A Christian and a Muslim are drowning, who would you rescue?

[Flail]

If a Christian and a Muslim were drowning and you could rescue but one, which one would it be?

I would think that if you were a Christian, you would rescue the Muslim, since you would "know" that your fellow Christian had eternal life anyway.

I would think that if you were a Muslim, that you would rescue the Christian, since you would 'know' that the Muslim had eternal life anyway.

If you were not religious you would attempt to rescue them both and die.. but you would have your salvation in your selfless act of kindness and non-judgment.....


So why all the fighting over who will be anointed?

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 47:

Completely wrong, and speaking of honor, you should retract that.

I shall not, considering your refusal to retract your ostensible attempt to speak on my behalf.

When you can come to terms with the idea that not all atheists want to see folks drown, perhaps then you can understand that your attempts to clod clump are the height of dishonor.

[East of Eden]

From Post 47:

Completely wrong, and speaking of honor, you should retract that.

I shall not, considering your refusal to retract your ostensible attempt to speak on my behalf.

When you can come to terms with the idea that not all atheists want to see folks drown, perhaps then you can understand that your attempts to clod clump are the height of dishonor.

Cite or retract where I said ALL atheists, it would be the honorable thing to do.

[Goat]

How were they opposing the government, by worshippping God instead of Stalin maybe?

You are getting closer!. Not quite.. historically, the church has always been a center of power, and it was COMPETING with the government.. China takes control of the various religions where possible. They try to appoint the bishops for the RCC, and the 'adopt' their own Dali Lama.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 52:

Cite or retract where I said ALL atheists, it would be the honorable thing to do.

I contend my previous comments stand to reason, and will not retract, especially now that you seek to modify your previous statement.

Report me if you find such a condition intolerable.

It is my contention that the statement...

...your fellow atheists...

...should lead to the reasoned and logical conclusion that you referred to all atheists, but now that you've clearly been shown to be in error, you just can find it in yourself to admit as much.


But hey, if you wish to now amend, backpedal, or otherwise disavow your original statement, I think the observer has all the data necessary to see that when you say such as "...your fellow atheists..." you don't really mean what you say, given ya can't show it's truth anyway, but danged if you don't find it one heckuva powerful rhetorical...

tool.

[southern cross]

If a Christian and a Muslim were drowning and you could rescue but one, which one would it be?

I would think that if you were a Christian, you would rescue the Muslim, since you would "know" that your fellow Christian had eternal life anyway.

I would think that if you were a Muslim, that you would rescue the Christian, since you would 'know' that the Muslim had eternal life anyway.

If you were not religious you would attempt to rescue them both and die.. but you would have your salvation in your selfless act of kindness and non-judgment.....


So why all the fighting over who will be anointed?

The one with the best rack of course.
Is that too naughty?

[cubey]

[Replying to post 1 by Flail]
Nether, because the best thing for each them is for each one to be in there heaven of there beliefs.

[czyz]

I would save the one that I believed I had the best chance of saving.

[Ooberman]

Neither. I'm not the strongest swimmer and I know many times the rescuer is often dragged down with them. There is a technique to save someone drowning and you're not helping anyone if you both get killed.

Not being the right person to save them - knowing my limitations - I would call 9-11 and yell for help.

Then I'd say, "Both of you pray! Let's see what your god do!"

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 6 by Flail]

So long as there are belief systems pretending to be from God there will be hatred, judgement and killing by those who believe they are 'the chosen people' against others who believe they are 'the chosen people'. All such groups have a holy book and many rituals to hide behind. Therefore logic and reason will have no impact on the mindless superstitions of the participants.

Yet we see the godless secular world becoming so violent, debased and debauched, that most sane parents (note the plural) are terrified to let their children ride a bike down their own neighborhood streets in daylight hours.

Mindlessness, by reason, would be those without a Theistic compass to guide them. As indicative of an increasingly licentious, depraved and materialistic western world and worldview.

Godlessness begets a violent and lascivious society. How many sex slaves are there now in Europe? How many murders are commited in secularized American cities?

[czyz]

Godlessness begets a violent and lascivious society. How many sex slaves are there now in Europe? How many murders are commited in secularized American cities?

Utter tripe. You ignore sir the overwhelming evidence that religion has sparked violence and unmentionable acts of cruelty since man invented religion. A few examples are pograms (ethnic cleansing wars) initiated by religious authority (see Serbia as one recent example), the forced conversion of Jews and pagans, the Spanish inquisition, flying planes into buildings in downtown Manhattan, the advent of the Ustasia during WW2 in Yugoslavia whose Catholic leaders butchered Serbians by the thousands, persecution of various religious sects by other religious sects in the American colonies prior to the adoption of the Constitution, fleecing of gullible followers by numerous religions leaders, and the list continues.

Every 20 seconds on Earth, one human being kills another human being. The vast majority of these killings is not done for personal gain, but because the person was following a cause, a leader, or a crusade. I quote Steven Weinberg who stated that good people will do and say good things most of the time, bad people will do and say bad things most of the time, but to get a good person to do or say a bad thing, that takes religon.

If religion stopped tomorrow do you think there would be screwing in the streets or do you not believe that most people have a moral compass to guide them? We currently have religion so your argument that religion or belief would stop the acts you describe is a non-sequitur.

Many agnostics such as myself or atheists are not theistically bound but we have an inner code of conduct and our own moral compass to guide us. If you saw a person being tortured and taken to be killed would you try and stop it? Funny how that line of thinking never entered anyones mind when that was being done to Jesus by the religious of the day.