Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote: Biccat, your a smart fella, surely you don't think that counts as "absurd" either?

You really don't think conflating religion with child abuse is "absurd"?

Do you think it would be absurd to conflate homosexuality with child abuse?

mattyrm wrote: I mean, you can disagree.. I think I do as well, as I wouldn't say it is abuse per say, but its definately not absurd to have that opinion. He gives many many logical reasons about how he came to this conclusion.

At the risk of raising the spectre of Godwin, lots of people have logical reasons why they reach absurd conclusions. As I said before, if what Hitler said about the Jews was correct, then the Holocaust was justified. But he started from a false premise. As does Dawkins. And that's what makes the position absurd.

mattyrm wrote: Anyway, as I said, I dont think you really believe it is "absurd" you just disagree with it. And that's fine, so do I, I think he is being a bit too strong with his argument.

If I'm wrong however and you do indeed think it is totally absurd, then, not only have you hugely gone down in my estimation, you have just lost an argument.

Sorry, it really is absurd. It's absurd because he's advocating for punishment of people based on the fact that they have religious beliefs and they want their children to have religious beliefs.

If you don't think it's absurd, what type of comment would rise to the level of absurdity? How about "atheists are immoral"?

sirlynchmob wrote:and quite a few religious bigots who think their book somehow gives them the right to tell others how to live their lives.

And if they every try to impose their religious beliefs on others, you'll see me standing beside you opposing them. Because like I said, tyranny is bad, even if done for noble reasons.

so you are for gays being allowed to marry, good for you.

rockerbikie wrote:Forcing them until they are old enough to know better(Teenaged years) is probably a good thing. Law is based of religon yet we religon abuse, does that mean Law is Child Abuse? No. Religon has taught us a lot of good in our lives. Sure, it has it bad moments with religous zealots but it has people who will help you out. When was the last time you saw an Athiest soup kitchen.

There are literally dozens if not hundreds in DC. On the other hand, the Catholic church suspended all aid (or at the least, threatened to suspend all aid; I'm not sure if they actually went through with it) in DC when DC passed a law allowing gay marriage.

rockerbikie wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

Deadshot wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Name me one mainstream atheist view of Religion that is "absurd" please. I'm genuinely interested to hear the retort.

I'm pretty sure Dawkins argued that religion is child abuse.

Thats not absurd though, its truth.

/sigh So teaching Children morals through stories is wrong now. /clap

What I believe he means that children are indoctrinated into a religion at a young age. Anything they hear is fact. By getting them to learn it so young they take it as gospel, no pun intended, and refuse to believe anything else in later life. There are exceptions obviously. By forcing them, it can be construed as child abuse.

Forcing them until they are old enough to know better(Teenaged years) is probably a good thing. Law is based of religon yet we religon abuse, does that mean Law is Child Abuse? No. Religon has taught us a lot of good in our lives. Sure, it has it bad moments with religous zealots but it has people who will help you out. When was the last time you saw an Athiest soup kitchen.

Its a great thing we don't have laws based on christianity. Most of their laws are so horrid even they don't want to acknowledge them. or are you advocating that children need to be taken to the river and stoned, and if you marry a woman and she wasn't a virgin she should be stoned, and that slavery is ok?

Within reason. /facepalm Also, by Christian standards that is a huge defiance of the 10 Commandments, so is treat someone how you like to be treated.

what does reason have to do with the bible, its not my fault your god is a monster and put in some really horrid stuff into his book.

the 10 commandments really? so thats the only part of the bible worth following? and just because a secular nation believes killing someone is wrong and that just happens to work with a commandment, it means all our laws are based on religion? /epic facepalm.

Maybe if god hadn't wasn't the first 3 on "i'm shallow, worship me" he could have worked in don't sexually abuse children, or just codemn rape.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

streamdragon wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:Forcing them until they are old enough to know better(Teenaged years) is probably a good thing. Law is based of religon yet we religon abuse, does that mean Law is Child Abuse? No. Religon has taught us a lot of good in our lives. Sure, it has it bad moments with religous zealots but it has people who will help you out. When was the last time you saw an Athiest soup kitchen.

