Gay marriages in church

[Verbal]

Thats why the National socialists and the Communists butchered so many people in the thirties and forties. Not forgetting Pol Pott. They had nobody to answer to but themselves and the State.

 

I think you're missing the point by about a million miles. Never mind.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

I think you're missing the point by about a million miles. Never mind.

 

Always the first to embrace debate.

[Matthew Le God]

What point were you trying to make Sergei? Yes, those regimes were bad, but having no religion doesn't mean you can't construct a moral system which works for the benefit of society and the species as a whole.

 

Name a moral action that a religious person can do that an atheist can't?

[Deppo]

Don't you chaps think that you've given hypochondriac and Sergei enough evidence to take their case to a church and apply for a gay wedding? Next time, let them do their own research.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

What point were you trying to make Sergei? Yes, those regimes were bad, but having no religion doesn't mean you can't construct a moral system which works for the benefit of society and the species as a whole.

 

Name a moral action that a religious person can do that an atheist can't?

 

Generally in my opinion people who answer to a God are more likely to have better morale compass than those that answer to other men. That is a very general statement though.

[rocknrollman no2]

Generally in my opinion people who answer to a God are more likely to have better morale compass than those that answer to other men.

 

The crusades were done in the name of god.

The colonisation of Africa and China were done in the name of god.

Millions of people have been persecuted in the name of god.

Think i will give God a miss thanks.

[Matthew Le God]

Generally in my opinion people who answer to a God are more likely to have better morale compass than those that answer to other men. That is a very general statement though.

 

Please expand and elaborate on the phrase "better morale compass".

[LGTL]

Please expand on "better morale compass".

 

Didn't you know, all atheists are raping murdering scum. God said so...

[Matthew Le God]

The crusades were done in the name of god.

The colonisation of Africa and China were done in the name of god.

Millions of people have been persecuted in the name of god.

Think i will give God a miss thanks.

 

You can add to that list...

 

- Genital mutilation of innocent young children against their will, just because of what bronze age myth their parents happen to believe in.

Edited 14 February, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Please expand and elaborate on the phrase "better morale compass".

 

So are you more likely to be mugged by somebody who is deeply religious or somebody who is not?

[Verbal]

Always the first to embrace debate.

 

I think you have to enter it for anyone to embrace it. Droning on about the crimes of Nazi (and highly religious) and communist leaderships is completely beside the point - and in any case subject to the usual (equally off-the-point) retort that murder and abuse in the name of religion is as common as muck. Watch Dispatches on C4 if you'd like a little insight into that.

 

With our without religion, bad things happen; with or without religion people develop shared ethics.

[LGTL]

So are you more likely to be mugged by somebody who is deeply religious or somebody who is not?

 

What a stupid argument. Millions of innocent people have been murdered due to deeply held religious views! Get a grip.

[Red&White]

Global financial crisis, wars, religious extremism, nations building nuclear weapons, genocide, global warming, terrorism... And people are getting worked up because some gays want to get married in a Church?

 

Exactly

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

I think you have to enter it for anyone to embrace it. Droning on about the crimes of Nazi (and highly religious) and communist leaderships is completely beside the point - and in any case subject to the usual (equally off-the-point) retort that murder and abuse in the name of religion is as common as muck. Watch Dispatches on C4 if you'd like a little insight into that.

 

With our without religion, bad things happen; with or without religion people develop shared ethics.

 

The Nazi's were not religious they tolerated christianity.

 

Religion creates the tribes, that generate the enemies, that allows the human instinct to fight come out. It is the interpretation of the religion that causes the problems.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

What a stupid argument. Millions of innocent people have been murdered due to deeply held religious views! Get a grip.

 

On an every day 2011 level that is a fair statement.

[Verbal]

The Nazi's were not religious they tolerated christianity.

 

Religion creates the tribes, that generate the enemies, that allows the human instinct to fight come out. It is the interpretation of the religion that causes the problems.

 

Leaving aside the demonstrable nonsense that Nazis were not religious, you seem to have self imploded. If religion created tribes, and religiously-founded tribes led to conflict, you end up with the statement that religion is therefore the source of all human violence. Did you mean that?

 

And you finish as you started: with some gibberish. Religion does not exist if nobody interprets it.

Edited 14 February, 2011 by Verbal

[Matthew Le God]

So are you more likely to be mugged by somebody who is deeply religious or somebody who is not?

