Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

Are Most Atheists really Atheists or...


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 76-100 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 18:20:34 GMT
Spin says:
Bellatori: Ah, yes. I recall that Governmental foolishness now. Anyone with an extra room has to move to another flat in order to avoid paying extra tax. Thus single folk in two room flat will be applying for "exchanges"...The councils will be busy. (Are there plans to tax "balconies" or "garden sheds"?) =)

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 18:26:23 GMT
I was being ironic again.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 18:26:50 GMT
Bellatori says:
Spin, it is one of those things that sound wonderfully plausible on paper and when glib politicians spout them out. When you get to look at the effect that they actually have it is tragic.

Let me give you another example. This was simply disgusting but when put to the minister he wittered and twittered and carefully avoided any questions.

A retired couple live in a two bedroom terraced house. The wife has MS and is incapable of doing much for herself. The house has been adapted with a lift and other services to allow her to carry on at home with husband who is her carer. He sleeps mainly in the second bedroom because were he to roll into his wife at night it would cause her great pain and distress.

The legislation means that they only 'need' one bedroom. They will lose £28 (?) per week because they have an excess second bedroom. Even if they could be found a one bedroom appartment the cost of converting it would be more than the 'saving' that the tax would generate.

What kind of crazy world do we live in?

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 18:29:02 GMT
Bellatori says:
C. E. Statham says: "I was being ironic again."

Oh dear!? I merely thought you were being wrong. Ooops, clumsy of me...!?

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 18:32:20 GMT
Spin says:
Bellatori: I agree. I doubt a milionaire living in a Tudor mansion, will be taxed according to the number of rooms in his domicile. And how many rooms does Buckingham palace have? Empty rooms we pay for.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 19:32:36 GMT
AJ Murray says:
Diane,

Is this all you have left? Whining and puling that others criticise the actions of individual Catholics and the institution of the church itself? It's almost as if you regard any criticism, no matter how valid, as being out of bounds for anyone not a fully paid up member of the church.

-"You are quick to site specific actions that you think show the Catholic church in a bad light."

Correction; i am quick to cite any actions that display the inherent problem with holding to religious dogmas and the resultant harm that these inflict on others. As you may well know if you cared to pay attention to my contributions on this matter. I don't single out Catholicism for special attention, nor do i insist that every Catholic is tarred by the actions of its leaders and figureheads.

-"Do you know of any specific actions that show the Catholic church ina good light?"

A few. But you should already be aware of them and they don't serve to mitigate the harm caused by the bad. Which is why your insistence that people qualify every criticism with a list of virtues is ridiculous.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 21:33:49 GMT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 22:04:42 GMT
AJ Murray says:
Diane,

-"So, your argument is that more bad is done by the church than good."

Did i say that? You have this remarkable ability to only see what you want to see.

-"Can you please show your proof for this."

After your dismissal of my previous examples in response to your requests, i don't hold out much optimism for you to even acknowledge any proof i provide.

-"It will of course necessitate the inclusion of both the bad and the good things done, and a comparison that shows empirically which prevails."

I can't help notice that you fail to practice what you preach, i notice no examples of good derived from atheism being included in any of your posts.

Ever.

Is hypocrisy a tenet of your religion now? Or is it just your personal whim to be so?

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 22:05:07 GMT
Last edited by the author on 12 Feb 2013 22:05:37 GMT
Bellatori says:
Sorry DB but that is just daft. AJ is right here. Jimmy Saville helped tens of thousands, gave and provided millions to charity. Does that mitigate the other things he did? I defy you to find one person who says it does. Why should we be less severe on the church?

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 22:32:05 GMT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 22:38:47 GMT
DB says:
Bellatori

So you are defining your attitude to a church by the actions of one man?

I ask again - why do you not condemn 'the college of nursing' or NHS for bad nurses?
the police force for corrupt policemen?
schools for paedophile teachers?

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Feb 2013 22:39:19 GMT
AJ Murray says:
Diane,

-"you could simply say that you are not prepared to put forward a 'reasoned' argument in which you compare the good with the bad in religion."

BUt that's not what you'vebeen demanding, you've declared that every criticism of your particular brand of Christianity be set against any good that is done, for no good reason.

-"Doesn't fit your unreasonable, irrational need to only show the 'bad' in religion I suppose."

Alternatively if you church were willing to stop doing bad, then there would be nothing to criticise.

-"Are you as prejudiced in your thinking on other subjects, or is it just religion?"

You should probably stop accusing others of prejudice when you own is being displayed so readily.

-"Can you think of other viewpoints where you refuse to investigate the positive as well as the negative?"

Yes. I can criticise politics, and policies without having to include a list of caveats as to the overall benefit of having political representatives.

-"What are they?"

See above.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 08:51:34 GMT
C. A. Small says:
Can anyone tell me where the 95/5% split comes from?

Has the catholic church done a survey of its paedophiles?

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 09:02:06 GMT
C. A. Small says:
Diane- I note your continued refusal to explain the flooding at Lourdes, and whilst you are ignoring questions- why has the pope got a pacemaker? Surely a trip to Lourdes now that the water has subsided would do the trick?

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 10:22:34 GMT
One man?

There are approx. 100,000 victims of catholic priest abuse in the US alone. Approx 6000 predatory priests in the US.

http://www.snapnetwork.org/experts_say_100_000_us_kids_abused_by_priests_snap_responds

This is not the action of one man. Its institutional. I would not let my children anywhere near such a place. But if you think this is OK because the church does some good well I disagree. Any other institution would have been closed down.