There are literally dozens if not hundreds in DC. On the other hand, the Catholic church suspended all aid (or at the least, threatened to suspend all aid; I'm not sure if they actually went through with it) in DC when DC passed a law allowing gay marriage.

They did the same thing in new york. the salvation army is the worst for it. everyone thinks donating to their santas for xmas makes them a good person, but the salvation army takes most of that money to fund bigoted agendas.

sirlynchmob wrote:
what does reason have to do with the bible, its not my fault your god is a monster and put in some really horrid stuff into his book.

the 10 commandments really? so thats the only part of the bible worth following? and just because a secular nation believes killing someone is wrong and that just happens to work with a commandment, it means all our laws are based on religion? /epic facepalm.

Maybe if god hadn't wasn't the first 3 on "i'm shallow, worship me" he could have worked in don't sexually abuse children, or just codemn rape.

This really doesn't help matters.

sirlynchmob wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

Deadshot wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Name me one mainstream atheist view of Religion that is "absurd" please. I'm genuinely interested to hear the retort.

I'm pretty sure Dawkins argued that religion is child abuse.

Thats not absurd though, its truth.

/sigh So teaching Children morals through stories is wrong now. /clap

What I believe he means that children are indoctrinated into a religion at a young age. Anything they hear is fact. By getting them to learn it so young they take it as gospel, no pun intended, and refuse to believe anything else in later life. There are exceptions obviously. By forcing them, it can be construed as child abuse.

Forcing them until they are old enough to know better(Teenaged years) is probably a good thing. Law is based of religon yet we religon abuse, does that mean Law is Child Abuse? No. Religon has taught us a lot of good in our lives. Sure, it has it bad moments with religous zealots but it has people who will help you out. When was the last time you saw an Athiest soup kitchen.

Its a great thing we don't have laws based on christianity. Most of their laws are so horrid even they don't want to acknowledge them. or are you advocating that children need to be taken to the river and stoned, and if you marry a woman and she wasn't a virgin she should be stoned, and that slavery is ok?

Within reason. /facepalm Also, by Christian standards that is a huge defiance of the 10 Commandments, so is treat someone how you like to be treated.

what does reason have to do with the bible, its not my fault your god is a monster and put in some really horrid stuff into his book.

the 10 commandments really? so thats the only part of the bible worth following? and just because a secular nation believes killing someone is wrong and that just happens to work with a commandment, it means all our laws are based on religion? /epic facepalm.

Maybe if god hadn't wasn't the first 3 on "i'm shallow, worship me" he could have worked in don't sexually abuse children, or just codemn rape.

I don't not believe in Jesus or Jehovah. I believe in the Aesir and the Vanir gods. Like I said, I'm not christian. My gods expouse true virtues:
1) Courage

2) Truth

3) Honour

4) Fidelity

5) Discipline

6) Hospitality

7) Industriousness

8) Self Reliance

9) Perseverance


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

Deadshot wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Name me one mainstream atheist view of Religion that is "absurd" please. I'm genuinely interested to hear the retort.

I'm pretty sure Dawkins argued that religion is child abuse.

Thats not absurd though, its truth.

/sigh So teaching Children morals through stories is wrong now. /clap

What I believe he means that children are indoctrinated into a religion at a young age. Anything they hear is fact. By getting them to learn it so young they take it as gospel, no pun intended, and refuse to believe anything else in later life. There are exceptions obviously. By forcing them, it can be construed as child abuse.

Forcing them until they are old enough to know better(Teenaged years) is probably a good thing. Law is based of religon yet we religon abuse, does that mean Law is Child Abuse? No. Religon has taught us a lot of good in our lives. Sure, it has it bad moments with religous zealots but it has people who will help you out. When was the last time you saw an Athiest soup kitchen.

Its a great thing we don't have laws based on christianity. Most of their laws are so horrid even they don't want to acknowledge them. or are you advocating that children need to be taken to the river and stoned, and if you marry a woman and she wasn't a virgin she should be stoned, and that slavery is ok?

Within reason. /facepalm Also, by Christian standards that is a huge defiance of the 10 Commandments, so is treat someone how you like to be treated.

what does reason have to do with the bible, its not my fault your god is a monster and put in some really horrid stuff into his book.

the 10 commandments really? so thats the only part of the bible worth following? and just because a secular nation believes killing someone is wrong and that just happens to work with a commandment, it means all our laws are based on religion? /epic facepalm.

Maybe if god hadn't wasn't the first 3 on "i'm shallow, worship me" he could have worked in don't sexually abuse children, or just codemn rape.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

streamdragon wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:Forcing them until they are old enough to know better(Teenaged years) is probably a good thing. Law is based of religon yet we religon abuse, does that mean Law is Child Abuse? No. Religon has taught us a lot of good in our lives. Sure, it has it bad moments with religous zealots but it has people who will help you out. When was the last time you saw an Athiest soup kitchen.

There are literally dozens if not hundreds in DC. On the other hand, the Catholic church suspended all aid (or at the least, threatened to suspend all aid; I'm not sure if they actually went through with it) in DC when DC passed a law allowing gay marriage.

They did the same thing in new york. the salvation army is the worst for it. everyone thinks donating to their santas for xmas makes them a good person, but the salvation army takes most of that money to fund bigoted agendas.

Just because something is not Anarchistically Left, it is not Bigoted. Most Charities do that, Green Peace is a lovely example, so is 40 vision.

Let's cut down on the quote pyramids, it's annoying to see so much text for such a tiny, pithy response.

biccat wrote:
Sorry, it really is absurd. It's absurd because he's advocating for punishment of people based on the fact that they have religious beliefs and they want their children to have religious beliefs.

If you don't think it's absurd, what type of comment would rise to the level of absurdity? How about "atheists are immoral"?

Is he advocating punishment? I like Richard Dawkins generally, he seems well spoken and gentle, I doubt he has said "we should do X to them" and I would be surprised if that was the case. All I have heard him say of the matter, is that in his opinion, forcing a Religion onto a child is a form of child abuse because the child gets no say on the matter, can get morals from simply being raised taught right from wrong, and importantly takes the lessons literally because they are so young, thus, a tiny child hears about a realm of fire and suffering and torture, asks a parent if "Jenny from school" will go there because she isn't a Catholic and is told "sadly yes, she will suffer for ever" and becomes terrified to the point that they have nightmares.

As I said, its fine to disagree, and its absolutely not absurd, because tens of thousands of people will come out and say "Yes, my parents raised me X and as a result I am scarred by it"

Now, because no doubt millions of Religious people will say "Well I was raised devout and I am fine" its fine to disagree like you and I do. I would not say that it is a form of abuse, but it definitely isn't absurd because a reasonable argument can be made.

I, and surely anyone with any sense, defines absurd as "utterly ridiculous" if a reasonable argument can be made, or even a "relatively weak" one, surely by definition it cant be absurd?

Anyway, were OT, and neither of us will change the others mind, so why bother eh?

sirlynchmob wrote:

streamdragon wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:Forcing them until they are old enough to know better(Teenaged years) is probably a good thing. Law is based of religon yet we religon abuse, does that mean Law is Child Abuse? No. Religon has taught us a lot of good in our lives. Sure, it has it bad moments with religous zealots but it has people who will help you out. When was the last time you saw an Athiest soup kitchen.

There are literally dozens if not hundreds in DC. On the other hand, the Catholic church suspended all aid (or at the least, threatened to suspend all aid; I'm not sure if they actually went through with it) in DC when DC passed a law allowing gay marriage.

They did the same thing in new york. the salvation army is the worst for it. everyone thinks donating to their santas for xmas makes them a good person, but the salvation army takes most of that money to fund bigoted agendas.

I think one of their highlights is refusing to take toys based on Harry Potter (magic is evil!), Twilight (vampires are evil!) or anything similar theme. When they did recieve them, instead of giving them out to another agency (like Toys for Tots or something), they simply destroyed them. Nice.

mattyrm wrote:

biccat wrote:
Sorry, it really is absurd. It's absurd because he's advocating for punishment of people based on the fact that they have religious beliefs and they want their children to have religious beliefs.

If you don't think it's absurd, what type of comment would rise to the level of absurdity? How about "atheists are immoral"?

Is he advocating punishment? I like Richard Dawkins generally, he seems well spoken and gentle, I doubt he has said "we should do X to them" and I would be surprised if that was the case. All I have heard him say of the matter, is that in his opinion, forcing a Religion onto a child is a form of child abuse because the child gets no say on the matter, can get morals from simply being raised taught right from wrong, and importantly takes the lessons literally because they are so young, thus, a tiny child hears about a realm of fire and suffering and torture, asks a parent if "Jenny from school" will go there because she isn't a Catholic and is told "sadly yes, she will suffer for ever" and becomes terrified to the point that they have nightmares.

As I said, its fine to disagree, and its absolutely not absurd, because tens of thousands of people will come out and say "Yes, my parents raised me X and as a result I am scarred by it"

Now, because no doubt millions of Religious people will say "Well I was raised devout and I am fine" its fine to disagree like you and I do. I would not say that it is a form of abuse, but it definitely isn't absurd because a reasonable argument can be made.

I, and surely anyone with any sense, defines absurd as "utterly ridiculous" if a reasonable argument can be made, or even a "relatively weak" one, surely by definition it cant be absurd?

Anyway, were OT, and neither of us will change the others mind, so why bother eh?

That is true. Political debates are like the Special Olympics, you all think you win in the end.

d-usa wrote:Well, only took 9 pages to go completely of-topic and make this a classic Dakka atheism/religion thread. 'twas nice while it lasted.

You have to admit thats pretty good for Dakka.

Frazzled wrote:

d-usa wrote:Well, only took 9 pages to go completely of-topic and make this a classic Dakka atheism/religion thread. 'twas nice while it lasted.

You have to admit thats pretty good for Dakka.

Yeah, I have to agree with you for the probably the first time.

Piston Honda wrote:


Quote from the husband is totally true. How many guys do you know like watching lesbian porn?

Porn doesn't necessarily ruin a marriage...
Actually if it does the marriage really wan't all that stable anyway...

Or if the person wasn't.

Purplefood, the comic and my comment was not in regards to pornography destroying marriages.

It was the number of men who will watch Lesbian porn or find girls kissing hot

yet will deny gay couples rights

insult, degrade, attack gay men.

But it is hot when chicks do it.

Or can use the mentality of one of my gaming members, "most gay chicks don't look like the girls in lesbian movies". New qualification.have to look sexy to get married.

Piston Honda wrote:Purplefood, the comic and my comment was not in regards to pornography destroying marriages.

It was the number of men who will watch Lesbian porn or find girls kissing hot

yet will deny gay couples rights

insult, degrade, attack gay men.

But it is hot when chicks do it.

Or can use the mentality of one of my gaming members, "most gay chicks don't look like the girls in lesbian movies". New qualification.have to look sexy to get married.

You'd be suprised by all the people who hate Lesbians who shave their heads or act a bit more like men.

No we wouldn't, the number of morons out there, whilst disheartening, isn't really surprising.

Still one day eh ?

We're well off topic now and going nowhere.

I'm sure we'll do all this again, all too soon, so worry not.

Seems that Karma is real and a real bitch eh ?