Does he have a valid point?

[Zzyzx]

.

Bill Maher:
"When I hear from people that religion doesn't hurt anything, I say really? Well besides wars, the crusades, the inquisitions, 9-11, ethnic cleansing, the suppression of women, the suppression of homosexuals, fatwas, honor killings, suicide bombings, arranged marriages to minors, human sacrifice, burning witches, and systematic sex with children, I have a few little quibbles. And I forgot blowing up girl schools in Afghanistan."

Some say "The good outweighs the bad." If so what is that weighty good?

Many say "That is just the other religions." Is that true?

[MasterOfOnesOwnMind]

Stalin was also an Aleprechaunist (as far as I know, anyway). So was Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. Perhaps we should say that Aleprechaunism leads to mass murder?

That would depend. Did Stalin murder millions of people for the express purpose of reducing belief in leprechauns the way that he murdered millions of people for the express purpose of reducing religious belief?

Stalin did not become a maniacal, psychotic, selfish homicidal nutcase because of Atheism... He didn't do bad things because atheism.. He did bad things because he was crazy. He would have done the same things because he was a power hungry maniac.

Religion is a set of indoctrinations and used as a moral compass. Atheism is just one thing, a lack of belief in God. Atheism does not dictate how to act or who to be. It is merely a lack of belief in a deity. No one does genocide in the name of "lack of belief in a deity". Do you understand? Religion and atheism are not the same thing.

[MasterOfOnesOwnMind]

[Replying to post 8 by Zzyzx]

Then I am sure you will agree and won't distance yourself from the fact that the ideology of evolution killed the most people last century. Let alone the Holocaust of abortion taking place today.

Abortion is much different than invading and murdering people for not holding the same beliefs as you. Not even comparable. Not to mention a fetus is a fetus, not a human being yet. Preventing life is not taking life.

With respect, you have no idea what you are talking about... A fetus is not a human being? What?... Are you referring to a gorilla fetus or something?

A fetus is a fetus, not developed into a human being yet. I know what I'm talking about, so don't tell me I don't just because your opinion is different, bigot.. You have no right to dictate what a woman does with her reproductive organs, just because your fairy tale book tells you it's wrong. ultimately, the status of a fetus is a matter of subjective opinion, and the only opinion that counts is that of the pregnant woman.

You think partial birth abortion and harvesting the fetus' organs is PREVENTING life not TAKING it?

Without using the words "partial birth" and "harvesting the fetus' organs", yes I do think that abortion is preventing life of a HUMAN BEING. I don't have proof, but like I said above, the status of a fetus is subjective opinion. Can you prove a fetus is a human being? No, you can't. So the ultimate choiec is left up to the pregnant ladies moral conscience. You anti-choicers seem to be confused between the difference of the adjective "human" and the noun "human being". Is afetus human??? Well it certainly isn't an alien from outerspace. Is a fetus a "human being"??? In my humble opinion, no. It is not developed and can't feel pain, can't converse, doesn't have cognition, doesn't have feelings...

I'm going to assume you are ignorant of these brutal facts but if you aren't I have no respect for the position you are taking.

You've already proven you are ignorant to many facts, so I won't be assuming anything.

I don't even know what you're talking about with your "ideology of evolution". How exactly did the "ideology of evolution" kill the most people last century?

"There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed."

How does this compare with "ideology of evolution" killing people? Evolution has nothing to do with killing people, it is a process that happens naturally.

[KenRU]

The quote from Weinberg makes no sense. What about all the people the USSR who slaughtered people for being religious, as well as for a variety of other reasons? In what sense where they motivated by religion?

This would be an example of bad people doing bad things, wouldn't it?

Well that was evil people being evil. Easy lol...

So yes Weinberg's quote makes PERFECT sense.

Everyone who has done something evil in the name of non-theism was a bad person doing bad things?

Fair enough. Everyone who has done something evil in the name of religion was a bad person doing bad things.

The quote from Weinberg remains empirically false.

You miss the point of the quote, imo.

When a parent can be so duped to do things like: disown their child because he/she marries out of faith (or is a homosexual). That is someone doing something cruel when they believe they are doing something good.

When a parent sits over their sick child and prays for them to get better instead of taking them to the doctor, then watches as that child dies, that is doing evil but thinking you are doing good. When that parent has another child and does the same thing and watches a second child die - that is what my signature line refers to.

Show me another social system or belief system that has that kind of power over its adherents if you can.

All the best

[KenRU]

[Replying to post 74 by enviousintheeverafter]

The point is that authoritarian use of violence and the exclusion/persecution of out-groups occurs in species that dont demonstrate any religiosity whatsoever.

Such in group/out group behavior isnt a characteristic of religion - it's a characteristic of primates (and hundreds of other species.)

Bill Maher rails against supposedly 'religious" misogyny but on Darwinian evolutionary models, such behavior isnt immoral - it's naturally selected.

Actually that's not the case, most indications are that early humans were quite friendly toward each other and that the various sub groups (e.g., Neanderthals) were like absorbed rather than slain.

I'd be more inclined to observe that religion seems to more often rely on violence and the exclusion/persecution of out-groups than any other human institution.

Unless, of course, you convert ....

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 8 by Zzyzx]

I know what I'm talking about, so don't tell me I don't just because your opinion is different, bigot..

You anti-choicers

You've already proven you are ignorant to many facts,

Moderator Warning


These lines, and inflammatory words are considered a personal attack. In particular, name calling using words like "bigot". A perfect example of how NOT to conduct debate on these boards.


Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[MasterOfOnesOwnMind]

I'm going to assume you are ignorant

I'd appreciate the double standards get put to a halt. Every time I get a warning the instigator doesn't receive one.

[DanieltheDragon]

I'm going to assume you are ignorant

I'd appreciate the double standards get put to a halt. Every time I get a warning the instigator doesn't receive one.

Let's not quote mine please:

I'm going to assume you are ignorant of these brutal facts but if you aren't I have no respect for the position you are taking.

Ad hoc was stating you were (without knowledge) of his proposed brutal facts. This is not the same as saying you are (without knowledge) entirely. I am ignorant of astrophysics and a lot of chemistry this does not make me ignorant.

Ignorant can be a tricky word because it can be used as a derogatory term but it is not always such. There is no double standard at play if you see someone engaging in personal remarks just flag them in the upper right corner is an exclamation mark that is the report feature.

Instead of complaining about double standards please just respect the rules and use the report system to mark those who engage in personal remarks towards you. The moderators are more than fair.

[MasterOfOnesOwnMind]

I'm going to assume you are ignorant

I'd appreciate the double standards get put to a halt. Every time I get a warning the instigator doesn't receive one.

Let's not quote mine please:

I'm going to assume you are ignorant of these brutal facts but if you aren't I have no respect for the position you are taking.

Ad hoc was stating you were (without knowledge) of his proposed brutal facts. This is not the same as saying you are (without knowledge) entirely. I am ignorant of astrophysics and a lot of chemistry this does not make me ignorant.

Ignorant can be a tricky word because it can be used as a derogatory term but it is not always such. There is no double standard at play if you see someone engaging in personal remarks just flag them in the upper right corner is an exclamation mark that is the report feature.

Instead of complaining about double standards please just respect the rules and use the report system to mark those who engage in personal remarks towards you. The moderators are more than fair.

I didn't say he was without knowledge entirely. I said to many facts, which is the same thing.

Don't worry I will be reporting everything now since I appear to be the only one getting reprimanded for observing someone being a bigot and relaying my observation.

[Zzyzx]

.

Don't worry I will be reporting everything now since I appear to be the only one getting reprimanded for observing someone being a bigot and relaying my observation.

Moderator Intervention

"Reporting everything" is a common tactic for the disgruntled who have received Moderator Comments or Warnings for their own infractions.

The practice of making frivolous infraction reports is akin to a known tattletale running to teacher complaining about everything they can deem or distort as a rule infraction.

Why not have EVERYONE debate the ISSUES without personal comments and without childish quibbling?

Rules
C&A Guidelines


______________

Moderator interventions do not count as a strike against any posters. They are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels that some sort of intervention is required.

[MasterOfOnesOwnMind]

[Replying to post 89 by Zzyzx]

By everything, I meant everything that is a personal attack or any other broken rule.

Double standards are in play here, so yes I am disgruntled by the unfairness that is taking place.