 

What a bizarre argument! It completely depends on the person in question.

 

An evil person will do evil things, a good person will do good things BUT it takes religion to make a "good person" do evil things.

 

Such as...

 

Are you more likely to have your genitals mutilated against your will when you are a child by a parent that is religious or a parent that is an atheist?

 

Are you more likely to go to war and kill thousands of people because a bronze age scripture from a man in the clouds tells you to if you are religious or an atheist?

 

etc etc

Edited 14 February, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[Deppo]

Ricky Gervais wrote a great article on atheism and morality in the Wall Street Journal before Christmas:

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/12/19/a-holiday-message-from-ricky-gervais-why-im-an-atheist/

 

Some of the replies are incredible.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Leaving aside the demonstrable nonsense that Nazis were not religious, you seem to have self imploded. If religion created tribes, and religiously-founded tribes led to conflict, you end up with the statement that religion is therefore the source of all human violence. Did you mean that?

 

And you finish was you started with some gibberish.. Religion does not exist if nobody interprets it.

 

So which God did the Nazi's worship then?

 

Very puzzled how you came to that conclusion. I merely stated that religious teachings themselves do not cause human violence but create the groups that exercise their human instinct to fight. So you think that Martin McGuinness and Mad Dog Adair were devout followers?

 

There are mainstream interpretations and more radical interpretations. The problems come when radical intepretations become more mainstream.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

What a bizarre argument! It completely depends on the person in question.

 

An evil person will do evil things, a good person will do good things BUT it takes religion to make a "good person" do evil things.

 

Such as...

 

Are you more likely to have your genitals mutilated against your will when you are a child by a parent that is religious or a parent that is an atheist?

 

Are you more likely to go to war and kill thousands of people because a bronze age scripture from a man in the clouds tells you to if you are religious or an atheist?

 

etc etc

 

In today's Britain if you drop a tenner a god fearing person would be more likley to return it to you than somebody is not.

[Verbal]

So which God did the Nazi's worship then?

 

Very puzzled how you came to that conclusion. I merely stated that religious teachings themselves do not cause human violence but create the groups that exercise their human instinct to fight. So you think that Martin McGuinness and Mad Dog Adair were devout followers?

 

There are mainstream interpretations and more radical interpretations. The problems come when radical intepretations become more mainstream.

 

As to your first question, there's a very easy answer, because in Germany, including its Nazi phase, everyone paid a Church Tax, and for that, you had to declare your faith. Hitler and Goebbels, for example, were Catholic. Neither refused to pay their taxes.

 

As for the rest, I suggest you go back and read your own post - you seem to have misunderstood yourself.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

As to your first question, there's a very easy answer, because in Germany, including its Nazi phase, everyone paid a Church Tax, and for that, you had to declare your faith. Hitler and Goebbels, for example, were Catholic. Neither refused to pay their taxes.

 

As for the rest, I suggest you go back and read your own post - you seem to have misunderstood yourself.

 

They were hardly practising their faith were they! That is how I define somebody who has a religious faith.

 

Makes sense to me. Sorry you struggle to understand the point.

[Matthew Le God]

In today's Britain if you drop a tenner a god fearing person would be more likley to return it to you than somebody is not.

 

Which is better...

 

Person A returning you the tenner because they wanted to and were being unselfish?

 

or

 

Person B only returning the tenner because they are fearful of punishment from God or wanting reward from him for doing so?

 

It is Person A for me every time, as Person B isn't acting genuinely and is only doing it because they want to gain favour from God.

 

In any case, surely God is aware they were only doing it to gain favour and makes the whole exercise pointless as if there was a God he would know it wasn't a truly selfless act but instead one to impress him for your own benefit. Thus the atheist that returns the money has the true moral high ground (I also don't understand why you think someone of no religion wouldn't return the money).

Edited 14 February, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[Verbal]

They were hardly practising their faith were they! That is how I define somebody who has a religious faith.

 

Makes sense to me. Sorry you struggle to understand the point.

 

Can you please rearrange the above into four vaguely connected sentences?

[rocknrollman no2]

In today's Britain if you drop a tenner a god fearing person would be more likley to return it to you than somebody is not.

 

Werent all of those peadophile priests god fearing?

Wasnt the vatican and the pope god fearing when they collabrated with the Nazis?

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Werent all of those peadophile priests god fearing?

Wasnt the vatican and the pope god fearing when they collabrated with the Nazis?

 

Obviously not.

[Matthew Le God]

Obviously not.

 

No answer to the question in post #123 then?

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Can you please rearrange the above into four vaguely connected sentences?

 

They were obviously not practising Catholics. It surprises me that you believe that they were men driven by a strong faith.

 

Its a struggle to engage somebody who is so bigoted against Christianity that thye cannot recognise that it can be a great force for good.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Which is better...

 

Person A returning you the tenner because they wanted to and were being unselfish?

 

or

 

Person B only returning the tenner because they are fearful of punishment from God or wanting reward from him for doing so?

 

It is Person A for me every time, as Person B isn't acting genuinely and is only doing it because they want to gain favour from God.

 

In any case, surely God is aware they were only doing it to gain favour and makes the whole exercise pointless as if there was a God he would know it wasn't a truly selfless act but instead one to impress him for your own benefit. Thus the atheist that returns the money has the true moral high ground (I also don't understand why you think someone of no religion wouldn't return the money).

 

I am not asking which is better.

[scotty]

Which is better...

 

Person A returning you the tenner because they wanted to and were being unselfish?

 

or

 

Person B only returning the tenner because they are fearful of punishment from God or wanting reward from him for doing so?

 

It is Person A for me every time, as Person B isn't acting genuinely and is only doing it because they want to gain favour from God.

 

In any case, surely God is aware they were only doing it to gain favour and makes the whole exercise pointless as if there was a God he would know it wasn't a truly selfless act but instead one to impress him for your own benefit. Thus the atheist that returns the money has the true moral high ground (I also don't understand why you think someone of no religion wouldn't return the money).

 

well, I have to say I'm glad thats been cleared up.

[Matthew Le God]

I am not asking which is better.

 

Answer the final point then. Why do you think someone of no religion wouldn't return the money?

 

I'm not religious and I would return it (and have on many occasions returned things in similar circumstances) even though I have nothing obvious to gain personally from doing so. What you do gain in the long run from seemingly selfless acts such as these is a stable society which is good for the survival of the species and continuation of genes.

 

Do you not think if there is a God he wouldn't see that you were only doing it for your own benefit to gain favour with him?

Edited 14 February, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Answer the final point then. Why do you think someone of no religion wouldn't return the money?

 

I'm not religious and I would return it (and have on many occasions) even though I have nothing obvious to gain personally from doing so. What you do gain in the long run from seemingly selfless acts such as these is a stable society which is good for the survival of the species and continuation of genes.

 

Do you not think if there is a God he wouldn't see that you were only doing it for your own benefit to gain favour with him?

 

I did not say they would not return the money, I said the Christian was more likely to.

[Verbal]

They were obviously not practising Catholics. It surprises me that you believe that they were men driven by a strong faith.

 

Its a struggle to engage somebody who is so bigoted against Christianity that thye cannot recognise that it can be a great force for good.

 

It's really hard to have an argument with someone who shifts the ground every single time they post. I'm not arguing that Hitler and Goebbels were driven by 'strong' faith - merely (as this point has developed in this thread) that they were raised and stayed within a religion and yet committed horrendous acts. Christian (Catholic) values would have been inculcated during their upbringing, and they not once renounced their religion - yet did what they did.

 

Can you please tell me how you came to the bizarre conclusion that I am 'bigoted' against christianity? I happen to think the founders of Christianity - which was at the time a small Jewish sect committed to pacifist resistance against a colonial aggressor - came up with some startlingly wonderful ideas (social equality and a campaign against exploitation, a refusal to respond in kind to extreme violence, etc). How far are the ideals these men and women lived by from the Spanish Inquisition.

[Matthew Le God]

I did not say they would not return the money, I said they were more likely to.

 

On what do you base that claim? A gut feeling? Or something a bit more substantial than that?

 

Do you not think it is creepy that people are forced into acting under the pretence of being seemingly good towards others to cover up their true intentions of gaining favour from God? These people aren't acting unselfishly at all, it is all a facade to get a good spot in heaven and not actually for the purpose to help another human.

 

Who is more likely to mutilate the genitals of their innocent children against their will. An atheist or a person of religious beliefs?

Edited 14 February, 2011 by Matthew Le God

[rocknrollman no2]

Whos more likely to join a religious cult,then try to brainwash vunerable people into parting with their money?

(note the clue in the question).

Im not saying religion is a bad thing,as it can help people ,but there seems to be more nutters who have found religion,than those who dont believe.

[scotty]

This thread is one of those circular arguments that ultimately cannot go anywhere except "I believe", "I dont believe", or "I havent got a f*cking clue". I fall into the latter category, but incline towards the concept of a universe in which time and distance are meaningless outside our own limited realm.

[benjii]

Matthew your understanding of the bible is unbelievably wrong! It is full of truth and if you take the time to understand it rather than condone your life will be much better!

 

 

Good one.

[benjii]

Nope what? So the apostle Paul who wrote about the final supper as was also at it, does not provide a first hand account?

 

 

Good one.

[Deppo]

Who is more likely to abuse a child - those guided by God or a heathen?

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

On what do you base that claim? A gut feeling? Or something a bit more substantial than that?

 

Do you not think it is creepy that people are forced into acting under the pretence of being seemingly good towards others to cover up their true intentions of gaining favour from God? These people aren't acting unselfishly at all, it is all a facade to get a good spot in heaven and not actually for the purpose to help another human.

 

Who is more likely to mutilate the genitals of their innocent children against their will. An atheist or a person of religious beliefs?

 

If there are a thousand born again Christians who all see somebody drop a tenner and a thousand people selected randomly from the street who all see somebody drop a tenner, which group would return the most tenners. You have a monkey to have a bet at even money - now where is your money going?

[Saint_Rick]

some of you old c**ts are about as progressive as the BNP, deary me

[Pancake]

An evil person will do evil things, a good person will do good things BUT it takes religion to make a "good person" do evil things.

 

Holy crap, I've seen some bull**** written on here, but this one is amazing. It falls down on so many levels. I like to think I'm an inherently good person, but religion has never made me do "evil" things. Vice versa, Im pretty sure religion wasn't the force that made the drunk driver knock down and permanently injured my mate 5 years ago; from what I could tell in court he was a normal "good" bloke that ended up driving home drunk.

Edited 15 February, 2011 by Pancake

[Turkish]

some of you old c**ts are about as progressive as the BNP, deary me

 

I agree, Nick Griffin used to wear National Front white power t-shirts, now he wears a smart suit and shirt, fantastic progress and image upgrade.

[dune]

Who is more likely to abuse a child - those guided by God or a heathen?

 

Who cares deppo - oh look no one has replied - so no-one does. Do you know what this means? Nah ur thick cause you don't. it means everyone thinks ur a boring **** and no-one has replied, unless you count this reply.

[Saint_Rick]

I agree, Nick Griffin used to wear National Front white power t-shirts, now he wears a smart suit and shirt, fantastic progress and image upgrade.

 

3/10 must try harder

[dune]

I agree, Nick Griffin used to wear National Front white power t-shirts, now he wears a smart suit and shirt, fantastic progress and image upgrade.

 

I have a lot of respect for Nick. Despite all the people calling him a racist he is just like me except his a fat and i am not, he is ugly and i'm not as ugly ((lol) been a while and my missus dumped me so i could spend all day with my friends online ha ha) and Nick is very thick, and I am almost as smart as verbal, and Nick is dull and i'm a great personality second only to Delldays, and Nick wears womens underwear and i just sniff it.

[Viking Warrior]

I don't have a problem with gay folk getting married in churches. what I do have a problem with is that we have to use legislation to force people to allow it. This is too much big brother stuff

 

let the churches change their stance not enforce it through law

[dune]

I don't have a problem with it being made law, but I don't think vicars should be forced to carry out services.

 

The way i look at it is that homos are by their nature premiscuous which can turn them into Aids spreaders. Any measure that encourages more stability has to be a good thing.

[buctootim]

Just make a decision to stop using TSF if thats what you want Dune. Saying more provocative stuff just to get attention and then get banned just makes you look, well, a little more pitiable than usual.

[dune]

Just make a decision to stop using TSF if thats what you want Dune. Saying more provocative stuff just to get attention and then get banned just makes you look, well, a little more pitiable than usual.

 

It's banter mate. But I doubt you'll ever see that. Look we all have our posting styles and without people like me there wouldn't be half the debate. You might say you want me gone (i wouldn't want you gone because i think that'd petty jut like i stood up for Deppo) but you may find this place dull if you ended up with one big love in discussing the merits of gouda over edam