The college of nursing/policemen/teachers are often critised. Do you think any of these institutions have 6000 predatory paedophiles abusing 100,000 children? Do you think any paedophiles would be protected in these institutions? Do you think these people do more good than harm?

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 11:59:23 GMT
DB says:
Rev

As you know the 'one man' was in answer to Bellatoris reference to saville.

But hey, why would you answer honestly when you can twist it and use it to fit your paedophile post.

So you judge whether an institution should be shut down based on the number of abuses committed. How many do you allow before nurseries should be closed down?
how many do you allow before children's homes should be closed down?
How many old people can be abused in hospital before you close them down?

figures seem important to you, so can you answer the above in numbers please
i.e. 5, 100, 1000 etc.

Shall we shut down the BBC because paedophiles were protected, or weren't there enough children abused there?

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 12:17:16 GMT
Dan Fante says:
"We're all in this together". Just some of us more than others.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 13:12:57 GMT
C. A. Small says:
DB- you still have not replied to my questions. Too tricky, or can't you fit the reply into your dogmatic view?

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 15:14:41 GMT
Bellatori says:
Can you really be that idiotic? My post said no such thing. I am condemming the church on the basis of the actions of its 'employees'. Doing good 95% of the time does not exculpate the church from the other 5% of evil.
My point is (and was)... Would YOU forgive Jimmy Saville his little 'pecadillos' on the basis of the 'good' that he did for charity? If you can then you will be in a minority of one. His behaviour was abhorrent.
The same argument goes for the church.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 15:43:30 GMT
DB,

"So you are defining your attitude to a church by the actions of one man?"

Nope. I'm defining my attitude because it is riddled with abusers. Institutionally. 6000 in USA alone.

"But hey, why would you answer honestly when you can twist it and use it to fit your paedophile post."

I am being honest. Show me where I am not.

"So you judge whether an institution should be shut down based on the number of abuses committed."

No. I judge it on whether the abuse was systematic, covered up, downplayed, blamed on others, not dealt with and led to further abuse because of prevarication. ANd yes the BBC did all that (allegedly) so it too is under the same scrutiny. However the BBC is a different beast entirely to the church. I abhor what Savile did and the failings of the BBC - but it was not institutional. It looks like a small group. And I hope they all answer for it.

"How many do you allow before nurseries should be closed down?
how many do you allow before children's homes should be closed down?
How many old people can be abused in hospital before you close them down?"

Nurseries and childrens homes are often closed down when systematic abuse is found. But I have yet to hear of abusive child carers being moved to another nursery without any action being bought to "save face" for the nursery. In all cases abuse is dealt with by the law when it is found. I have no doubt old people are abused in hospitals but I also suspect the vast majority aren't.

"figures seem important to you, so can you answer the above in numbers please"

The figures aren't important. It what happens when abuse is found. The church covered up, prevaricated, moved preists around so they could continue to abuse, blamed homosexuality, blamed the children of abuse, and outright failed to deal with the problem. It still, like you, seems to think it isn't a problem and simply blames everyone and everything in a futile attempt to deny responsibility. It is absolutely shameful that an organisation which claims to be a force for good backed by a benevolent god should do this. It is morally bankrupt. DO you think God is proud of the way the church has acted?

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 15:46:01 GMT
Hi Ryan,

"Meaning, you got an answer you didn't like and failed to plug the hole it exposed in your argument"

No Ryan. If you read my initial post I have not made an argument; I have asked questions which have not been answered. Really not interested in telling anyone they are wrong because their POV differs to mine. Just seeking to understand? As I said clearly I'm in the wrong place? "this isn't a particularly difficult concept to grasp" Quite!!

"And you are still glossing over the topic. Christianity, the last time I looked, wasn't the state religion of Nepal"

Still not glossing over anything. Just because I don't want to feed your fixation with Christianity being a state religion in blighty! (I apologise for my observation on Nepal unsettling you so much due to its lack of like for like comparison? But I wanted to bring personal experience rather than speculation or "book/TV" knowledge to the forum). Sorry Ryan but this is not what I asked. One of my questions was that given the fact that in the west (a loose term I know but I think we all know what I mean in this context) Christianity is the primary faith, does that skew things in terms of just focusing on that religion for some Atheists?

Apparently is does. And apparently some are particularly miffed that is the state religion? As I said, asking questions, not getting answers.

Anyways, I will disengage here and leave all the angry, frothing at the mouth types of all opinions to carry on "arguing" where there was no argument in the first place.

What is it you are really angry about Ryan? ;)

Yes, that's another question but not one I want answered. But wait!! No chance of that happening anyway so I am safe! Phew!!

Life lesson learned. There is little or no difference between fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Atheists. Ask a question and logic flies out the window to be replaced by arrogance with a side order of anger.

TTFN

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 15:52:55 GMT
Midge I'm quite sure I answered your original question in my first post in this thread, I also believe I did it quite clearly

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 16:06:40 GMT
Drew Jones says:
Do Nepalese Buddhists provoke with the JAQing it technique? If not that might answer your questions.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 16:11:25 GMT
Ah but lets remember we're dealing with Christians here, if they ask a question and you answer it, and they don't like the answer then they have 2 responses.

Response number 1: Ignore it
Response number 2: Pretend it was a different answer

Midge seems to prefer the first category.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2013 16:12:22 GMT
Dan Fante says:
To be fair, I'm not sure you can disengage from something you haven't engaged in in the first place.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  41
Total posts:  1324
Initial post:  11 Feb 2013
Latest post:  11 Mar 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions