• Religious people trust atheists as much as they trust rapists, study finds.
    365 replies, posted
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;33567141]nah man we'd totally have world peace without religion! Imagine no wars (because all wars, even World War II and the Civil War, were motivated by religion), no shootings, no crime, nothing but people holding hands singing Kumbaya![/QUOTE] I know you're not serious, but I've met people that say this everytime, and I tell them: You're gonna have to explain to me how the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Franco-Prussian War, the Punic Wars, the Peloponnesian War, the Hundred Years War, World War I, World War II, the Polish-Soviet War, the Russo-Japanese War, and the US Civil War were all motivated by religion. No seriously, I have all of those in my head and list every single one of them. It baffles the fucker each time. "well um, napoleon was christian so he invaded russia or something or the other" true story :v
What if the religious people they trust are the rapists? Would they still trust them more then a normal atheist?
[QUOTE=Noble;33567335] And by the way, religion did have a hand in both of those wars you mentioned. Views on slavery for example, a key issue of the civil war, were divided by religious beliefs. Also, [/QUOTE] But for World War II it was a [I]very small hand.[/I] Hitler was not motivated by any religious reason at all when he invaded Poland, and later the Soviet Union. It was for political and ideological reasons, ie Lebensraum. The Japanese did not attack China for religious reasons in 1936, and did not bomb Pearl Harbor and seize Hong Kong and sink the Prince of Wales for religious reasons. The Italians did not attempt a bizarre conquest of Greece and British Africa for any religious reasons. At all. So again, very small hand. In fact I'd say it was confided only to the Holocaust.
[QUOTE=Noble;33567627]Stalin didn't kill people in the name of atheism, he was just a cruel man who happened to be an atheist. That's a bit different than Hitler directly referencing his religious beliefs and saying that he's doing his evil deeds for "the work of the Lord"[/QUOTE] Funny enough, I think Hitler was actually quoted once as saying to a passing farmer on a walk that, for all intents and purposes, he only used ethnicity as the seeming driving force behind his Holocaust because it meant that there was someone the whole world over to unite against. Then again, it was an overly verbose and out-of-context quote, so I'm probably wrong. Plus it came from TV Tropes. So, yeah, probably wrong. [editline]4th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=dass;33567684]What if the religious people they trust are the rapists? Would they still trust them more then a normal atheist?[/QUOTE] We really need an official sorting algorithm for bigotry. For instance, if someone were an Agnostic rapist, would they be trusted as much as a normal Atheist, or slightly more than an Aetheistic rapist? It's surprisingly complex for baseless hatred cooked up by rednecks.
[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;33567665]I know you're not serious, but I've met people that say this everytime, and I tell them: You're gonna have to explain to me how the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Franco-Prussian War, the Punic Wars, the Peloponnesian War, the Hundred Years War, World War I, World War II, the Polish-Soviet War, the Russo-Japanese War, and the US Civil War were all motivated by religion. No seriously, I have all of those in my head and list every single one of them. It baffles the fucker each time. "well um, napoleon was christian so he invaded russia or something or the other" true story :v[/QUOTE] Again, unless someone is foolish enough to say that every single war was completely motivated by and fought over religious beliefs, you are just attacking a strawman - a point that is easy to criticize, but that no one is actually trying to make. I will put the claim forward that religion contributes greatly to divisiveness between people and therefore is responsible for a lot of conflict caused by this divisiveness. There are other ideas to fight over besides religion though, and I don't think anyone disagrees with that.
its ok, I as an athiest dont trust religous ppl so were even.
[QUOTE=Noble;33567764]Again, unless someone is foolish enough to say that every single war was completely motivated by and fought over religious beliefs, you are just attacking a strawman - a point that is easy to criticize, but that no one is actually trying to make. I will put the claim forward that religion contributes greatly to divisiveness between people and therefore is responsible for a lot of conflict caused by this divisiveness. There are other ideas to fight over besides religion though, and I don't think anyone disagrees with that.[/QUOTE] Except many of these people I met were anything but strawmen. These people were dead set on proving that religion was the reason for violence, war, greed and power, in their words. I distinctly remember one, a girl, in Government class who claimed the US invasion of Iraq was almost entirely religious-based. If she wasn't seriously trying to make that point then she was an incredible actor.
[QUOTE=cyclocius;33566508]This is why I support religion. Because of the bigoted attitude and arrogance Atheism instils in people. Not to mention just how quick many Atheists on this forum are all to eager to jump aboard the Religion-Hating Bandwagon when all religion provides is a moral code that amounts to "Don't be a dick".[/QUOTE] I'm an Atheist who would bash on an atheist for enforcing ideas the same way a Christian would, so don't even fucking start there. And religion has far more bigger arrogance and bigoted attitude than Atheism from what I've seen. Sure, Atheists can be arrogant and bigoted, but who are the ones who would sooner hold a bible up blindly and say that they're going to hell for disagreeing, even though they should know full damn well that doing so would be a sin and only god shall actually judge the atheists? and who are the ones who claim to have the morals and say that atheists don't have any, when they don't truly follow everything in the bible like they say they do? I've seen all too many rich Christians say they were honest Christians. This is a flat out bullshit lie, if they were real "Christians" they would understand that a camel will go into the eye of a needle sooner than a rich man goes into heaven. I'm sorry but, Jesus was a socialist, rich people are looked down upon. Too many religious followers also claim to believe in god, but don't act like they truly do, actually be careful in life and don't judge people and enforce things , be kind, loving, all that stuff, and be happy when someone dies that they're in a better place but honor their life, if you actually believed in god, you would do this, but I've seen tons of people blindly acting with hateful judgement and saying "What god would do" as if they know what he would do. Doesn't that make the religious seem a little dishonest there? Also, the religious trusting Atheists as much as rapists, doesn't that prove some mass form of bigotry there based on belief that they have? [QUOTE=cyclocius;33566639]Sorry to piss in your cornflakes kiddo, but everything you've posted is from the Old Testament of the Bible which is generally, outside of Genesis, not taken to be "canon". The New Testament preaches kindness, altruism and Empathy, all of which many Christians take to heart when they support their communities. People who adore the Old Testament are idiots, akin to the Westboro Baptist Church. You'd note that most if not all Christian Fundamentalists cite the Old Testament, like the WBBC, the KKK and the more radical Evangelicals.[/QUOTE] Sorry to piss in your cornflakes kiddo, but saying "Sorry to piss in your cornflakes kiddo" makes you look silly.
[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;33568077]Except many of these people I met were anything but strawmen. These people were dead set on proving that religion was the reason for violence, war, greed and power, in their words. I distinctly remember one, a girl, in Government class who claimed the US invasion of Iraq was almost entirely religious-based. If she wasn't seriously trying to make that point then she was an incredible actor.[/QUOTE]Everyone knows it was oil based
Vise fucking versa to you too religion!
It's ok by me, I don't trust them either(The religious people I mean). If they need to be guided by their imaginary friend to stay on a "morally straight" path than how are they the stable ones?
They don't trust because they don't fully understand. It's natural, they probably grew up with religion their whole lives, believing everything from a young age to an adult. You can't just expect them to trust a person who says everything they have been taught about religion their whole lives isn't true. Give people time, in the future I am sure people will get over religion, but we live in the time where atheism is at it's very first stages of popularization, and religion still holds supreme for most countries and people. It's not like religion is completely evil anyways, sure it's a double edged sword, but I think facepunch just listens to most of the negatives.
[QUOTE=Stick it in her pooper;33566187]Are you really trying to compare that laughable event to the horrible things "real" religious nuts like Osama Bin Laden have done? I trust religious people as much as I trust my local rapist[/QUOTE] That's pretty poor logic. Comparing every religious person to Osama Bin Laden is rather stupid. I understand the article in the OP is just as stupid. Never said it wasn't.
Who says we need the fear of damnation to keep us on the good path?
[QUOTE=J!NX;33568149]Also, the religious trusting Atheists as much as rapists, doesn't that prove some mass form of bigotry there based on belief that they have?[/QUOTE] Christianity doesn't exactly promote that kind of thought process though. It doesn't have to do with the religion itself, just the people who practice it poorly. [editline]4th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=OrionChronicles;33568912]Who says we need the fear of damnation to keep us on the good path?[/QUOTE] No one. Only idiots think that way.
[QUOTE=Noble;33567627]Stalin didn't kill people in the name of atheism, he was just a cruel man who happened to be an atheist. That's a bit different than Hitler directly referencing his religious beliefs and saying that he's doing his evil deeds for "the work of the Lord"[/QUOTE] Stalin tried to destroy religion as he found it dangerous, so yes it was to do with the fact that he was atheist
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;33569024]Stalin tried to destroy religion as he found it dangerous, so yes it was to do with the fact that he was atheist[/QUOTE]He tried to destroy churches because they had too much power actually.
[QUOTE=Noble;33567627]Stalin didn't kill people in the name of atheism, he was just a cruel man who happened to be an atheist. That's a bit different than Hitler directly referencing his religious beliefs and saying that he's doing his evil deeds for "the work of the Lord"[/QUOTE] If Hitler so believed he was being a good Christian then why did he send priests to concentration camps and try to start up his own pagan religion?
[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;33570034]If Hitler so believed he was being a good Christian then why did he send priests to concentration camps and try to start up his own pagan religion?[/QUOTE]Because he could. Atleast he thought so.
Double standard all the way facepunch, way to go. Religious people say they don't want an atheist in power, and you say you don't want a religious person in power. Theirs is bigotry, yours is fair and just. Religion is here to stay, bitch as you will, without religion we would not have the technological superiority over the Middle East, you can thank the crusades. Without religion we would not have taken the New World so easily without the Jesuits and Spanish attempting to convert the populations. How about all those starving people in Africa the churches are attempting to help and save? Sure they are trying to convert them to their religion, but oh well they must be evil for trying to spread their beliefs, but wait, atheists are trying to spread it by billboards put in areas that will create controversy. If you want so many damn people to stop being religious, get off your ass and spread your beliefs without the keyboard and without going out and coming across as a Westboro baptist idiot, which is what a lot of Atheists seem like. Everyone is free to believe what they want, and yes you can try to change their views to your own, but going around and slamming them with insults is why religious people have to be defensive against atheists. Be smart about how you do it, because the way your going around now may seem intelligent and superior to the way they go on, but ad campaigns like making the Pope kiss an Iman, or putting a "God Is Not Real" billboard outside a church is rude, insensitive and downright wrong. You go to attack them directly, incite hate, and create a conflict where you then go on to bash them. Guilty by defense or guilty by acceptance. Yes, religion has caused bad things to occur. Crusades killed millions of people, Spanish Inquisition, Native Americans being killed in North America, and some extreme missionaries have had their converts kill people who reject to convert. Go on to bash and attack religion based on things that have happened, you'll be the ones living in the past and following a 'barbaric' influence, or, you can be the better men and be smart about how you tackle religion, point out inconsistencies, problems, flaws that are occurring in the MODERN age, not back in the 1200's. Stop calling all things religion terrible, instead disagree with what they say and then say why, not this "Religion sucks because the people who follow it are stupid and there is no god". Instead "I disagree with what you believe and say, based on findings and ..." And if they reject your statement, so be it. They look stupid and you look more like the victim of religious discrimination. Yes, I'm religious, so what? Did I go out and attack anyone personally? Did I sling insults around to try and enrage you to the point where your sentences are fueled by anger? No, I gave you points, put my ideas and beliefs down so you could see. If people on these forums were more accepting, you would have more intelligent discussions compared to the 3 word "FUCK ALL RELIGION" posts we see. You may disagree with what I said, go ahead, try to enlighten me. But at least I have the balls to put down my beliefs in front of you and let you try to tear them to shreds.
i don't like religion but i like religious people and unless they did something untrustworthy i'd trust them. total state of zen is the way to be man
[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;33570034]If Hitler so believed he was being a good Christian then why did he send priests to concentration camps and try to start up his own pagan religion?[/QUOTE] I don't think he did that at all. He was backed by the Catholic church at the time, he pushed Christianity as a unifying force during his regime, and he prosecuted non-believers. In "Mein Kompf," he repeatedly brought up his Christian faith, and portrayed himself as a crusader, in a way.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33569069]He tried to destroy churches because they had too much power actually.[/QUOTE] Same as Hitlers reasoning for his attack on the Jews [editline]4th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Thy Reaper;33572125]I don't think he did that at all. He was backed by the Catholic church at the time, he pushed Christianity as a unifying force during his regime, and he prosecuted non-believers. In "Mein Kompf," he repeatedly brought up his Christian faith, and portrayed himself as a crusader, in a way.[/QUOTE] Erm no he wasn't, he tried to set up the Reich church that promoted Nazi ideology over the bible. He also got rid of the Centre Party.
i like how as soon as this kind of thread pops up it becomes apparent that facepunch is not happy with religious people believing in their faith. What the fuck, guys?
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;33569088]I fucking hate evangelists.[/QUOTE] You do know that there are two completely different groups of evangelists?
[QUOTE=Gundevil;33571243]Double standard all the way facepunch, way to go. Religious people say they don't want an atheist in power, and you say you don't want a religious person in power. Theirs is bigotry, yours is fair and just.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure what particular people you're trying to address, but not all of us don't want a religious individual in power. A person can be a perfectly effective leader regardless of their faith or lack thereof. However, when a recent president disregarded atheists as 'real' citizens, directly as a result of his faith, it is a focus of concern. [quote]Religion is here to stay, bitch as you will, without religion we would not have the technological superiority over the Middle East, you can thank the crusades. Without religion we would not have taken the New World so easily without the Jesuits and Spanish attempting to convert the populations. How about all those starving people in Africa the churches are attempting to help and save? Sure they are trying to convert them to their religion, but oh well they must be evil for trying to spread their beliefs, but wait, atheists are trying to spread it by billboards put in areas that will create controversy. [/quote] The crusades are probably more responsible for destroying progress than promoting it. I don't think colonizing two huge continents would really have been slowed down by a lack of missionaries. Money is a powerful motivator, as is a wish for conquest. Consider two groups of people, one group dedicated to helping a population, and one dedicated both to helping and converting a population. Won't the one who doesn't waste resources to converting people do more help in the long run? Also, the whole condom thing from the Catholics... Those "Controversial Billboards" that say things like "We don't believe in God" and "You aren't alone." you mean? Or maybe the "You can be Good without God" billboards? [quote]If you want so many damn people to stop being religious, get off your ass and spread your beliefs without the keyboard and without going out and coming across as a Westboro baptist idiot, which is what a lot of Atheists seem like. [/quote] We should stop using the internet... why? It's not like internet use precludes also talking to people, or that using the internet somehow makes you appear crazy. The Westboro baptists are crazy independent of their mode of communication, just as anyone is. [quote]Everyone is free to believe what they want, and yes you can try to change their views to your own, but going around and slamming them with insults is why religious people have to be defensive against atheists. Be smart about how you do it, because the way your going around now may seem intelligent and superior to the way they go on, but ad campaigns like making the Pope kiss an Iman, or putting a "God Is Not Real" billboard outside a church is rude, insensitive and downright wrong. You go to attack them directly, incite hate, and create a conflict where you then go on to bash them. Guilty by defense or guilty by acceptance.[/quote] Ah, so "God Is Not Real" is the truly controversial statement that we should never say. Oh well, [B]God Is Not Real[/B]. [quote]Yes, I'm religious, so what? Did I go out and attack anyone personally? Did I sling insults around to try and enrage you to the point where your sentences are fueled by anger?[/quote] It strikes me that you're generalizing Atheists to be assholes, so yeah, you kinda did. [QUOTE]No, I gave you points, put my ideas and beliefs down so you could see. If people on these forums were more accepting, you would have more intelligent discussions compared to the 3 word "FUCK ALL RELIGION" posts we see. You may disagree with what I said, go ahead, try to enlighten me. But at least I have the balls to put down my beliefs in front of you and let you try to tear them to shreds.[/QUOTE] I did only glance over some posts in this thread, but I didn't see this sort of behavior in this thread, and certainly not as the standard response.
[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;33572465]I'm not sure what particular people you're trying to address, but not all of us don't want a religious individual in power. A person can be a perfectly effective leader regardless of their faith or lack thereof. However, when a recent president disregarded atheists as 'real' citizens, directly as a result of his faith, it is a focus of concern. The crusades are probably more responsible for destroying progress than promoting it. I don't think colonizing two huge continents would really have been slowed down by a lack of missionaries. Money is a powerful motivator, as is a wish for conquest. Consider two groups of people, one group dedicated to helping a population, and one dedicated both to helping and converting a population. Won't the one who doesn't waste resources to converting people do more help in the long run? Also, the whole condom thing from the Catholics... Those "Controversial Billboards" that say things like "We don't believe in God" and "You aren't alone." you mean? Or maybe the "You can be Good without God" billboards? We should stop using the internet... why? It's not like internet use precludes also talking to people, or that using the internet somehow makes you appear crazy. The Westboro baptists are crazy independent of their mode of communication, just as anyone is. Ah, so "God Is Not Real" is the truly controversial statement that we should never say. Oh well, [B]God Is Not Real[/B]. It strikes me that you're generalizing Atheists to be assholes, so yeah, you kinda did. I did only glance over some posts in this thread, but I didn't see this sort of behavior in this thread, and certainly not as the standard response.[/QUOTE] 1. The crusades weren't responsible for the slow progress made during the middle ages, feudalism was. Do I agree with the crusades? No. The people who were in charge of them and participated them are mostly terrible people who would have known better, if they could actually read. If more people could read and had copies of the Bible, they would have clearly been able to tell that what was going on with the crusades was wrong. However, not many people did. If anyone spoke out against them, the church labeled them as a heretic and had them killed. Was this Christianity's fault? No. It was the corrupt church. 2. He was implying that a face to face interaction is more likely to gain converts. Simple. 3. Posting a billboard that says "God is not real." right by a church is cruel. It is that simple. Why not post them somewhere else in town? 4. I didn't see him making generalizations, I'm sure he was just trying to make a point. Atheists are just like any other religious demographic. You have the good and you have the bad.
[QUOTE=Mon;33563006]figured you exaggerated on that because that borders on hate speech and would do a pretty shit job at getting new members most of the time they just talk about light and salvation and shit[/QUOTE] Saying you'll burn in hell for being an atheist is no more "hate speech" than saying you'll get crushed to death by a giant if you climb the beanstalk
[QUOTE=wingless;33561457]And this is why I'm Anti-Religion. Because of the bullshit it spreads and the danger it inflicts. Not to mention the countless crimes ignored and constant demoralization and fear spread around the world.[/QUOTE] Yeah, you're the reason why people hate atheists. Pretend that you're a religious person and someone's spouting off how dangerous religion is at you without any kind of argument other than personal experience.
[QUOTE=Greenen72;33572688]Yeah, you're the reason why people hate atheists. Pretend that you're a religious person and someone's spouting off how dangerous religion is at you without any kind of argument other than personal experience.[/QUOTE] But religion's entire dogma is about how dangerous it is to not be religious, and the fact that the mere concept of hell exists is proof of this. Religion is so pervasive that atheists are reminded about how they'll "burn in hell" in a near hourly basis. Why is it okay for them to point out what they perceive as dangerous but not for us to do the same? (I know the answer to this, it's because religious people have a sense of entitlement from being pandered to for thousands of years and the minute they start to see equal standards in place they take it as an attack)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.