the gills with what is happening. Imagine...17 trillion dollars in the hole,
and millions of people have NO idea how it got to be so much....as they
go down to the local government office to take their lifetime dole-money.)

Tuco Blondie

Since: Aug 14

Location hidden

#774734 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Riverside Redneck is now Stilgar Fifrawi.
.....

.....30Aug14.....and ' it ain't necessarily so '.... is still a prick.

Tuco Blondie

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#774736 Aug 29, 2014
curiouslu wrote:
Especially not in America.
Except for joyless's kids, that thing being a child's only source of education would be tantamount to child abuse.
Rubbish as your educational system is, it's still better than abuse.
Uh-huh.

That's why people from around the world flock to America for an education...

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#774737 Aug 29, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>Uh-huh.

That's why people from around the world flock to America for an education...
So what's your excuse?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#774738 Aug 29, 2014
macumazahn wrote:
Now I'm curious. What characterizes these "Topix Atheists!" of whom you speak?
Over confidence.
atheism is destructive

Alabaster, AL

#774739 Aug 29, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
I think your vengeance will disqualify you from Heaven as well.
If God is justice, that is.
Insults Are Easier
Awwww, did I upset you? It's funny how you sit back and enjoy your daily insults to Christians and then seem surprised that someone retaliates against it with statements of impending doom as punishment.

You atheists are such maggots.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#774740 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:

That's simply not credible. The anxiety is because homosexuality has been demonized and gays marginalized, and experiencing homosexual urges in a world where you know that family, friends, acquaintances, and strangers are conditioned to view you disapprovingly would be threatening.
That's your view. I disagree.
In another time and place where homosexuality was not stigmatized, there would be no such anxiety.
Which time and place is that?
It's amazing to me how blind you are to this phenomenon and Christianity's role in creating it in Western culture. Who in these threads is calling homosexuality a sin - an abomination to a perfect god?
I am, and so are many others.

BUT - I'm also calling adultery and theft an abomination to God.

Do you think Christians are to blame for the guilt of cheating on a spouse or the punishment for taking something that doesn't belong to you?
Christians. True, not all, but so what?
That's THE point of contention here, IANS. "Not all". You shouldn't dismiss that so quickly.
Everybody that is is Christian. Christian homophobia
Do you think I'm homophobic because I agree with the Bible on homosexuality?

If so, then you must also think I'm adulteryophobic too
is manifesting itself through those susceptible to it. If you refuse to pile on, good for you. But Christian homophobia remains prevalent.
Saying something is a sin, or abominable to God, doesn't constitute a phobia.
You manifest it in a diluted form. You're not overtly attacking gays people, but your refusal to see the problem and its source is due to your god belief.
I'm researching the problem. That's why I ask so many questions - I want answers.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#774741 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
What kind of answer is that? The fact remains that the lives of gay people are made more uncomfortable, more difficult, and more dangerous because of a culture of homophobia which has one principle source.
Your inability or unwillingness to acknowledge the existence of Christian homophobia has caused friction between us. You see me making this argument not as a good faith effort to help ease an injustice, but as a bigoted, hateful assault on Christianity.
This exact same phenomenon plays out as Christian atheophobia. Atheism is perhaps even more stigmatized than homosexuality, which also led to an entire class of people being forced to choose between the contempt of a society programmed to disapprove of them, or occupy a closet. And it's no coincidence that both closets have begun to empty out with the weakening of the Christian church's social clout. And both groups are pointing the finger right back in the face of the church. The best weapon to use against the church is to expose it as the persecutor of both groups in the hope of reversing the disapproval and stigma. Let it be Christianity that is seen as immoral instead. Let's its moral legs be cut right out from under it like the Black Night in The Holy Grail. Let it be shamed and stigmatized into relative silence and irrelevance.
That was a pretty good post until you vented on the last two sentences. They show your true animosity towards Christians and Christianity.

While I was reading you words, I was like "hey, he's onto something here", then I got to the end...

Is it hatred? Disgust? Shame? What is it?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#774742 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
It promotes situational pedophilia. It needs to go. And it will.
Can you guess why there is celibacy rule, and why it will disappear? Hint: follow the money.
<quoted text>
There is nothing to understand. How is pedophilia misunderstood? Who doesn't think that pedophilia is a crime in a culture where it its illegal? And how does there is pedophilia outside the church when deciding how to deal with it inside the church?
Christians don't seem to know how they are perceived when they function as apologists for organized pedophilia. Any attitude other an unqualified statement that the crimes are egregious, intolerable, and need to be prosecuted vigorously demeans your character and values. Decent people simply will not accept such arguments, and will think less of you for being willing to make them.
And you really have no duty to defend or promote a church that expects you to do so while covering up crimes. It asks you to defend the indefensible. Let the priests do that themselves.
<quoted text>
What evidence is there that the church is "better than yesterday"?
And who believes your church when it claims zero tolerance? It's obviously willing to say and do anything to protect its treasure.
And no organization should follow the Catholic church. None comes close to its crimes. It is the world's largest sex syndicate, and in America, it should be prosecuted under the RICO (racketeering) statutes.
Sorry to be so blunt, but you've chosen the wrong side of this issue, and you should be ashamed to be defending such an institution.
Situational pedophilia??

Do you know of any evidence indicating that being deprived of sex propels a person to commit pedophilia?

I've never heard of any. What I have read is that being sexually active stimulates the sex drive.

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#774743 Aug 29, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
<quoted text>That's your view. I disagree.

[QUOTE] In another time and place where homosexuality was not stigmatized, there would be no such anxiety. "

Which time and place is that?

[QUOTE] It's amazing to me how blind you are to this phenomenon and Christianity's role in creating it in Western culture. Who in these threads is calling homosexuality a sin - an abomination to a perfect god? "

I am, and so are many others.

BUT - I'm also calling adultery and theft an abomination to God.

Do you think Christians are to blame for the guilt of cheating on a spouse or the punishment for taking something that doesn't belong to you?

[QUOTE] Christians. True, not all, but so what? "

That's THE point of contention here, IANS. "Not all". You shouldn't dismiss that so quickly.

[QUOTE] Everybody that is is Christian. Christian homophobia "

Do you think I'm homophobic because I agree with the Bible on homosexuality?

If so, then you must also think I'm adulteryophobic too

[QUOTE] is manifesting itself through those susceptible to it. If you refuse to pile on, good for you. But Christian homophobia remains prevalent. "

Saying something is a sin, or abominable to God, doesn't constitute a phobia.

[QUOTE] You manifest it in a diluted form. You're not overtly attacking gays people, but your refusal to see the problem and its source is due to your god belief.
"

I'm researching the problem. That's why I ask so many questions - I want answers.
Duh, "adulteryophobic" isn't even a word.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#774744 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
What burden do you imagine one assumes by adding "I believe that there are no gods"? What incentive is there to lie about such a thing?
I think you know.

- To say "I believe no god exists" implies the same burden of proof as saying "I believe a god exists".

- To feign lack of belief implies that the position of atheism is a default position.

- To feign lack of belief implies superior rationality, as in adopting no position that goes beyond actual knowledge.

- To feign lack of belief suggests that atheism is the natural state of man, as in before any indoctrination occurs, as in "every human being is born an atheist".

It's atheist apologetics, and it's a fraud.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#774745 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, at long last we can begin.
It took so long to get an answer from you that you forgot an important part of the question that needs to be resolved before we can proceed to discussing your post. Here it is as originally asked:
"Would you like to take a few moments to discuss what open-mindedness and closed-mindedness mean to you? What defines them and how do you identify them? Why did you imply that my rejection of your claim was closed-minded? Too often on these threads, those words are used to refer to somebody not accepting somebody else's claim, or not being convinced by their argument."
I'll have to answer the first part of the question for you. Please feel free to modify my answer if it is not yours, and in the future, please try to answer the questions asked yourself the first time.
I am concluding from your post, and especially the comment, "Your mind is absolutely resistant to new arguments or new ideas that invalidate your preconceptions," that you define closed-mindedness as the refusal to accept your argument, and that you identify me as closed minded because I won't accept conclusions of yours such as that Christianity does not teach homophobia or that Christianity is a force of good in the world. Is that correct?
It also seems like you are defining closed-mindedness as not acknowledging your arguments: "I say that you're close-minded to Christianity because you refuse to acknowledge any new testimonies or evidence that are produced." This would be a different claim, and I would respond to this one differently than the one above. I'm not sure what claims you think I have not even acknowledged as opposed to rejected. If this is accurate, would you please give me examples of a claim or evidence you resented that I ignored rather than disagreed with?
These appear to be the two definitions of closed-mindedness that you would like to accuse me of. is that accurate?
And if so, do you see the difference between them? I would agree with you in the first case that, yes, I do reject your conclusions, but that that is not closed-mindedness. I would agree with you in the second case that not even acknowledging your argument would be closed-minededness, but that I don't do that.
Once we get this much settled, I can address your specific charges. But before I do, I need a clear picture of what the word means when you use it, and as you can see, it already appears to mean two different things. Please make a clear, declarative statement of what it is you are accusing me of when you call me closed-minded.
Okay, I can do that. Here:

You are unreceptive to new ideas or new information about Christianity.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#774746 Aug 29, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
America was founded on a belief in divine creation of man. That's not necessarily a Christian principle, but it's a religious principle. Some may think that was a mistake, but it's historical fact.

We've had this discussion.
Yes, we have.

And I would go further than you did and say that Americanism is definitely not founded on any Christian principle at all, nor could the creator referred to possibly be the Christian god. The principles of Christianity were indissolubly linked to the principles of monarchy. There is almost no connection between Christian philosophy, which is authoritarian, demands obedience, and is focused on commandments and judgment, and Americanism, which began with the overthrow of a king, the repudiation of aristocracy, and the elevation of man subject to free, self-governing citizen.

Americanism is characterized by principles like democracy, egalitarianism, the rule of law, personal political freedoms, and limited, transparent, and secular government - all humanistic, Enlightenment ideas, and all reactions to the theocratic traditions of the Middle Ages. None of those Christian principles is represented in the US Constitution, and none of the principles of Americanism are found in the Christian bible or the Middle Ages governments that actually are founded on it.

If the writers were sincere that a god was involved, they must have been referring to some other god, most likely the deist god. But it is equally possible that they were giving lip service to a concept that tied the past with their new way of viewing the world - through the lens of Enlightenment ideals. Overthrowing a king was definitely a break from the ideology of the Middle Ages, which was very Christian. The Christian god empowers kings, and expects subjects to obey them. It was probably difficult for many colonists to accept this impiety, and throwing in a god couldn't hurt. It was a strategically sound thing to do.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#774747 Aug 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
It is with great trepidation that I post this article I just read from the Daily Kos at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/19/1322... :
"The brain behind Facebook’s popular ‘God’ humor page has crowdfunded over $US40,000 in a campaign to erect pro-gay billboards in the home town of the anti-gay Westboro Baptist Church.
" ‘God’s’ followers pledged the funds in just ten days, and ‘God’ now plans to buy more billboards with the message that ‘God loves gays’ in other parts of the United States if he can raise further funds."
[Here is the original Campaign message]
" ‘A mean lie has been put into the world for thousands of years. The time has come to right this wrong,’‘God’ says of his campaign.‘God loves gay, lesbian and transgendered people. God loves ALL people!‘Therefore, the LORD shall put up a billboard in Topeka, Kansas that says "God Loves Gays." The time has come to fight back. With love!’ "
Isn't that interesting? It appears that Christians (I'm assuming that it is Christians giving the money for this project) are publicly fighting the Westboro Baptist Church. This is obviously the right thing to do, and comes at an opportune time for this thread, where we are presently actively arguing the net effect of Christianity in this area, with Stilgar having said that this kind of behavior typifies Christianity as much as the opposite, as well as debating the effectiveness of publicly shaming the church. The question of relevance to that discussion is whether this represents a face of Christianity which has been waging a gay-tolerance campaign in relative obscurity, or a new phenomenon and a recent reaction to a lot of negative blowback following a shaming campaign by the church's detractors. To my knowledge, this is the first time that something like this has been done and received press - in this case, by the Daily Kos, who appears to have gotten the story from the Gay Star News http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/%E2%80%98g... (check out the cute animation at the bottom of the link)
Where are the conservative Christian media reports of this? Where are the Family Research Council and the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry (CARM)? How about Drudge and TownHall?
I applaud you, IANS. I know that was probably hard for you to post.

It's good to see that Christians are finally doing something to put a stop to the ugly stigma that churches like Westborough Baptist have given us.

Do a Google search of "God loves gays billboard" and you will get a ton of hits.

I would recommend a partial revision of your post, though. The part where you said "debating the effectiveness of publicly shaming the church" shouldn't really be there. It's the "the church" part that gives me pause. Publicly shaming Christianity is not the answer, publicly shaming ignorant fools like the ones at WBC *is* the answer.

But all in all, that was a really good post. Very fair and open-minded. I thank you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 58 min uIDIOTRACEMAKEWOR... 184,719
the tricks and treats of healthcare 1 hr Sethlong 3
new jersey and philadelphia muslims 1 hr Sethlong 5
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr PadMark 675,598
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Bongo 110,470
Hell Angels motor cycle group (Jul '11) 5 hr mechanic 106
what lurks amongst us 5 hr Sethlong 4
More from around the web